Defending a throw-in

ATR 15.5:

 

IF you aren't within two yards, jumping around like this is a basketball in bound is still not sporting behavior. This is also a situation that can instantly became a problem if you let it go. Consider the possibility that this is a U-16 boys game instead, with a thrower who can really throw it. The opponent stands, say, four yards away, and jumps up to block the throw. The throw whacks the defender in the face, breaking his nose. "Sorry. I was just trying to throw it to my teammate." Now, Mr. Referee, how are you going to deal with that?

 

By the book, the ref had grounds to card the player, however, if there was no contact with the ball and the result of the throw appeared to be successful and meet the intent of the thrower, I don't see the need for a caution. A friendly reminder to the defender would be enough for me. I mean, did the caution really have any game management benefit? Probably the opposite. Frustration for the defenders.

 

I've never found cause to get to USB on something like this. I've only seen it happen with younger players who don't know any better, where a "knock it off" is all that is needed. That said, I don't know what the R saw (which may be different than how Stanger saw it), nor what might have transpired before that moment (inlcuding what the R may have said to this or other players already), even if it was early in the game.

My gut is that I would have stopped the behaviour rather than going to plastic, but without seeing what actually happened and having the context, I don't know how we can really opine on what is a pretty unusual scenario in real soccer. (There are reasons we don't see this done ....)

 

Ah the perils of coaching......my first thought about this incident was "why have a player near the person throwing the ball in, when that player can be back helping defend better?"

But, that's why I'm a referee not a coach.

 

Obviously, we are starting to talk about scenarios that exist in each of our minds but which are not identical to each other.

The operational issue that sometimes happens is that the player who gets whacked by the throw-in may have been struck unintentionally or perhaps intentionally. The referee can end up having to decide on something from the full range of injury/no foul all the way to injury/red card for striking. Me? I'd rather try to avoid having to make that decision. And, as Rufusabc said, other than being a wise guy, why would the defender be there? Is he tactically clueless? or trying to distract/interfere with the throw-in? Probably an easier sell if you make that decision before the throw-in is taken, rather than after.

 

Agreed in this case. If Red shows they are going to long bomb the throw, get back and mark up.
If Red is taking TI and immediately backpassing to the thrower so he/she can put the ball through, then mark the thrower to break up the set play that way.

 

The purpose of this ATTR is to prevent defending against throwing, but allow defending against receiving. A single jump near the thrower without a receiving player nearby is USB. A throw in cannot be defended against. Only the receipt of the throw can be defended.

Hence the words to the effect that you cannot "impede the throw".

 

Or maybe you *should* be a coach since yo would coach the players to do what the pros do instead of some silly ploy that has no chance of being successful . . . unless stanger's daughter is humongouesly tall and can leap like Michael Jordan, there is no way to get in the way of a ball being thrown a distance that starts from over the other player's head. Even if thrown at just a 30 degeree upward angle (which probably isn't enough height to make a really long throw into the PA -- physics says 45 degrees is ideal to get maiximum distance . . . ) the ball goes up 1/root3 feet for each foot it travels [remember that old 30-60-90 triangle from high school geometry?] -- that's more than a full yard of height in the two yards back the defender is. So unless she's taller than the girl making the throw *and* has a 36" standing vertical leap, and is perfectly positioned, she can't do anything at all to actually block the long throw . . . I can't imagine why the referee would start with a suspicion that something more was happening than the innocent attempt to intercept the throw . . .

 

Am I missing something? The ATR only states a player standing still is okay. What was the player jumping for if not to interfere with putting the ball back in play?

 

But at 35 yards he's not trying to prevent a ball being put back into play. He is trying to defend a ball in the air. As a coach, think back to every time you've seen a punch thrown in a game. How many of those circumstances began with some inciting incident that the referee could have avoided (players holding the ball preventing quick restart, players grabbing ball out of net, repeated hard fouls with no cards). Even though the instructions are clear when a player strikes another with the ball, is it not in our best interest to handle the original interference before it escalates to this or at least before a player is hurt forcing us to make a decision?

"Position is maintained without movement" is really all we need to know. Jumping is moving and the referee can absolutely caution the case in the original post. The decision to can be based on skill, age, temp of match but some form of management should be required here, even if it is just talking.

 

If that is the "idea," it is flat out wrong -- which just might be why you never see this done at the top levels. At a 30 degree upward incline, the defender has no chance to get at the ball. And increasing to 45 degrees will increase not decrease the distance the ball travels. http://www.physicsclassroom.com/mmedia/vectors/mr.cfm So the only chance this can impact the thrower is if it is well, an effort to distract the thrower . . . which gets us back to, well, that is what the ATR describes as USB . . .

But not the long ones, which was the whole premise of the discussion -- disrupting the long throw that is like a cross . . . a long throw has to be lofted at an angle to gain the necessary distance before gravity brings it to the ground.

(Oi! I can't believe I posted in this thread again. )

 

I remember a video from a couple of years ago that made the rounds. It was a boys game, and there was a flip thrower who nailed the standing defender (twice I think!) and if memory serves there was a heated discussion whether it was a red card. To the thrower.

Nothing good can come of this situation. SoCal ( who may be a rocket scientist) has detailed the chances of said throw being intercepted. It appears the thrower had been successful on at least one previous throw in game so coach decides to guard thrower. If only This coach had been coaching against Duke in the Christian Laatner game!

I don't know if I would have gone to my pocket in this situation. Don't know what you gain as a referee here. But, I give so few cards, so this card able offense would really need to stand out.

 

Well, except that it's two separate requirements.

Two yards is the required distance. In addition to that, the Law (per the I&G) provides: