I don’t think 6 seconds is enough time, you would barely have defenders outside the 20-25 yard range. It’s not fair to expect players to start sprinting back up the field after their keeper collects it And that’s the main reason for why it takes goalies so long to release it, because they have to wait for their teammates to get down to field, at least getting somewhere close to midfield. It’s not always time wasting. If the rule was 15 seconds instead of 6, but the referee legitimately enforced it, it would be just fine for the sport
Except it is not usually 20 seconds, start counting in your head during games, especially when your team is down a goal. It likely is only 6-10 seconds most often, with an occasional 20-30 second obvious time waster, or a keeper truly looking for a spot to distribute it to. Usually, both teams do not mind the time the keeper takes. They all usually like the time to catch their breath and get back in position. It is only the team down a goal that now feels anything over 6.00001 seconds is a violation of their rights.
True. My point was that in reality, it seems like AR's are shying away from raising their flag on any calls that are close, and instead relying on VAR/SAOR to make the determination. I'd guess the ratio of goals ruled onside by the AR and then called offside by VAR/SAOR is about 10x the number of goals ruled offside by the AR and then allowed to stand by VAR/SAOR.
Since ARs are supposed to be positive before flagging (with or without VAR) errors permitting goals should far outnumber errors denying goals in games at all levels.
The most important thing that is being ignored in this discussion is that the AR is verbally making the decision in real-time. He or she is saying to the referee "delay delay delay" if they think it's offside. If they don't think it's offside, they don't say that. The point being that there's no scenario where they are suddenly making the decision after the ball goes in the net. Either they've communicated that the flag is coming at the end of the attacking phase (and it then comes) or they do not communicate as such (and then it does not come). I doubt this is true and would be interested to see if we have stats available from MLS. But one factor not being considered is that if the ball ends up in the net on a delayed flag, it gets adjudicated. If there's a delayed flag and the ball does not end up in the net, we go with the offside (similarly, the lack of a flag on an offside play that results in a corner kick or goal kick isn't included). Those decisions can be wrong, too. But would never get factored into any stats about VAR affecting things.
Unsporting seems an easy one to me at the levels where time is not added: shows a lack of respect for the game
You can’t add time for the GK lying on the ball—the ball is in play. It’s a 6 second violation or it’s nothing.
Another technicality with that, although I don’t know if it would apply in this situation, is that the only handling offense that a keeper can be carded for in his penalty area is now a second touch after releasing the ball. So holding onto the ball for too long in the penalty area cannot be carded period as per the laws
Not being nit picky...well maybe a little.... And I could be wrong. The keeper can be carded if touching the ball with the hand/arm from a deliberate kick by a team mate, if it stops a promising attack. (IFK + Caution) That is categorized as a handling offense I think. Anyway, if I warned a keeper a bunch of times about diving on the ball and staying there for way too long, as well as the IFK, I could probably still caution for USB (shows a lack of respect for the game) if I was looking for a way to caution. BTW...I have never done this, but I think there are tools for just about everything.
Yeah, the tool is calling 6 seconds. That is easily sufficient punishment without getting cards out—the GK turns the ball in his hands to an excellent scoring opportunity for the other team. There is no reason to stretch to get to USB.
https://www.theifab.com/laws/latest/fouls-and-misconduct/#direct-free-kick The part about SPA YC/DOGSO RC for second touches only was added a few years ago
Technicalitiies about the "can a goalkeeper be carded for handling" aside (and, to be clear, I think those are misplaced because this isn't a situation where she or he is not permitted to handle)... The issue here is one of just using arbitrary referee power for no real reason. To pick up on one specific comment but definitely a sentiment that seems like it's being expressed... First, why would you (or anyone else) be "looking for a way to caution?" If a match or player "needs a caution," so to speak, this offence is not likely to be your best route. Second, why have you warned them a bunch of times? If it's reaching a point where you think you need to punish it, then get there sooner before it's also (in your eyes) misconduct. This one is really simple. There's an offence in the laws and there is a specific remedy. If the IFAB wanted this to be misconduct, it would have done so. It did not. The call is rare, so people might dismiss the notion of consistency, but it's important here. If some refs are correctly not giving a caution for this and others are arbitrarily doing so because "they are looking for a way to caution" or (wrongly) believe this is delaying a restart (which I've seen before), that's a problem. Now, to introduce some nuance here. In the rare event where this does get called, you will sometimes see the goalkeeper then hold onto the ball to prevent the quick IFK. THAT is where the caution comes into play because then they are committing DR. But we shouldn't confuse that with the wrongheaded idea of just cautioning for an offence that is not a cautionable offence.
Of course that is all technically correct MassRef. The problem is us poor saps in grassroots dealing with crazy coaches and parents and players whining about 6 seconds every time they are down a goal. 99% of the time, telling the kid to stop playing around and release the ball sooner works.
Right. And I'm not arguing against that approach. To be abundantly clear, I don't think I've ever called 6 seconds. I mean, maybe once long, long ago but nothing sticks out in my mind. Anyway, I'm arguing against the approach that says, once a referee does reach their individual breaking point, he or she also gives a caution. There's just no need. The change of possession and the dangerous IFK is the remedy.
Just imagining the hypothetical nightmare where a goalkeeper forces you into calling a six second violation like three times and you have to decide if it counts as PO.
I was actually going to introduce this as the one scenario where you could theoretically caution for this, but I try to pride myself on not being a sicko.
We just hosted a fanTAStic outdoor 5v5 tournament, with Futsal-esque rules. Some jerko dad was losing his mind, counting to four seconds on...corner kicks.
Worst one in this genre I ever was involved with happened on a men's game (a long time ago). I was new to the geographic area and an AR in an adult competition that was very competitive in the basic sense of the word, but not one of those that is feeding up to the highest cup levels and all that. Anyway... Referee--perhaps deservingly so, admittedly--decided to punish a goalkeeper for wasting time on a goal kick which was on my side of the field. Problem is he did so by giving an IFK to the attacking team. I tried to intervene but it became abundantly obvious very quickly that A) not only did the referee think I was wrong but B) both teams accepted his decision and didn't think he was wrong. I was trying to insist that he take away a free kick that team A wanted and give a yellow card that team B didn't want. Path of least resistance and all that, I didn't press the matter. It's a fascinating world out there sometimes.
A few weekends ago I had to ask U12 captains to the center circle at halftime to tell them all to cut the crap because one team leading was already taking their sweet time on goal kicks and throw ins and the other team players and parents were screaming at me about them. U12.
Never in a million years would I go there. Putting aside that it isn’t going to happen, if the GK wants to continue taking the ball out of his hands and turning it into an IFK for the other team, so be it. He’s doing the other team a favor every time.
To be clear: "BTW...I have never done this, but I think there are tools for just about everything." I was just trying to point out a scenario where possibilities exist. "Could" is not "would" and that a referee CAN, if need be, and they really wanted too, find a tool for just about any scenario that can be invented.