Controversial free kick...

[spudski]

....apparently the player asked the ref whether it was ok to take it quickly. And he said yes. 

I guess as defenders you have to be constantly alert and not expect to play to the whistle. 

All time club record broken as well. 40 this season so far. 

 

[Robbored]

Looks legitimate to me. The defenders were half asleep. No point complaining - they’ve only got themselves to blame.

[Antman]

also marginal if offside?

the  poor b ugger doing up his laces seems to play him on

[Midlands Robin]

Similar thing happened to us against Stoke in the Auto Windscreens final in 2000.

Our defence were still complaining to the Ref about the foul when Mercer was picking the ball out of the back of the net. 

 

Edited March 29, 2023 by Midlands Robin

[bcfc01]

Just now, Midlands Robin said:

Similar thing happened to us against Stoke in the Auto Windscreens final in 2000.

Our defence were still complaining to the Ref about the foul when Mercer was picking the ball out of the back of the net. 

Louis Carey was still arguing with the ref when they took it quickly.

In that game and the Notts game, no defender stood over the ball to stop it happening, just talking to the ref or ambling about.

[HappyClapper]

I’m all for it. In my view a free kick should infer an advantage. Too often an offence is committed that allows the defending team to reset, making it more difficult for the team that was fouled. I would like to see a rule change that encourages/ allows it in most circumstances.

[Sir Geoff]

I think  a perfect rule change would be to allow the team with the advantage to be allowed to take the free kick as soon as they like. No need for the other team to be ready (even though they should be) or fussy refereeing waiting til everyone is ready so that he can blow his whistle. It's a free kick stop the ball where the offence occurred and carry on. If you take it before a defender has retreated 10 yards and it hits him tough.

[phantom]

1 hour ago, Midlands Robin said:

Similar thing happened to us against Stoke in the Auto Windscreens final in 2000.

Our defence were still complaining to the Ref about the foul when Mercer was picking the ball out of the back of the net. 

 

I was always curious if the ball was still rolling as he took the kick?

He rolls the ball away and the next thing he has passed it - never convinced it would have stopped rolling

[1960maaan]

There was a time where you could ask the Ref if you could take it, the Ref would stand to the side & not bother to get the opposition back 10 yards . I thought they changed it, but as long as the ball isn't moving and it does a full rotation the balls in play. It's one reason players stand in front of the ball 

[Dunc]

45 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

I think  a perfect rule change would be to allow the team with the advantage to be allowed to take the free kick as soon as they like. No need for the other team to be ready (even though they should be) or fussy refereeing waiting til everyone is ready so that he can blow his whistle. It's a free kick stop the ball where the offence occurred and carry on. If you take it before a defender has retreated 10 yards and it hits him tough.

Absolutely this. I hate that they took away yellow cards for players blocking free kicks. Slows the game down and rewards fouling. Fast and more creative game is in everyone's interests, unless you're called Big Sam.

When I was a youngster our coach taught us to run harder when the ball was out of play or for a free kick. Get it back in play as quickly as you can as lots of players switch off. 

[Leveller]

I can’t see anything in the rules about having to wait to take a free kick. Is there anything? Is it all at the ref’s discretion?

I agree with others that it doesn’t seem fair that the offending team can gain a second advantage by stopping any momentum the attacking team has.

[A Horse With No Name]

1 hour ago, Sir Geoff said:

I think  a perfect rule change would be to allow the team with the advantage to be allowed to take the free kick as soon as they like. No need for the other team to be ready (even though they should be) or fussy refereeing waiting til everyone is ready so that he can blow his whistle. It's a free kick stop the ball where the offence occurred and carry on. If you take it before a defender has retreated 10 yards and it hits him tough.

Problem is that we are all taught to play to the whistle. If the ref blows to stop the game, surely he has to blow again to restart it. Imagine the same thing happening with a penalty.

Edited March 29, 2023 by CrackingCheeseGromit

[Clutton Caveman]

1 hour ago, Sir Geoff said:

I think  a perfect rule change would be to allow the team with the advantage to be allowed to take the free kick as soon as they like. No need for the other team to be ready (even though they should be) or fussy refereeing waiting til everyone is ready so that he can blow his whistle. It's a free kick stop the ball where the offence occurred and carry on. If you take it before a defender has retreated 10 yards and it hits him tough.

Anything to stop the constant kicking the ball away and standing too close to the taker would help entertainment.

[Curr Avon]

3 hours ago, Robbored said:

Looks legitimate to me. The defenders were half asleep. No point complaining - they’ve only got themselves to blame.

Was that the official's sight?

[Sir Geoff]

2 hours ago, Leveller said:

I can’t see anything in the rules about having to wait to take a free kick. Is there anything? Is it all at the ref’s discretion?

I agree with others that it doesn’t seem fair that the offending team can gain a second advantage by stopping any momentum the attacking team has.

I think you are correct. I worded it rule change as couldn't think of an alternative phrase. 95% of the time referees stop quick free kicks or pull them back as nobody was ready. There should be a directive that free kicks can be taken as soon as the team fouled wish.

[Red-Robbo]

1 minute ago, Sir Geoff said:

I think you are correct. I worded it rule change as couldn't think of an alternative phrase. 95% of the time referees stop quick free kicks or pull them back as nobody was ready. There should be a directive that free kicks can be taken as soon as the team fouled wish.

 

I agree, although sometimes refs have to stop quick kicks as takers often kick the ball from where it was when the ref blew the whistle, rather than where it was when the foul occured. 

[Midred]

18 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

I agree, although sometimes refs have to stop quick kicks as takers often kick the ball from where it was when the ref blew the whistle, rather than where it was when the foul occured. 

Perhaps the ref could move the kick 10 yards forward if the offending team insist on standing over the ball.

[Leveller]

4 hours ago, Midred said:

Perhaps the ref could move the kick 10 yards forward if the offending team insist on standing over the ball.

Stopping a quick free kick seems to be cautionable, yet it’s allowed all the time.

[Portland Bill]

8 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

I think  a perfect rule change would be to allow the team with the advantage to be allowed to take the free kick as soon as they like. No need for the other team to be ready (even though they should be) or fussy refereeing waiting til everyone is ready so that he can blow his whistle. It's a free kick stop the ball where the offence occurred and carry on. If you take it before a defender has retreated 10 yards and it hits him tough.

No rule change needed, a team can take the free kick as quick as they like. It’s the opposition players standing on the ball, a yellow card to be handed out, or an injured player that stops 90% of free kicks being taken quickly. 
 

5 hours ago, Midred said:

Perhaps the ref could move the kick 10 yards forward if the offending team insist on standing over the ball.

That’s not in the laws of the game though!. 

[Portland Bill]

7 hours ago, Clutton Caveman said:

Anything to stop the constant kicking the ball away and standing too close to the taker would help entertainment.

Best have a word with every manager in the country then, because his instructions will be to do exactly what you stated. 

5 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

I think you are correct. I worded it rule change as couldn't think of an alternative phrase. 95% of the time referees stop quick free kicks or pull them back as nobody was ready. There should be a directive that free kicks can be taken as soon as the team fouled wish.

They can!. 

[Portland Bill]

7 hours ago, CrackingCheeseGromit said:

Problem is that we are all taught to play to the whistle. If the ref blows to stop the game, surely he has to blow again to restart it. Imagine the same thing happening with a penalty.

A referee only ‘has’ to blow his whistle for two restarts, a kick off, and a penalty. 

[nebristolred]

It's the lack of consistency that's unfair here. 99 times out of 100, you're waiting for them all to form a wall and no one is allowed to take it until the ref blows his whistle. If they try to take it early, the ref stops it. In this instance, for some inexplicable reason, the ref has seemingly allowed it.

I'm all for allowing them to be taken quickly, but they have to be consistent with it. Not just change the rules whenever they fancy. I think the defending team can feel hard done by there.

Edited March 30, 2023 by nebristolred

[Harry]

Saw a very odd one a couple of weeks ago at Yate Town vs North Leigh. 
Free kick given to North Leigh about 25 yards out, slightly to the right side of the box. 
Yate players are organising a wall and the keeper is over by his post. The North Leigh player takes a quick one and simply bends it directly into the empty goal whilst the keeper is faffing around. 
I was very surprised at the time that it stood. 

[formerly known as ivan]

This one has always confused me…

If it’s in the halfway line you can take it as quickly as you like, no need to wait for the refs whistle. Why is it so different when it’s outside the box?  You can’t have different rules based on where on the pitch the free kick is, that’s ridiculous.  It should be down to the defending team to stay switched on, simple as.

[Midred]

8 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

No rule change needed, a team can take the free kick as quick as they like. It’s the opposition players standing on the ball, a yellow card to be handed out, or an injured player that stops 90% of free kicks being taken quickly. 
 

That’s not in the laws of the game though!. 

Perhaps it ought to be to prevent the advantage of a free kick being lost.

[Portland Bill]

53 minutes ago, formerly known as ivan said:

This one has always confused me…

If it’s in the halfway line you can take it as quickly as you like, no need to wait for the refs whistle. Why is it so different when it’s outside the box?  You can’t have different rules based on where on the pitch the free kick is, that’s ridiculous.  It should be down to the defending team to stay switched on, simple as.

There are no different rules. As long as the free kick is taken from the right place it’s fine. Why do you think opposition players stand over the ball, they know it can be taking quickly, 

 

 

[Midred]

8 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

No rule change needed, a team can take the free kick as quick as they like. It’s the opposition players standing on the ball, a yellow card to be handed out, or an injured player that stops 90% of free kicks being taken quickly. 
 

That’s not in the laws of the game though!. 

There's probably not a law that says the ref should be consistent in his administration of the laws!

[Unan]

Always loved Korey making the most of this, whenever I player would stand in front the ball, he’d just kick in in to them even if a ball wasn’t on, and then start going mad at the red, often getting a yellow for their player. Don’t know why we don’t do it more.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Marcus Aurelius

[Portland Bill]

14 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

I think you are correct. I worded it rule change as couldn't think of an alternative phrase. 95% of the time referees stop quick free kicks or pull them back as nobody was ready. There should be a directive that free kicks can be taken as soon as the team fouled wish.

You will find that there is communication between the referee and the players. 99% of the time the team with the free kick will ask for “ten yards”. The defending goalkeeper will also ask for the whistle. 
 

[Portland Bill]

4 minutes ago, Midred said:

There's probably not a law that says the ref should be consistent in his administration of the laws!

When the team that wins the free kick asks the referee to get the opposition players back 10 yards, he will. When a team wins a free kick and wants to ‘play’, they can, as long as the ball is in the position where  the foul/ handball was committed. 
Take in to consideration, an injured player on the floor, a yellow card for the offence, the opposition players standing over the ball. 
You will find it’s not a simple consistency matter, as every stoppage is different. The only way you will find out, is to referee a game yourself. 

[italian dave]

20 hours ago, spudski said:

....apparently the player asked the ref whether it was ok to take it quickly. And he said yes. 

I guess as defenders you have to be constantly alert and not expect to play to the whistle. 

All time club record broken as well. 40 this season so far. 

 

Should it have stood? Absolutely. (Leaving aside the rolling ball and offside issues). 

I miss the art of the quick free kick. I hate the way that opposing players run towards the ball to stand over it and have to be told to get back 10 yards. 

A free kick is meant to be to the advantage of the team taking it. 

And I don’t buy the ‘ref has to blow’ argument: in areas of the pitch that are less of an attacking threat it’s quite common for free kicks to be taken with barely a touch of the had to stop the ball and certainly with no whistle to restart the game. 

