Ref Watch ..... Fleetwood H

[Mick]

As Michael Caine would say "Not a lot of people know that!"

The rules have changed greatly since his playing days in 1981.

 

[rigsby]

No, the "opposing" half bit is just to define what constitutes an offside position. Being in an offside position is not an offence in itself - only when the player becomes involved and that is where the free kick is, or should be, taken.

That should be changed as well. No problem with the relaxing of the law a good while back, remember the bad old days of anyone an inch offside and it was a free kick. Even if a corner was cleared and someone volleyed in a worldly it could be ruled out because the corner taker was offside.

But the confusion comes when a player is clearly offside and then chases the ball and we have to wait until he actually touches it. Its obvious the said player is active but the defender can't be sure so chases 30 yds back whilst he and the crowd watch the lino's body language expecting the flag but slightly nervous in case he has made a howler.

Further slows down the game and is not needed, rather like the pointless slow trudge of the tactical time wasting substitutions. In the past players came on whilst the other one went off.....While I'm on a roll how about an indirect free kick for time wasting on a goal kick, would be far more entertaining than the ref running 60 yds for a pointless and further time wasting Yellow card.

 

[rigsby]

Because that is what the Law says. We would have been within our rights to challenge for it. Ok, so no one does, but the ref cannot make that call.

I did clearly say 'a rule that could be changed'. We have all seen a keeper having to put the ball out for an injury, followed by a throw back to him by the oppo. The ball is not active in the keepers hands, you can't kick out of them so why make him put it out of play. Stop the game and just carry on with the drop kick/throw after the player has gone off.

 

[Mick]

But the confusion comes when a player is clearly offside and then chases the ball and we have to wait until he actually touches it. Its obvious the said player is active but the defender can't be sure so chases 30 yds back whilst he and the crowd watch the lino's body language expecting the flag but slightly nervous in case he has made a howler.

Agree completely. I once saw an assistant run virtually his whole half of the pitch alongside a winger chasing the ball and only flagging when he just managed to keep it from going out for a goal kick.
Rule could be reworded from "plays the ball" to "plays the ball or moves towards the ball with the obvious intention of playing the ball".

 

[Mick]

..While I'm on a roll how about an indirect free kick for time wasting on a goal kick, would be far more entertaining than the ref running 60 yds for a pointless and further time wasting Yellow card.

Not against that, but need some firm and precise guidance on defining time wasting (delaying the restart of play). It's fairly arbitrary at present and players are frequently carded for taking less time than has been allowed much earlier in the game.

Whilst an indirect freekick on the edge of the goal area sounds like a lot of fun, it would get very messy and I'm not sure that punishment would be proportionate.

 

[rigsby]

Not against that, but need some firm and precise guidance on defining time wasting (delaying the restart of play). It's fairly arbitrary at present and players are frequently carded for taking less time than has been allowed much earlier in the game.

Whilst an indirect freekick on the edge of the goal area sounds like a lot of fun, it would get very messy and I'm not sure that punishment would be proportionate.

Its one of those rules that should never have to be used. Rather like the 7/9 ? seconds for a drop kick....Never used now days but greatly speeded up the game for the good. Just like the back pass to the keeper rule.

 

[Mick]

Its one of those rules that should never have to be used. Rather like the 7/9 ? seconds for a drop kick....Never used now days but greatly speeded up the game for the good. Just like the back pass to the keeper rule.

6 seconds.

I think the outlawing of the backpass to the keeper has been the single biggest law-change induced improvement to the game in the nearly 60 years I've been watching.

 

[Lord Football]

I did clearly say 'a rule that could be changed'. We have all seen a keeper having to put the ball out for an injury, followed by a throw back to him by the oppo. The ball is not active in the keepers hands, you can't kick out of them so why make him put it out of play. Stop the game and just carry on with the drop kick/throw after the player has gone off.

Not sure what your point is...

But, for clarity. The goalkeeper is under no obligation to kick the ball out. It is one of the sportsmanship things that has developed in the last couple of decades.

The referee has the power to stop the game regardless of where the ball is, and if it is still in play, he will restart with a drop ball.

