It seems like I have a new and unusual situation occur every single game I center these days! Here's the situation from today's game. Offensive player is tripped just off the goal line and just outside of the penalty area. The defensive player also got some ball and kicked it over the goal line. Since I see the trip and I know there is no real advantage, I blow the whistle and award the free kick near the PA/goal line intersection. However, I hear the offense's coach yell, "We'll take the corner kick." That got me thinking - would I have been within my bounds to play advantage here and allow the corner kick instead of the free kick? I guess that I would have been within the bounds of the advantage clause, because the offense would rather have play continue and get the corner kick. What are others' thoughts on this type of situation?
It's really up to you to decide what is more of an advantage. If this team has choreographed set pieces from the corner that they've been utilizing all game, then maybe you might remember that and realize a corner is to their advantage. That said, so long as you ensure they get ten yards on the free kick, I don't know how the free kick isn't perceived as more of an advantage.
Have a look at a situation where an offensive player is fouled inside the corner arc and the defending player kicks the ball out for a corner. What is the difference between the free kick and the foul? * Defending players must be 10 yards (9.15m) from the kick for BOTH the free kick and the corner kick. * Attacking players CAN BE OFFSIDE direct from a free kick. * Attacking players CAN NOT BE OFFSIDE direct from a corner kick. So it is slightly to the advantage of the attacking team to award the corner rather than the free. This assumes that the tackle was not a red card offence. If is was then you should award the free kick and send off the offending player. Crowdie
No, if it better to have the corner, and it was a red card offense you still award advantage. You also still give the red card.
I used to think this as well until I was assessed by a FIFA referee who advised me that FIFA wants all red cards to be immediate. No advantage is to be played. If it was a yellow card offence then you can come back and issue the caution but not for a sending off offence. Crowdie
What if it's a red card offense, but a goal is scored immediately afterward? Do you stop play and give the card and take away the goal, or not issue a card but let the goal stay?
Above continued.... Although in this situation if the ball when almost straight out you could sell the decision. If the ball stays in play for more than two to three seconds after the red card offence and you don't issue the red then the assessor is probably going to want a word after the game. If it was an under 12 game and you are not being assessed then you probably aren't that worried about the call Crowdie
Depends on the period of time from the red card offence to the ball crossing the line. If it is the same phase of play as the red card offence then the goal is fine. If the player is taken out and you let a team mate run 30m up the field to shoot then you cannot come back for the red card. Again this is assuming the game is a competitive senior game or tournament youth game. Crowdie
If I was the player and touch the ball when making a challenge I'd be a little angry that you'd even think about giving a free kick. Don't forget it is a contact sport. As for sending the player off, your having a laugh aren't you?
As with all calls, just because you get the ball doesn't mean there isn't a foul. Actually, as a player I would probably prefer the corner if it was an older league where they could actually serve up a corner well. Real young players have problems even getting corners to the goal area, at least in many of our leagues, so they would probably prefer the DFK.
But if the ball is on/near the endline for the free kick, the only way for the attacking players to be offside (ahead of the ball) is for them to be over the endline. That's why you can't be offside on a corner kick! The only advantage I can see to the corner kick is in US NFHS rules, you can sub on a corner, but not on a free kick. As a ref, I wouldn't have any problems with a team backing up to the corner arc to take a free kick. It would then become the same play.
That seems overstated. If an obvious red card offense occurs, and an obvious advantage situation developes immediately thereafter, it seems to me you have to allow advantage and you have to come back and issue the red card. If it is a situation where there is an advantage but not a dangerous goal scoring opportunity, by all means, blow the whistle and show the red. That is, be less inclined to play advantage if you believe the foul merited a red. If the offense was not a clear cut red and you play advantage, you have the option to award a yellow instead. If you believe a red was truly deserved (and apparently you did, because that was your initial instinct), I find it difficult to believe FIFA wouldn't agree that that is the card that should be issued regardless whether or not advantage was allowed. If you play advantage and the 4th official and the ARs believe a red was not deserved, you've compounded the problem by playing the advantage. Especially if the advantage was not terribly significant. In short, FIFA may want all red cards to be immediate, but that doesn't mean the run of play will always allow them to get what they want. For example, take the situation where the CR doesn't see a serious foul, but an AR does and raises his flag. After a two-minute discussion with the AR and a two-minute discussion with players, a red card is issued. It is the right call. But under Crowdie's black-and-white rule, since the red card was not issued immediately, FIFA would frown and say a yellow card should have been issued even though a red was merited. And that makes no sense to me.