[spudski]

11 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Should it have stood? Absolutely. (Leaving aside the rolling ball and offside issues). 

I miss the art of the quick free kick. I hate the way that opposing players run towards the ball to stand over it and have to be told to get back 10 yards. 

A free kick is meant to be to the advantage of the team taking it. 

And I don’t buy the ‘ref has to blow’ argument: in areas of the pitch that are less of an attacking threat it’s quite common for free kicks to be taken with barely a touch of the had to stop the ball and certainly with no whistle to restart the game. 

I totally agree, as most have pointed out, it's the inconsistency across the pitch. 

Apparently the Notts County manager has told his players to be constantly asking the ref whether they can take a free quick quickly. 

The whole ' theatre' of a ' set piece' free kick, where defence builds wall, players position etc etc etc....waiting for the ref to blow his whistle....being told by the ref to wait for the whistle...has no bearing on other free kicks around the pitch. 

Other times when teams have been pulled back from playing a quick free kick, and told to wait for the whistle and defence to fully retreat 10 yards. The referees discretion on the day. 

It's so inconsistent. 

I'd be in the ear of the ref every time a free kick is given around the box, asking to take it quickly and not play to the whistle, to take advantage of the opposition concentrating on building a wall rather than defending. 

[A Horse With No Name]

9 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

A referee only ‘has’ to blow his whistle for two restarts, a kick off, and a penalty. 

Not a corner?

[A Horse With No Name]

1 hour ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

Always loved Korey making the most of this, whenever I player would stand in front the ball, he’d just kick in in to them even if a ball wasn’t on, and then start going mad at the red, often getting a yellow for their player. Don’t know why we don’t do it more.

I personally hate that. May be just me.

[Unan]

Just now, CrackingCheeseGromit said:

I personally hate that. May be just me.

Getting the opposition booked for obstruction(?) or intentionally kicking it to get the other player booked?

Edited March 30, 2023 by Marcus Aurelius

[A Horse With No Name]

2 minutes ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

Getting the opposition booked for obstruction(?) or intentionally kicking it to get the other player booked?

The latter, although I get what you are saying.

[italian dave]

1 hour ago, CrackingCheeseGromit said:

I personally hate that. May be just me.

I’m sure it’s not just you, but funny how we all see things. Personally, I hate the insistence of the offending team players standing in front of the ball. Sometimes running 10 yards to do so. They are supposed to retreat 10 yards. I’d kick it at them every time! 

Edited March 30, 2023 by italian dave

[formerly known as ivan]

2 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

There are no different rules. As long as the free kick is taken from the right place it’s fine. Why do you think opposition players stand over the ball, they know it can be taking quickly, 

 

 

Then what is so controversial about this?

[Cowshed]

21 hours ago, spudski said:

....apparently the player asked the ref whether it was ok to take it quickly. And he said yes. 

I guess as defenders you have to be constantly alert and not expect to play to the whistle. 

All time club record broken as well. 40 this season so far. 

 

 

The referee should also be giving the defending team instruction .. On my whistle etc. Refs providing information of what the expectations are part of their control of the game. 

So the answer could be no depending on what information the ref has given the players. 

[beaverface]

2 hours ago, Marcus Aurelius said:

Always loved Korey making the most of this, whenever I player would stand in front the ball, he’d just kick in in to them even if a ball wasn’t on, and then start going mad at the red, often getting a yellow for their player. Don’t know why we don’t do it more.

Tinnion was the master at doing that.

[spudski]

6 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

 

The referee should also be giving the defending team instruction .. On my whistle etc. Refs providing information of what the expectations are part of their control of the game. 

So the answer could be no depending on what information the ref has given the players. 

And this is where controversy occurs. 

Referees changing how they are going to control a match, from one game to the other. 

'On my whistle'  is over ruling the laws of the game. 

A free kick can be taken at any time once given, as long as the defending team have moved 10 yards away...by law you don't have to wait for a whistle to restart. 

