Can you give an instance/example in how you would give offside against a player if the ball is played backwards?
Trying to rack my brains but can't see how you would.
Following a short corner.
Your centre half stays in front of the keeper jumping up and down, you slant it back (cos everybody else has charged out of the area anyway) so you have the ball, and between you (and the goal line) is their keeper and your centre half. In front of the ball Seeking to gain and advantage and interfering with play. In the opponents half Less than two opponents between him and the goal.
Can you give an instance/example in how you would give offside against a player if the ball is played backwards?
Trying to rack my brains but can't see how you would.
Following a short corner.
Your centre half stays in front of the keeper jumping up and down, you slant it back (cos everybody else has charged out of the area anyway) so you have the ball, and between you (and the goal line) is their keeper and your centre half. In front of the ball Seeking to gain and advantage and interfering with play. In the opponents half Less than two opponents between him and the goal.
and so on.
It can happen believe me.
It can only happen once the forward receives the ball, shoots......and then the referee has to decide whether the centre half is blocking the keeper (thus interfering with play). At no previous point, when the ball has not been played forward, will off-side be even considered.
Can you give an instance/example in how you would give offside against a player if the ball is played backwards?
Trying to rack my brains but can't see how you would.
Following a short corner.
Your centre half stays in front of the keeper jumping up and down, you slant it back (cos everybody else has charged out of the area anyway) so you have the ball, and between you (and the goal line) is their keeper and your centre half. In front of the ball Seeking to gain and advantage and interfering with play. In the opponents half Less than two opponents between him and the goal.
and so on.
It can happen believe me.
It can only happen once the forward receives the ball, shoots......and then the referee has to decide whether the centre half is blocking the keeper (thus interfering with play). At no previous point, when the ball has not been played forward, will off-side be even considered.
Can you give an instance/example in how you would give offside against a player if the ball is played backwards?
Trying to rack my brains but can't see how you would.
Following a short corner.
Your centre half stays in front of the keeper jumping up and down, you slant it back (cos everybody else has charged out of the area anyway) so you have the ball, and between you (and the goal line) is their keeper and your centre half. In front of the ball Seeking to gain and advantage and interfering with play. In the opponents half Less than two opponents between him and the goal.
and so on.
It can happen believe me.
It can only happen once the forward receives the ball, shoots......and then the referee has to decide whether the centre half is blocking the keeper (thus interfering with play). At no previous point, when the ball has not been played forward, will off-side be even considered.
Believe me !
The centre half fulfils all the checklist.
Opponents half In front of the ball Less than two players Seeking to gain advantage.
....when the ball is played, even slanted backwards, it doesn't have to wait for a forward to turn and shoot, why should it? Not just blocking the keeper, but seeking to gain from being in that position, maybe blocking the keepers line of vision. Anyway it would be the refs call, and the law could include the word 'forward' to make the decision easier.
The thing you are missing Seth, is "intefering with play" and hardly anyone is deemed as intefering these days & no way are they intefering if the ball is going away from the goal.
Well I take your point, but it could be argued that being in the keepers eye line, or jumping around in front of him is interfering with play, and it is also very arguable that the player is seeking to gain an advantage by being in that position even without physical obstruction. My overall point is that the players usually have not read the laws, yet think they can tell the ref what to do when at least the ref has read the laws, if it isn't about offside it could be about other things that the player decides they know best. How about this problem. It is an evening match under lights, and one of the players, say a tricky winger, has electric flashing lights in his boots (similar to the ones little kids have, or used to have), do you allow it? Do you allow boots painted with luminous paint that reacts to the floodlights?
How about when a ball is about to smash into a player's face from a short distance. He tries to get his hands there in time to protect himself. If he got any hand to the ball is unclear because of the speed but blood to the head suggests his efforts to protect himself were in vain. Do you send him off? Yes of course you do.
The Solly sending off was crap, but I have seen worse, like a 1-0 Arsenal win at Highbury when Humphrey was adjudged to have handled in the area. The problem is how quickly a referee has to make a decision, and they will obviously get some wrong...but so what? Players mess up too none of it is an exact science....anyway how about no ref at all, that would at least stop them spoiling things
Everybody can agree, with hindsight, that the referee got the Solly incident wrong. The ref is human, humans make mistakes.
Referees are judged on a seasons' performance (marked by clubs and assessors) and the worst demoted. Referees are also "disciplined" on a match-by-match decision if a real howler has been committed (relieved of their next scheduled match).
Not sure, short of hanging, do some spectators want beyond the aforementioned actions.
This "played the game" thing. To what standard does one have to have played to qualify as good enough to referee because you have "played the game"?
I have a mate who is constantly banging on about it, every single time a ref fails to get a decision 100% correct. He played semi-pro back when he was younger, (although to listen to him you would think he played for Barcelona). He thinks that as a result of that he would be a better referee than the top FIFA officals, with their years of experience.
Do those that adhere to this notion think that pros should manage pros, semi pros, semi pros and park footballers, park footballers, or is there a level at which you can officiate in any game as long as you have played to a certain standard?
