In the pet peeve thread there is a discussion about "play on" and advantage. https://www.bigsoccer.com/threads/biggest-pet-peeves.2078208/ I'm starting a new thread in the hope of catching some of the folk who may not be reading that thread. The long time teaching, at least in USSF, was that "play on" should be reserved exclusively for advantage and not used for "not a foul" because doing so blurs the distinction between the concepts. While the last version of the GtoP included "play on" and "advantage" as alternative verbalizations, and Jim Allen posted an answer almost a decade ago repeating the advice that "play on" never be used outside the context of advantage, I'm not aware of anything currently in print that either confirms or rebuts that interpretations. While my view is that the guidance to not use "play on" for things other than advantage remains solid, I was wondering if anyone was aware of any more current guidance, and in particular hoping to find out from any of you lucky enough to attend the top training programs what is being taught there.
I've only done AYSO so far but I know that in the Intermediate and Advanced AYSO courses that I've taken it's also recommended to reserve the phrase "Play On" only for advantage situations.
What, if anything, should be verbalized if there is no foul/infringement/advantage, but an occurrence in a match that causes players to sort of stop playing because they think there's a foul/handball etc...? If not "nothing there", then what? Just trying to add to my toolkit
For handling, in my view, the best thing to say is "Not deliberate! Keep playing." (With the latter unnecessary to add at older levels.) It not only says "I saw that," but also educates players/coaches/parents on why its not being called. For other items, I'm going to just repost from the other thread for those who might be reading this one but not that one: "Not a foul" "clean play" "keep going" "fair challenge" and in some contexts (as ages go up) just "no" are all things I use for other non-fouls. In my mind there is a lot of room for personal preference in what you say on non-calls, but some things to keep in mind are Keep it simple--they won't hear past a few words. The point is to be clear to the players that you saw it and it wasn't a foul Don't cause confusion between advantage and not a foul. (While "play on" may not cause confusion at lower levels since they don't understand advantage, the more we can use language properly at lower levels the easier it for them to understand "play on" means advantage later. (Though I always use "Advantage! Play on!" when I verbalize that one as I don't know how many youth players really understand they meant the same thing.) Don't say anything that reinforces myths (e.g., "got the ball first" might explain a particular play, but more broadly speaking is a myth). When possible, educate (e.g., "not deliberate") Although I sometimes find it escapes my lips, I'm not a fan of "nothing there"--something was there if we find it necessary to say something, it just wasn't a foul. The player on the ground likely doesn't appreciate it being called nothing. (At younger levels, just be sure you don't yell any of these things so loud that you startle the kids into stopping--10U players react a lot differently from 19U players.)
I use "play" for situations where there wasn't a foul and "advantage play on" for actual advantage situations.
I don't use this all the time, but one thing that I like to use is, "I saw it." One of my friends, in his own style will say, "Not that one." It works for him but I don't know that it would work for most of us.
I find there are times when a shake of the head or a quick "No!" does the trick. Maybe better in situations where it's the players appealing, vs. the coach, who is generally less intimately involved with what is (not) happening on the field.
I usually say, "Nothing there" or "Keep going." I try to avoid anything with the "play" in it so that players don't confuse a not a foul situation with an advantage situation.
That's my worry with "play", but I'd rather use that than "nothing there". "Something" was there, but it wasn't enough for a foul. I also try to avoid "no foul" since some may just hear the "foul" and not the "no". Each person has their own style though.
I've been instructed in a high level course to get away from using the verbal phrase "play-on" but its for slightly different reasons. In the same course they said advantage or play-on are acceptable but they instructed us to use advantage solely because of language differences.
I've never been a fan of saying "nothing there" because a player who's smarting from contact you decided was fair is darned sure that "something" happened. I usually stick with "keep going", although I'll throw in "not deliberate" for handling appeals if I think the players will understand it.
So where are we on "Play?" That used to be a synonym, more or less, for "Play on!" accompanied by the same admonition against using it outside the true Advantage context. But I find it conveniently monosyllabic in response to "Handball!" If I'm feeling articulate I'll do the full "Not deliberate, keep going!" But if I'm feeling terse I'll sometimes just go with "No! Play!"
