With players, yes. Unfortunately it's usually not a player I'm scolding. Even when it is a player, if it's to the level of dissent, the explanation may not be delivered quite so nicely.
What do you guys/gals do when you give advantage to a player, and they stop on purpose and want the free kick? 2v3 and one of the 3 defenders takes out the attacker with the ball, and in doing so wipes out another one of his defenders. Ball goes to an instride attacker with only a flat footed stationary defender. I yell out advantage and signal. One dribble and he would have been 1v1 with the keeper inside the 18. He stopped. I did not bring it back. He had a great advantage and wasted it by stopping. My feeling was that was on him. It kind of irked me that he stopped. Thoughts?
He blew his advantage, not on you! We had a player given advantage to then pass it to a player in an offside position. Tweet. Advantage blown by attacking team, IDFK to defense
In my heart of hearts, I agree with this. A strict reading of the LOTG doesn’t really support it unfortunately. The way it reads it almost sounds like they have to get an actual advantage over the free kick they would have been awarded for advantage to really be applied.
So that part about "when the non-offending team will benefit" means it's important to evaluate whether a given game/team/player will benefit from us giving advantage. Sometimes it's best to just call fouls, even if we "shouldn't." Of course, it's easy to get that decision wrong, but hey, it's November and I'm on hiatus!
Get it wrong? Moi? I love it when mid level U14 coaches scream that I should have played the advantage in their defensive third.
In my view it depends on the play. On this did he have the advantage, or did he have an opportunity to get an advantage if he was able to beat the defender. If the former, then you can get to wasted the advantage; if the latter, the advantage never accrued and you should go back. You don't say the age or level of play. This event suggests it might not have been a level where the advantage was really there and it would better to call the foul. But as to both of the above, YHTBT.
I think with these types of scenarios YHTBT but based on your wording. I think I would have called the foul since an advantage didn't materialize. Since he still needed to dribble around the defender to get to a 1v1 I can see why he would stop and look for a free kick and possible card for the taking out of his teammate. As Socal said maybe the age/skill level of the game needed the foul to be called as if this was a U17 and up boys game I am pretty sure most players would have seen and taken the advantage. But to answer your question on what to do when a player stops play because he wants a foul. I either agree that a foul should be called and I mark it and then ask the player to try to play through it next time or I do nothing and deal with the no call on the fly with (not enough there, or not today).
Recommendation from "on high" (ie, FIFA and UEFA) is that this should be pulled back for the original foul. This seems to be about the only case that should be pulled back for such...
I always said "nothing there", but I can now see how that could be a bad idea. Now that we can appropriately use a one-armed advantage, is there any validity to using a one-arm advantage signal to show that advantage may be applied, and then add the second arm and call out play on when the advantage fully materializes? When I officiated, I used my team address for high school games (man, I hated doing that!) and my captain's meeting for club games to simply remind teams to play to my whistle. I didn't want to come right out and say that I would play a slow whistle and give teams a chance to play advantage, so I hoped the captains and teams would get the hint.
OP - "play, play, play" Never going to be confused with "play on" and not as demeaning as "nothing there" Fractions - the "F-word" of mathematics.
I realized this confusion existed in my first few years and have successfully eliminated "play on" from my vocabulary entirely, for either circumstance. This fits along the lines of skills craftsmanship. Foment good habits to pre-emptively avoid mistakes caused by instantaneous decisions.
I was at recert today and asked the instructor, who made national candidate last year, and he echoed your guidance. Looks like “play on” is a USA thing only- “advantage” is the norm in ROW.
For some reason I kept using play on today instead of advantage. I'm blaming this thread for getting into my head.
I have a hard time even getting "Advantage!" to come out of my mouth. I will try harder. I've always vaguely thought that the best thing would be "Advantage blue, play on!" But I'd never get that right in a million tries. EDIT: NFHS Rule 3.1.d. specifically calls for "play on."
I told a coach to leave, using ask, tell, remove, who didn't get the message. The assigner came over at half time of the game and asked why I gave the coach a straight red card.
Oh yeah but I was thinking more something you could do, you know, publicly and personally, yet without interrupting the action of the game. "Shut your pie-hole!" is seasonally appropriate but not likely to earn style points.
Omg I just imagined yelling loudly “SHUT UUUP” and sweeping both hands up while running past the bench.
This really is the hardest part. It's hard to change what you say. I listened to a mentor originally from Europe rant (/endlessly mock) about advantage vs. play on for a solid 20 minutes and that's the only reason it's been easier for me.
Source? Obviously there could be something I've missed but I must admit I've never come across such a recommendation. I can think of a number of incidents in televised matches where this has happened and the offside was given - there was one in the English Premier League just this weekend, IIRC.
The recent UEFA RAP materials suggest just such a thing, as do the recent FIFA Futuro materials. The 2017:1 RAP materials had two instances of a foul occurring, and the immediate pass being made to a player in offside position, and both state that the best outcome is for no advantage to be given. Now, that doesn't mean that everyone adheres to that, and indeed, a number of national associations, despite the push from IFAB that everyone do the same thing, still insist on doing their own specific and quirky things along the way.