I recall a number of years back there was a drive to recruit ex players and fast track them, but if memory serves, only one actually made it onto the league list? I think that was before professional refs, I don't see why that cannot be attempted again, players who didn't make vast fortunes playing and cannot find/don't want a coaching or punditry job could do alright out of it for a few years if the attain the standard needed?
I think a standard where you get the niggly little cynical fouls that players do and some refs don't see or give the foul the wrong way round for example. I can think of a number of times at the Valley where I have spotted something and the ref is looking at it, possibly with an even better view but doesn't see it.
I think a standard where you get the niggly little cynical fouls that players do and some refs don't see or give the foul the wrong way round for example. I can think of a number of times at the Valley where I have spotted something and the ref is looking at it, possibly with an even better view but doesn't see it.
Take up refereeing Muttley; it's ever so easy. Your remarks on here suggest you would be a good 'un :-)
I think a standard where you get the niggly little cynical fouls that players do and some refs don't see or give the foul the wrong way round for example. I can think of a number of times at the Valley where I have spotted something and the ref is looking at it, possibly with an even better view but doesn't see it.
That makes sense - but where would you, personally, think that players start to do that, and therefore as a referee would recognise it as such?
My son has taken up refereeing and we have found it to be a bit of a closed shop. Like I said, he has basically been given the choice of being a ref or playing by the league.
In terms of how players start to do it - the first step is to admit that playing helps to become a better ref. So at young ages playing the game is seen as important as reffing games in terms of development.
My son has taken up refereeing and we have found it to be a bit of a closed shop. Like I said, he has basically been given the choice of being a ref or playing by the league.
In terms of how players start to do it - the first step is to admit that playing helps to become a better ref. So at young ages playing the game is seen as important as reffing games in terms of development.
Cant agree that (necessarily) playing helps to become a referee; I did both and I saw them as being separate skills sets. As I have stated before, the biggest attribute of a referee is man management skills and secondly to always retain your composure (when was the last time you saw a British referee gesticulate or to lose his rag).
As was alluded to earlier by a another contributor to this thread, an experiment was undertaken some years back to "fast-track" ex professional players to league match officials and that was not a success. Enjoy your evening.
We will agree to disagree - I don't expect any refs to think that a full perspective is necessary as that is effectively my gripe with them and if they did I wouldn't have one! Not saying the other elements aren't important too - Playing football is clearly not all a ref should do - just it should be part of it. Where possible of course - I appreciate it might not always be so.
it's like learning a language. You can do it by solely studying in this country but you will be better at it if you spend some time abroad.
Comments
Your centre half stays in front of the keeper jumping up and down, you slant it back (cos everybody else has charged out of the area anyway) so you have the ball, and between you (and the goal line) is their keeper and your centre half.
In front of the ball
Seeking to gain and advantage and interfering with play.
In the opponents half
Less than two opponents between him and the goal.
and so on.
It can happen believe me.
Believe me !
Opponents half
In front of the ball
Less than two players
Seeking to gain advantage.
....when the ball is played, even slanted backwards, it doesn't have to wait for a forward to turn and shoot, why should it? Not just blocking the keeper, but seeking to gain from being in that position, maybe blocking the keepers line of vision.
Anyway it would be the refs call, and the law could include the word 'forward' to make the decision easier.
My overall point is that the players usually have not read the laws, yet think they can tell the ref what to do when at least the ref has read the laws, if it isn't about offside it could be about other things that the player decides they know best.
How about this problem.
It is an evening match under lights, and one of the players, say a tricky winger, has electric flashing lights in his boots (similar to the ones little kids have, or used to have), do you allow it?
Do you allow boots painted with luminous paint that reacts to the floodlights?
Referees are judged on a seasons' performance (marked by clubs and assessors) and the worst demoted. Referees are also "disciplined" on a match-by-match decision if a real howler has been committed (relieved of their next scheduled match).
Not sure, short of hanging, do some spectators want beyond the aforementioned actions.
I have a mate who is constantly banging on about it, every single time a ref fails to get a decision 100% correct. He played semi-pro back when he was younger, (although to listen to him you would think he played for Barcelona). He thinks that as a result of that he would be a better referee than the top FIFA officals, with their years of experience.
Do those that adhere to this notion think that pros should manage pros, semi pros, semi pros and park footballers, park footballers, or is there a level at which you can officiate in any game as long as you have played to a certain standard?
I recall a number of years back there was a drive to recruit ex players and fast track them, but if memory serves, only one actually made it onto the league list? I think that was before professional refs, I don't see why that cannot be attempted again, players who didn't make vast fortunes playing and cannot find/don't want a coaching or punditry job could do alright out of it for a few years if the attain the standard needed?
In terms of how players start to do it - the first step is to admit that playing helps to become a better ref. So at young ages playing the game is seen as important as reffing games in terms of development.
As was alluded to earlier by a another contributor to this thread, an experiment was undertaken some years back to "fast-track" ex professional players to league match officials and that was not a success. Enjoy your evening.
it's like learning a language. You can do it by solely studying in this country but you will be better at it if you spend some time abroad.
Enjoy your evening too.