A drop ball can be challenged by either side, the fact that in many cases a team doesn't do this, similarly is something that has developed over the years.

If I recall the incident you refer to correctly (and to be honest, I was struggling stay engaged with the game on Saturday). Cox went down, the ball was in play (in the keeper's hand). The ref stopped the game. Ben came on, magic sponge. The ref then restarted the game with a drop ball that we didn't challenge for. Refs drops in keeper's hands and legs it to his position the halfway line.

In both cases, the referee cannot instruct anyone to kick the ball out, nor can he instruct a team not to challenge for a drop ball. So the scenario I describe is how the game has evolved, rather than the Law. A rare example of common sense applying.

 

[Lord Football]

Its one of those rules that should never have to be used. Rather like the 7/9 ? seconds for a drop kick....Never used now days but greatly speeded up the game for the good. Just like the back pass to the keeper rule.

i understand the six second law was removed in the summer....

 

[Mick]

i understand the six second law was removed in the summer....

Really ?

Current Law 12 wording:

An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area,
commits any of the following offences:
• controls the ball with the hands for more than six seconds before releasing it

If they were minded to remove it, it would need to be replaced with something similar.

 

[londonblue]

i understand the six second law was removed in the summer....

Not according to IFAB. It's still in the Laws of the Game on their website:

IFAB

An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area, commits any of the following offences:

• controls the ball with the hands for more than six seconds before releasing it
• touches the ball with the hands after: releasing it and before it has touched another player
• it has been deliberately kicked to the goalkeeper by a team-mate
• receiving it directly from a throw-in taken by a team-mate

 

[RobM]

Really ?

Current Law 12 wording:

An indirect free kick is awarded if a goalkeeper, inside their penalty area,
commits any of the following offences:
• controls the ball with the hands for more than six seconds before releasing it

If they were minded to remove it, it would need to be replaced with something similar.

Why isn't it enforced though? We often hear "12...13....14" yet no free kick.

 

[1966 and all that]

Why isn't it enforced though? We often hear "12...13....14" yet no free kick.

I guess it's one of those 'spirit of the law' things - just like foot off the ground in throw-ins, goalkeeper handling the ball o/s the area when kicking out. And don't get me started on 'hands in an unnatural position.

 

[RobM]

I guess it's one of those 'spirit of the law' things - just like foot off the ground in throw-ins, goalkeeper handling the ball o/s the area when kicking out. And don't get me started on 'hands in an unnatural position.

Oh, go on!

 

[1966 and all that]

Oh, go on!

Well I typed a fulsome reply - but got logged out before I could submit.���� Maybe another time.

 

[Jay_SUFC]

Not against that, but need some firm and precise guidance on defining time wasting (delaying the restart of play). It's fairly arbitrary at present and players are frequently carded for taking less time than has been allowed much earlier in the game.

Whilst an indirect freekick on the edge of the goal area sounds like a lot of fun, it would get very messy and I'm not sure that punishment would be proportionate.

I'm for the idea of stopping the clock when the ball is out of play - will stop time wasting and also the arguments over time added on

 

[Jay_SUFC]

I guess it's one of those 'spirit of the law' things - just like foot off the ground in throw-ins, goalkeeper handling the ball o/s the area when kicking out. And don't get me started on 'hands in an unnatural position.

I with you on that one - which isn't even a rule; handball has to be intentional, yet I would say 9 times of of 10, handballs that are given are not intentional

 

[AndyT]

Also, if a player takes ages to walk off the pitch when substituted, the new fella has to enter the field of play at the same speed! .. or better still, when a substitution is made, the game carries on, which will speed up the changeover!

 

[londonblue]

Why isn't it enforced though? We often hear "12...13....14" yet no free kick.

Because most times people count too quickly. That's not to say 'keepers don't abuse this law, but they rarely keep hold of the ball for that long.

 

[londonblue]

I'm for the idea of stopping the clock when the ball is out of play - will stop time wasting and also the arguments over time added on

I don't really think that will stop time wasting as most time wasting is added on anyway. Time wasting is often about disrupting play, and stopping the opposing team's momentum. That will probably be worse because the players can argue that it doesn't matter how long they take because the clock has stopped.