Handling in the box and advantage?

Discussion in 'Referee' started by Timbuck, Sep 9, 2017.

  1. Timbuck

    Timbuck Member

    Jul 31, 2012
    Girls 04 game. Midway through 1st half. Score is 0-0. My team has more possession and looks like the dominant team.
    Ball is about 5 yards inside the left corner of the box. Girl on defense jumps up and ball and hand connect. Referee puts the whistle to his mouth. Ball lands at the feet of my attacker. A pass or 2 later, we lost possession.
    Ref didn't blow the whistle.
    I asked him at halftime if he was playing advantage. He said yes. I let it go. (Wasn't going to change his call 20 minutes later anyway).
    I thought I read somewhere that handling in the box is always a pk and advantage is never the right call.
     
  2. rh89

    rh89 Member

    Sep 29, 2015
    OR
    I've been instructed that the only advantage in the penalty area is a goal. Given that instruction, sounds like the referee was incorrect.

    However, I'd also want to know more about the handball. Was it a handball or ball to hand? It sounds like the referee agreed with you that it was a handball, but that's my immediate question.
     
    dadman, voiceoflg and IASocFan repped this.
  3. RespectTheGame

    May 6, 2013
    Club:
    Columbus Crew
    If he SAID he was giving advantage then it's a very quick advantage and if no goal it should be a PK. A pass or two later is too long. I think that was a mistake if that's what he did. It's hard to process that all in the time needed (1) was it ball to hand or a handball, 2) is there advantage 3) was the advantage lost..... Whistle to mouth without blowing it is a bad habit that I do myself WAY too often. I do it as i"m replaying in my mind but I need to stop doing it. Sometimes after the replay I decide it wasn't a foul, but then everyone who looks at me thinks I"m just not calling an "obvious" foul.

    Advantage -can- be the correct call, but should almost always result in either an immediate goal or a whistle and PK.

    And on behalf of that referee, I thank you for your patience and sportsmanship.
     
    tomek75, Law5, Kit and 2 others repped this.
  4. EvanJ

    EvanJ Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Mar 30, 2004
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    What's a "girls 04 game"?
    I don't know the rules, but I don't think advantage should be called instead of a penalty kick.
     
  5. davidjd

    davidjd Member+

    Jun 30, 2000
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    With the change in the age group, teams are being referred to by their birth year and not their actual age. So right now '04 girls would GU13 (I think). Next year it would be GU14. Annoying at best in my mind.
     
  6. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    It is not correct that advantage in the PA is never correct. But advantage--in any case--should only be used if the situation is better than the free kick would be. That is very rare in the penalty area because the PK is such a good scoring opportunity. USSF taught for several years that in the PA, unless a goal is scored almost immediately, the referee should award the penalty. (I'm not 100% sure that is current guidance. If a player was wide open in front of an empty net and simply flubs the ball, one could conclude that the advantage arose (i.e. an opportunity better than a PK), but the player wasted that advantage.)

    So in your play, its not clear what the real opportunity was when the ball fell at the feet of your attacker. It sounds likely that there was never a better opportunity than a PK, in which case advantage should never have been considered.
     
  7. Gary V

    Gary V Member+

    Feb 4, 2003
    SE Mich.
    I agree with the general sentiment in the replies above. The only advantage better than a PK is the ball in the net.

    But you don't fully describe what happened, why the ball was played in the penalty area by your team until possession was lost. Perhaps the first player had a good advantage for a goal, but she muffed it. The classic example of this is a wide open net that the player misses by shooting the ball high or wide. It could also be a case of a player not recognizing a great goal opportunity, and passing the ball instead of shooting. Or a player attempting a shot, unhindered by defenders, but the ball spins sideways off her foot instead of going to the goal.

    If the players had a good opportunity but chose not to use it or didn't execute it properly, then they've had their advantage and squandered* it.

    (*) - credit Jim Allen for this excellent wording.
     
  8. camconcay

    camconcay Member+

    Atlanta United
    United States
    Feb 17, 2011
    Georgia
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Back when USSF had a memo about this it stated clearly that 2 bites at the apple were expected. The rest of the world generally felt that a fair and open shot that was missed was as @Gary V (and Jim Allen) stated advantage realized but squandered. The USSF memo stated the only advantage in the PA is a goal. A missed shot should be called back for at the PK thus the 2 bites at the apple.