The worst thing would be for the player who will be sent-off to make a goal first. A play-on for a few seconds that does not include this person may be advantagous for the attackers but more than that puts the ref in major risk of a protest.
Eric, the offender got the ball after the player. His front leg tripped the player, then his other leg got the ball going out of bounds. As for the ball/player first debate, I'll call a foul on a two-footed challenge even if the player gets all ball. If the challenge is unfair, careless, reckless, or excessive, I'll call a foul even if the defender gets the ball.
A lot is going to depend on: i) The age group of the game ii) The tournament/league the game is being played in iii) The temperature of the game iv) The player's history in the game What is a red card offence in one game is not always a red card offence in another. As the CR it is up to you to judge that. Another thing to take into account is why do you referee? When you become a FIFA referee and officiate at a FIFA tournament (World Cup, Confederations Cup, etc) you go into "camp" before the tournament and FIFA instructs you how they want fouls, etc called during that tournament. How FIFA wants it called may be very different to how you think it should be called. You don't have that pressure when you don't referee at that level so I know a number of very senior referees here that aren't interested in officiating at FIFA level because of this. This happens well below FIFA level as well as local referees who just want to run the game without being assessed every game don't get themselves assigned to tournaments/leagues where every game is assessed. The key, I believe, is to referee at a level where YOU enjoy it. At lower levels as long as you enjoy it and can control the game where is the problem in calling the situation you described originally as a corner AND red card. It may not be 100% correct in the keys of FIFA but when was the last time you saw a FIFA representative at the local park on a Saturday morning? Don't get caught up in the technicalities of every situation. It will drive you mad in the end. Did the right team get the foul and was the level of foul (dangerous, reckless, excessive force) called correctly in your eyes? Great. Get twenty referees together and they will give you twenty different answers as to what to do in the same situation Crowdie
If you allow advantage for a foul in the penalty area, and the second offensive player (not the one fouled) completely flubs the advantage, do you then go back and award the spot kick? (Thinking of US-Mexico last night.)
No. That is the risk you run in allowing advantage to the attacking team in the box. They don't get two bites at the cherry. Crowdie
I understand what advantage is. I'm fuzzy on its actual application. For example, an offensive player is moving the ball towards the goal. A defensive player grabs offensive players shirt but the player is strong enough that he gets away and manages a shot on goal. I call advantage. The ball sails wide and goes over the goal line. Is it a goal kick or do I call for a free kick at the spot of the foul?
Restart would be a goal kick: the advantage allowed the player to take his shot; whether the player scores or not isn't part of the equation. You may, however, wish to speak to either the fouler or foulee...or both...to make sure they understand what you did, and why. And you might warn the defensive player that the cost of a successful foul may well have been a caution, due to the tactical nature of the foul.
You could be right with either call. Free kick, the hold effected the shot. It's time to leave the shirts alone and play soccer. OR Goal kick. Trifling foul or advantage given and lost. I would decide based on what I felt was the fairer call and whether I needed to tighten up the game. If I felt I needed more help with man management, I might lean toward the foul. If the game was smooth and it was really a trifling hold, goal kick.
Thanks. Another question is how long can you let play continue before deciding to punish the infraction.
For a yellow card or red card, you can legally wait until the next restart. After the next restart, you can't go back. If the game stops (out of play, goal or foul), you need to make sure that the play doesn't restart until you given your card(s). For a foul or a red card, I wouldn't wait any more than 3-5 seconds. For a red card, you want to penalize the offending team, and you don't want the offending player affecting play. Normally within 1-3 seconds you can tell if the offended team is better off with advantage or a free kick.
I was interested to read UEFA's "12th UEFA Advanced Course for Elite and Premier Referees - General CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS" that has been released at http://www.uefa.com/newsfiles/171412.pdf (Thanks MassachusettsRef). If you look around half way down on page 4 you will see: "In those circumstances where the referee considers that the offending player should receive a second yellow card or a direct red card for the original offence, advantage should not be considered. A free kick should be awarded immediately." Crowdie
Hmmm, so you feel that the advantage is only realized if a goal is scored? I'd think that if you gave (and signaled) advantage and the player gets a shot off, you've made your bed at that point. If you want to tighten up the game that's fine, but then it would be better to call the foul immediately instead of letting the play develop to the point where there was a shot.
The original premise was that the shirt was being pulled as the grabbed as the attacker gets off the shot. Calling the foul immediately was not an option as the shot is already off. You have to determine whether the shot was off because of the shirt pull or that the shirt pull was incidental and triffling.