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-13---free-kicks 

 

 

[Cowshed]

4 minutes ago, spudski said:

And this is where controversy occurs. 

Referees changing how they are going to control a match, from one game to the other. 

'On my whistle'  is over ruling the laws of the game. 

A free kick can be taken at any time once given, as long as the defending team have moved 10 yards away...by law you don't have to wait for a whistle to restart. 

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/lawsandrules/laws/football-11-11/law-13---free-kicks 

 

 

On my whistle isn't over ruling the laws of game. A ref can blow the whistle at any time to stop the game and restart it. A ref can inform a defending team on my whistle at free kicks, direct keeper etc and they routinely do. Its good practice information. 

This goal was very inconsistent.  Its not a quick free kick at all. Its ten seconds plus after the offence the "quick" free kick is taken. Players around the ball. Players doing laces up. The refs proximity to the ball is odd. He is getting there quickly to stop the game.  If you want quick free kicks the ref stays away (they do), Its not normal practice. Its not normal control given the level of the game. The majority of refs do not allow free kicks to be taken like this. Hence I wonder what the players expectations would be from his instruction.

[spudski]

2 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

On my whistle isn't over ruling the laws of game. A ref can blow the whistle at any time to stop the game and restart it. A ref can inform a defending team on my whistle at free kicks, direct keeper etc and they routinely do. Its good practice information. 

This goal was very inconsistent.  Its not a quick free kick at all. Its ten seconds plus after the offence the "quick" free kick is taken. Players around the ball. Players doing laces up. The refs proximity to the ball is odd. He is getting there quickly to stop the game.  If you want quick free kicks the ref stays away (they do), Its not normal practice. Its not normal control given the level of the game. The majority of refs do not allow free kicks to be taken like this. Hence I wonder what the players expectations would be from his instruction.

I see it completely differently. 

The laws of the game are in place. 

Teams play to those rules. 

A referee deciding to play to the whistle is over riding those rules. 

He's changing the laws of the game for his benefit. 

How are fans, managers and players meant to find continuity....if refs do as they like at Free kicks.

Also you are relying on communication from the ref being heard by everyone. 

It's too open to being controversial. 

 

[IAmNick]

Reminds me of a Man Utd corner from a few years ago. Rooney placing the ball for the corner also touched it briefly with his foot to put it in play. Giggs jogged over to "take" the corner, but instead just ran infield with the ball, crossed, and they scored.

The ref didn't allow it.

Here's the (crap quality) video: 

 

Edited March 30, 2023 by IAmNick

[spudski]

5 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

Reminds me of a Man Utd corner from a few years ago. Rooney placing the ball for the corner also touched it briefly with his foot to put it in play. Giggs jogged over to "take" the corner, but instead just ran infield with the ball, crossed, and they scored.

The ref didn't allow it.

Here's the (crap quality) video: 

 

On the commentary you can hear them say the referee had whistled. 

You don't need to wait for a whistle at corners, free kicks or throw ins...only penalties. 

Again...referees overriding the laws of the game. 

Goal should have stood. 

[Cowshed]

6 minutes ago, spudski said:

I see it completely differently. 

The laws of the game are in place. 

Teams play to those rules. 

A referee deciding to play to the whistle is over riding those rules. 

He's changing the laws of the game for his benefit. 

How are fans, managers and players meant to find continuity....if refs do as they like at Free kicks.

Also you are relying on communication from the ref being heard by everyone. 

It's too open to being controversial. 

 

No. that is incorrect. A ref can use his whistle at free kicks. They do frequently. 

You are saying the goal is "controversial". It is remarkable, its not a normal goal because of the refs unusual actions. The majority of referees would not be allowing that free quick to be taken in that manner after that duration of time. There are other elements that are uneven. Refs at that level are accomplished and skilled, that lack of level of control and that rare goal is more akin to Sunday league. 

[spudski]

7 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

No. that is incorrect. A ref can use his whistle at free kicks. They do frequently. 