    In my experience the confusion lay with having a good clear shot (as a PK is) versus retaining possession even with a credible opportunity to attack. I try to explain it as the very next touch - in that whatever happens in the PA that will result in a PK is a PK unless the very next touch results in a clear shot on goal, a very likely goal - as a PK is a very likely goal.
     
  9. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    I always saw the "only a goal" advice as based on a view that too many referees were giving advantage in the PA because there was a scoring opportunity, even though the scoring opportunity was not as good as a PK. Advantage means it is better for the scoring team if the foul is not called, not just that they have the ball or some opportunity. (And it is rare for a team to have an opportunity after the foul that is better than a PK and not score--so the false results from the black and white rule should be minimal.)

    (And I think that is a common flaw in applying advantage in a variety of situations--seeing some opportunity, but not assessing (in that brief moment we have to do so) whether that opportunity is better that the FK for the offended team. And in deciding whether advantage never materialized or was squandered, we need to be re-evaluating whether the opportunity that arose and was squandered was better than the FK; if the opportunity that arose was less good than the FK, we go back the FK, even if the team squandered the less good opportunity.)

    (BTW, your post seems to imply that JA disagreed with the two bites concept. Not so. He had multiple answers explaining the two bites but only in the PA.)
     
  10. sam_gordon

    sam_gordon Member+

    Feb 27, 2017
    05s (born in 2005) are U13. U14 would be kids born in 2004 (04s), U15 would be kids born in 2003 (03s)
     
  11. Timbuck

    Timbuck Member

    Jul 31, 2012
    Ball was 15 yards from goal. Left edge inside the box. I don't recall how the ball got there; let's say it was a cross. Ball was about shoulder high. Girl on the other team had her arm up and out and the ball hit the arm. (Is there an argument for ball-to-hand or hand-to-ball- maybe. I think the outstretched arm overrules that). There were several opponents between the balll and the goal- we weren't likely to score on a shot had the ball/hand occurrence not taken place.
     
  12. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    This is a completely different issue from advantage. Law 12 specifies that handling is only an offense if it is deliberate. That isn't answered by the arm being outstretched. Arms away from the body (sometimes we talk about unnatural position or making oneself bigger) are clues that an action might have been deliberate. They are no a replacement for fundamental requirement that the handling, in the opinion of the referee, was deliberate.

    It's impossible to tell without being there whether the outstretched arm was outstretched to let the ball hit it or take away space from the opponent, or whether the arm was where it was for balance (or some other reason unrelated to the ball) and the player did not have the time or ability to move the arm out of the way. It is very plausible from what you wrote that, in the opinion of the referee, the contact was simply not deliberate. Frankly, at the age level we're talking about, from just what you have written, I would guess that it wasn't deliberate and it was a good no call. But it's impossible to tell without seeing the actual play. (And even then, it may not be definitive and a decision may vary depending on angle.)
     
  13. Gary V

    Gary V Member+

    Feb 4, 2003
    SE Mich.

    My mistake on mis-remembering advantage in the PA. (It was about the time I retired from reffing, so I didn't necessarily read everything that USSF put out.) But even so, it doesn't seem to me that "two bites" is fair, if the player spits out the first bite by making a bad decision or bad implementation.
     
  14. Timbuck

    Timbuck Member

    Jul 31, 2012
    Honestly, if the ref hasn't gone "whistle to mouth" i wouldn't have thought much of it. But when I asked him at half if he played advantage on the "handball" in the box, he said "yes".
     
  15. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    I'm not a huge fan either on a conceptual basis. But I do think that is why they did it: they felt more unfair results were coming from poor application of advantage in the PA than would arise with the black and white rule. And that it was better to be unfair the perpetrator than the victim.
     
  16. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    Hard to know if that was really what he meant or if he wasn't clearly remembering the event from early in the half and was taking the path of least resistance when you asked a leading question. Twenty minutes later, there are some plays I will remember clearly enough to discuss coherently and some I won't--my brain has been busy on a gazillion decisions since then.
     
    IASocFan and Gary V repped this.

Share This Page