This makes me a little sad. I’m an exclusive “play on” guy. I don’t want to say “advantage.” It’s got another syllable and juxtaposes two consonants twice. Of course that’s not a huge deal but it’s definitely easier to yell “play on” very loudly, especially when one is hauling butt because the advantage realized is a 50 yard overhit ball to an attacker who is now one v one with the outside defender. FWIW, because of “play on”’s specific meaning, I Never say “play” in any other circumstance. “Keep going” for contact that is trifling. “I see it, I see it” for the grappling that could be a foul if it becomes relevant to the attacker’s ability to get by. “Forget it!” or “No, no!” for the arm contact that is not deliberate. “That’s fine” for the legal shoulder charge or fair tackle. There are so many but It’s easy to avoid saying “play” except for when you need it.
"no foul" "keep it going" etc I lean away from "keep playing" because I don't want anything that sounds even remotely like "play on" unless I'm playing advantage. I also don't like to say "nothing there." Most of the time, there's *something* there. It may not be a foul, but it's still something. Better to indicate that it was trifling than to make them worry that I'm blind.
For unintentional handling, I would just use "Not deliberate." For non-fouls, "Nothing there." Best to keep it as brief as possible, in my opinion. Then there is also the non-verbal "cutting the grass" gesture which can be used for either scenario. Apparently not everyone is a fan of this gesture but it is quite often seen in games refereed by PGMOL officials (1st and second tiers in England, mostly) and is apparently recommended for use by them although with the warning to avoid over-using it. I can't say for sure, but I suspect one of the reasons behind them using it is that in televised games, while players may hear the referee, most fans in the stadium and any TV viewers will not, so it is felt useful to have a clearly visible signal that the referee has seen the incident but is taking no action.
I do that (the baseball "safe" signal) mostly for the coaches' benefit on plays like a fair challenge or clean tackle that might have appeared otherwise from the vantage point of the benches. Shall we revive our old discussion of whether to signal advantage immediately and then call it back if we see it not developing vs. waiting and seeing and then signaling? I still struggle with that one from time to time.
I'm also curious about how others handle. Personally, I don't rush the signal out so I rarely have the advantage not there if I've signaled, but I'll go back after if I have to. I'm more likely to be quick with the signal if it was a bad foul and I want to be immediately clear that I saw it and why there is no immediate whistle to prevent tension rising.
I'm more or less in the same place, but all too often I find myself waiting and seeing then calling the advantage and then immediately boom the attacker is dispossessed, and I feel like an idiot. So then I'm in the position of wait and see and call and then still call it back. I hate that. Almost as much as I love signaling advantage and then seeing a goal ensue; that's pretty wonderful.
I tend to be slow with the advantage signal, enough so that I don't remember the last time I signalled for it then called it back. The drawback is when there is clamoring for a foul call, you wait to see if advantage develops, then when it doesn't you finally blow the whistle. It can appear you allowed others to influence your decision to call the foul. I often give an AC to whoever was yelling for the foul call when this happens.
I had an interesting one in a 17G match. A player was being held quite a bit just inside the halfway line, but I could see an attacker unmarked waiting for a through-ball on the touchline. The pass doesn't come and the attacker gets frustrated from the holding and I call the foul. I told her I was waiting to see if she could get the pass off down the line, and a parent says "of the ref is running experiments today".
But I'll bet the player got it and your credibility grew. See what Code1390 wrote. I'd suggest rather than an opportunity for an AC, it's an opportunity to gain street cred. "Number 10, I've got this. It looked like your team might have an advantage because your wing was wide open--you don't want me to stop a good attack, do you?" Instead of (from the player's perspective) being the ref that missed a call and yelled at him about it, you're the ref that gets it and is looking out for the players. I've had good experience with those explanations--at the levels where they understand advantage. (And I'll do proactively at some levels if there is a pause that makes it possible after an advantage call --"Number 7, you understand I saw the foul and playerd advanrage because your teammate had an open field?") YMMV.