You are saying the goal is "controversial". It is remarkable, its not a normal goal because of the refs unusual actions. The majority of referees would not be allowing that free quick to be taken in that manner after that duration of time. There are other elements that are uneven. Refs at that level are accomplished and skilled, that lack of level of control and that rare goal is more akin to Sunday league. 

I know they do...you are missing my point completely. 

Why have laws in place, saying you do not have to play to the refs whistle at free kicks, corners and throw ins? 

A ref has overrided those rules, if he's told players to play to the whistle. 

What refs usually do should have no relevance. They are wrong to override the laws. Just because they do it...it doesn't make it right. 

You may as well not have the laws in place at all. 

[sugarwray]

15 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

A referee only ‘has’ to blow his whistle for two restarts, a kick off, and a penalty. 

Also for the end of each half (including extra time) I thought

[Unan]

What is the rule(s) then from free kicks?

[Atyeo's lift]

The Notts County goal looked good to me - the kit not so much..

[Cowshed]

3 hours ago, spudski said:

I know they do...you are missing my point completely. 

Why have laws in place, saying you do not have to play to the refs whistle at free kicks, corners and throw ins? 

A ref has overrided those rules, if he's told players to play to the whistle. 

What refs usually do should have no relevance. They are wrong to override the laws. Just because they do it...it doesn't make it right. 

You may as well not have the laws in place at all. 

Because that is what the ref wants. The ref if moving players away from the ball to ten metres uses the whistle - He will state play to my whistle, he will state what he wants. That manages the game, its control, its management.

 

[spudski]

1 hour ago, Cowshed said:

Because that is what the ref wants. The ref if moving players away from the ball to ten metres uses the whistle - He will state play to my whistle, he will state what he wants. That manages the game, its control, its management.

 

Which makes no sense at all. No point in having laws in place, if the ref is going to ignore them and play to his rules.

[Cowshed]

28 minutes ago, spudski said:

Which makes no sense at all. No point in having laws in place, if the ref is going to ignore them and play to his rules.

Given the timescale the non quick free kick was taken going to ceremonial does make sense. Free kicks around the box taking that long post ten seconds will go on the whistle. This free kick is unusual (controversial), it did not follow norms. 

Edited March 30, 2023 by Cowshed

[Portland Bill]

3 hours ago, sugarwray said:

Also for the end of each half (including extra time) I thought

Restarts!. 

[spudski]

19 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Given the timescale the non quick free kick was taken going to ceremonial does make sense. Free kicks around the box taking that long post ten seconds will go on the whistle. This free kick is unusual (controversial), it did not follow norms. 

This is just one example. As you have pointed out...Referees ' manage' a game regularly their way. Ignoring the laws, and telling players to play to the whistle. 

Free kicks often take time because the defenders don't move 10 yards away from the ball. Even if a team take a quick free kick, if the defence isn't 10 yards away, it has to be retaken. 

This is where the laws need to change imo. 

The advantage of a free kick is taken away from the offence, if the defence is allowed to re organise or stand in front of the ball. 

Book players blocking a quick free being taken. Or allow the offense to take a quick free kick regardless of the defenders position. 

 

[Midred]

4 hours ago, sugarwray said:

Also for the end of each half (including extra time) I thought

And depending on how important he wants to look!

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, spudski said:

This is just one example. As you have pointed out...Referees ' manage' a game regularly their way. Ignoring the laws, and telling players to play to the whistle. 

 

 

Its an example that fits the scenario in your initial post. Its not ignoring the laws.

[spudski]

3 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

Its an example that fits the scenario in your initial post. Its not ignoring the laws.

You are being really pedantic now and ignoring the intent and flow of the conversation. 

It's fine to say you disagree.

[Cowshed]

19 minutes ago, spudski said:

You are being really pedantic now and ignoring the intent and flow of the conversation. 

It's fine to say you disagree.

