Awwwww Ref - Know The Laws

My point was on the re-initiation of play being from when the kick was taken and comparing that to penalties, free-kicks, etc. It's not the distance travelled in those cases. Of course opposition players should be back the required distance - 18 yards in this case. 

The ref doesn't call play only once a free kick has travelled 10 yards, so not sure why goal kicks are different. Anyway, happy to admit I didn't know the full extent of this law. 

Just wondering what people's views are on overhead kicks and Law 12 of the game:

"Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury."

There were a few overhead goals in England over the weekend, I only saw Costa's and he did strike Naughton in the face with his boot. Is there a double standard with overhead kicks like these judged differently depending on where they occur on the pitch?

this is a very interesting point. Every other restart of play I can recall (free kick throw in kick off) players can move towards play as soon as restart has taken place. Why should a goal kick be different.

after a quick review of laws any restart of play from within penalty area by defending team requires opponents to remain outside penalty area until ball is in play I.e. it leaves penalty area. There must be some concern about attacking team getting an advantage. Maybe it is about what caused the restart. A penalty kick was caused by the defending team infringing so attacking team should be given more of an advantage following the restart . A foul by attacking team in penalty area or ball going out for goal kick was caused by an attacking teams action so should not be given an advantage which cod directly lead to a goal?

If you guys were to watch any of my daughter's U13 div 2 games you'd see why we need to wait for the ball to leave the box before pouncing...

Indirect free kicks inside the box to the defending team (ie after an offside) must also leave the box before being touched.

Not passing comment on why that is though, just stating that it's not just goal kicks, it's all indirect restarts inside the box. 

drop balls?

no as these are a contested restart. 

Something to think about..... 

Your Chance to get THE REF'S INTERPRETATION     Laws of the game

Would it be wrong of me to suggest this should be compulsory for all Central and Cap Prem Coaches/Managers/Captains. 

Would like it if many of the players in those teams also attended. 

Next time you want to question a referees decision, think about this (Yes I know your local ref isn't to the same standard but still)

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11096/10808...

Worth a look- Sky UK doco on referees:

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5h7yts

While my son was at practice last night I watched a whistle and flag training session for a referees course. It was very entertaining.

Sounds like a cool name for a pub!

These are some changes that the IFAB are looking at, have a read as they are really interesting http://www.play-fair.com/

Chapter 1 - YES!

Chapter 2 (No law change needed bits) - yes, the rest not so much.

Chapter 3 - No to most apart from the penalty order.

You're right, definitely some interesting proposals!

Chapter 2 looks like absolute garbage. Like someone put an American in charge.

I think the penalty order is over complicating things.

Penalty order is great as it takes away the advantage of teams going first. Working like a tennis tie break it's a great way to even it out. 

I'm a fan of all of the first section, I get what they are trying to do with second section but don't want it to end up like American Football where clock always stops but more can be done for time wasting and making it up. Don't think you need to make up anymore time for the other stoppages. I like the full time not ending on referees whistle but instead when ball is out can you imagine the chaos of that. Lol

As far as chapter 2 is concerned, one big aspect of Football is that you're still playing when the ball is out. You're still thinking, you're still re-positioning, you're still trying to outwit your marker, it's still all on. It's one of the things that makes "football fitness" unique from many other sports.

Sorry to parrot the slippery-slope argument (but let's be honest) the second the clock stops when the ball goes out, next year we'll have a timeout or something, and then next year we'll have tv ad breaks. No thank you.

Ref fitness test

That whole documentary is well worth watching.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5h7yts

Is the offside law still along the lines "a player is offside when they take an active part on the game "?

If so, surely as soon as a player in an offside position runs towards the ball , they are taking an active part ?

I find it infuriating how long AR's take to flag .

[quot
e=sthn.jeff]

Is the offside law still along the lines "a player is offside when they take an active part on the game "?

If so, surely as soon as a player in an offside position runs towards the ball , they are taking an active part ?

I find it infuriating how long AR's take to flag .

[/quote] have a read of the laws of the game pages 77 to 78 defines
when an offside offence occurs. Your scenario is not correct.

Ref here, who AR'd today.  Have a look at law 11.

Essentially, there is no offense in the laws about being in an offside position. It's perfectly legal to be an offside position. There are three actual offenses.

Have a read of this explanation:

http://www.theifab.com/#!/laws/offside/chapters/of...

We flag "late" because there is no offense until the offside player becomes active as above.

In general, the coaching around this is wait, wait and see. Better to be late and correct, than early and wrong.

There is one general exception to the wait, wait and see, and that is a one-on-one situation between a player and the goalkeeper, we're encouraged to flag earlier, to avoid the risk of player collision.

There's a lot more to it - give the law a read. It's pretty straightforward.

This leads to some amusing (to me) situations every so often. Pretty much always follow this script (or something like it): The AR flags, the striker pulls up, the ball continues through to the keeper untouched, ref waves AR away, the keeper picks it up and keeps walking out of the box, free-kick, defence loses it.

Silly of the striker not to play to the whistle!

I think my understanding of the law is about correct... ie Active part etc the offside offence takes place. It is just the instruction to wait until a player touches it

In my game today our CB played at a ball that was on course to meet an offside striker, the ball went out for a corner but the AR flagged the offside. The ref and AR had a very long discussion about it before ruling it off side. The opposition were fuming but I believe they made the correct call?

again suggest you read the laws here about the actions of a person who is in an offide position and if they commit an offside offence.

Or you could just say if he was right or wrong.

Hard to tell without seeing the actual incident, but I'd say that is correct. 

From my understanding, they made the wrong call. The striker never committed an offside offence, hence there can be no offside.

It would depend on the relative position/closness of the striker and the CB, and if the striker was deemed interferring with the CB, hence the need to put it out of play. Difficult to judge this from the original description.

Here's the relevant part of the law: 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             

interfering with an opponent by:

• preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or
• challenging an opponent for the ball or
• clearly attempting to play a ball which is close to him when this action impacts on an opponent or
• making an obvious action which clearly impacts on the ability of an opponent to play the ball

I hate the current interpretations for exactly this situation, but my understanding is that the decision was wrong.

A great example of how the law about offside position vs offside offence should be correctly interpreted is this own goal from Manny Muscat (it led to a red card for Tim Cahill too which was amazing.

Manny only plays at the ball because Berisha is lurking in an offside position behind him. But under the laws of the game as they are written, Berisha has committed no offside offence, so the goal stands.

Whether you think it should be offside or not is a different question (I don't think the laws should allow goals like this to stand, but the referees made the absolute correct decision).

Yeah I agree, the defender shouldn't have to decide whether to leave the ball because the player is offside - the game is too fast to make that call so it's going to be instinct. Especially if it's marginal. From what I've read over the years there are plenty of written laws that aren't as good as they should be.

That is the perfect example of why the current interpretations are a crock of shark.  By any sensible definition of the term active, Berisha had an active role in that, because by being there, he forced Muscat to lunge at the ball like that and slot it in the near post.