In that position, and with that delay etc a free kick to the whistle (ceremonial free kick) would not be ignoring the laws. It would be normal. Its surprising that the ref in this instance does not show the whistle, state on my whistle, place the ball, then move to allowing the opponents opportunity to form the wall, ensure the wall is in the correct position and move on to blowing the whistle to restart the match. This is a rule at free kicks. 

Edited March 30, 2023 by Cowshed

[spudski]

10 minutes ago, Cowshed said:

In that position, and with that delay etc a free kick to the whistle (ceremonial free kick) would not be ignoring the laws. It would be normal. Its surprising that the ref in this instance does not show the whistle, state on my whistle, place the ball, then move to allowing the opponents opportunity to form the wall, ensure the wall is in the correct position and move on to blowing the whistle to restart the match. This is a rule at free kicks. 

Again...you are missing the point of the discussion. The drive of the discussion is not about what the general rule is. 

It is about a refs in general overruling the laws of the free kick. 

Edited March 30, 2023 by spudski

[Mendip Broadwalk]

On 30/03/2023 at 00:13, Portland Bill said:

No rule change needed, a team can take the free kick as quick as they like. It’s the opposition players standing on the ball, a yellow card to be handed out, or an injured player that stops 90% of free kicks being taken quickly. 
 

That’s not in the laws of the game though!. 

Your a ref? Would you let this one go in one of your games? Looks to me the defending team have to be thinking the refs going to a ceremonial free kick as hes fannying around and not in control.  

[spudski]

15 minutes ago, Three Lions said:

Your a ref? Would you let this one go in one of your games? Looks to me the defending team have to be thinking the refs going to a ceremonial free kick as hes fannying around and not in control.  

According to the Accrington players, the ref had verbally said to play to the whistle. They were expecting to set up a wall and go through the ' ceremonial free kick' procedure. The ref didn't comply to his own instructions. 

This thread and others on such subjects, just goes to show how so many of us find the free kick laws and rules applied by refs, baffling and ambiguous. 

Free kick laws are written by the FA, say that you are entitled to take a free kick or corner without having to wait for the referees whistle. 

However this law is rarely allowed ( so what's the point of having the law ), as referees decide to manage the game themselves. Instructing both sides how they will interpret and manage a free kick situation. 

If a referee has told both teams to play to the whistle, but then allows a quick free kick without his whistle, then this is where controversy happens. 

Then you have the ' ceremonial free kick'... which goes along the lines of...

• Place the ball
• Show players your whistle
• Tell them not to take the free kick until you signal to do so
• Move sideways/backwards to the players lining up in the wall – keep eye on the ball
• Stop at the nearest defender
• Establish 10 yards whilst still keeping an eye on the ball
• Use voice and presence to take player back with you into the wall
• When wall established to your satisfaction move to one side, level with or slightly in front of the wall still keeping an eye on the ball
• Blow whistle 

 

The laws go out of the window...as the ref chooses to manage the game how he chooses...which can change from game to game. 

They can decide to give an advantage, pull a game back, slow a game down, offer a quick or slow free kick routine etc etc etc. 

Controversy occurs when communication is either mis understood or poorly directed. 

 

[MarcusX]

On 29/03/2023 at 15:54, HappyClapper said:

I’m all for it. In my view a free kick should infer an advantage. Too often an offence is committed that allows the defending team to reset, making it more difficult for the team that was fouled. I would like to see a rule change that encourages/ allows it in most circumstances.

I tend to agree, what’s frustrating is a lack of consistency though. Some refs insist on  the whistle, some allow them to be taken quick.

I guess as defenders we need to be switched on and someone stood over the ball.

[Leveller]

21 minutes ago, MarcusX said:

I tend to agree, what’s frustrating is a lack of consistency though. Some refs insist on  the whistle, some allow them to be taken quick.

I guess as defenders we need to be switched on and someone stood over the ball.

Yet the rules suggest that standing over the ball to stop a quick kick is cautionable?

[spudski]

3 minutes ago, Leveller said:

Yet the rules suggest that standing over the ball to stop a quick kick is cautionable?

The laws state that defenders have to be 10 yards back from the ball.

If a free kick is given, and allowed to be played quickly, and a defender is within 10 yards, the laws state it it should be retaken. 

So to allow a quick free kick with that scenario, goes against the laws. 

Hence my posts on referees overruling laws of the game. 

[Portland Bill]

On 31/03/2023 at 12:18, spudski said:

According to the Accrington players, the ref had verbally said to play to the whistle. They were expecting to set up a wall and go through the ' ceremonial free kick' procedure. The ref didn't comply to his own instructions. 

This thread and others on such subjects, just goes to show how so many of us find the free kick laws and rules applied by refs, baffling and ambiguous. 

Free kick laws are written by the FA, say that you are entitled to take a free kick or corner without having to wait for the referees whistle. 

However this law is rarely allowed ( so what's the point of having the law ), as referees decide to manage the game themselves. Instructing both sides how they will interpret and manage a free kick situation. 

If a referee has told both teams to play to the whistle, but then allows a quick free kick without his whistle, then this is where controversy happens. 

Then you have the ' ceremonial free kick'... which goes along the lines of...

• Place the ball
• Show players your whistle
• Tell them not to take the free kick until you signal to do so
• Move sideways/backwards to the players lining up in the wall – keep eye on the ball
• Stop at the nearest defender
• Establish 10 yards whilst still keeping an eye on the ball
• Use voice and presence to take player back with you into the wall
• When wall established to your satisfaction move to one side, level with or slightly in front of the wall still keeping an eye on the ball
• Blow whistle 

 

The laws go out of the window...as the ref chooses to manage the game how he chooses...which can change from game to game. 

They can decide to give an advantage, pull a game back, slow a game down, offer a quick or slow free kick routine etc etc etc. 

Controversy occurs when communication is either mis understood or poorly directed. 

 

Oh dear!. Have a chat with an assessor, then come back to me if you are still convinced the “ref decides to manage the game how he chooses”. 
You really haven’t got a clue!. 

[Portland Bill]

On 31/03/2023 at 11:40, Three Lions said:

Your a ref? Would you let this one go in one of your games? Looks to me the defending team have to be thinking the refs going to a ceremonial free kick as hes fannying around and not in control.  

Two of the defending team are more interested in arguing with the referee than defending the free kick, so they got what they deserved. The whistle does not ‘have’ to be blown for a free kick to be taken, and it’s common all around the pitch for a player to take a free kick quickly, I personally don’t see any issues at all with the clip.

This scenario has happened numerous times.

[spudski]

2 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

Oh dear!. Have a chat with an assessor, then come back to me if you are still convinced the “ref decides to manage the game how he chooses”. 
You really haven’t got a clue!. 

I'll take that as a compliment, as most refs haven't got a clue. Hence the daily complaints. 

Who gives a shit about an assessor....our own manager constantly complains about the standard of refereeing and the association.

You have a typical referees view point...everyone else hasn't got a clue apart from you. **** off...****. 

[Colemanballs]

On 31/03/2023 at 03:17, Cowshed said:

In that position, and with that delay etc a free kick to the whistle (ceremonial free kick) would not be ignoring the laws. It would be normal. Its surprising that the ref in this instance does not show the whistle, state on my whistle, place the ball, then move to allowing the opponents opportunity to form the wall, ensure the wall is in the correct position and move on to blowing the whistle to restart the match. This is a rule at free kicks. 

Where in the LAWS of the game does it state this?

[Portland Bill]

4 hours ago, spudski said:

I'll take that as a compliment, as most refs haven't got a clue. Hence the daily complaints. 

Who gives a shit about an assessor....our own manager constantly complains about the standard of refereeing and the association.

You have a typical referees view point...everyone else hasn't got a clue apart from you. **** off...****. 

Every referee ‘does’ give a huge shit about an assessor, but you know best big boy. 
You have just proved my point. You clearly don’t know any referees.