Last edited:
Not a chance I'm letting a quick one be taken there.
13 seconds between the foul and the 'quick' free kick. You want a quick one then it needs to be exactly that, quick.
Once you've gone past the initial 5-6 seconds then it becomes ceremonial in my view.
given the mass of bodies around the ball protesting the position of the FK (I think) there's no way i'd be allowing a quick on in these circumstances however
Given the referees already close proximity this doesn't seem fair as he is already there by this statement that excludes any quick free kick being taken.For match control in my game, I am not even letting it get close. Il be telling them on my whistle as soon as I am there.
Goal should stand, nothing wrong with that but I’m not sure I would have let them take it quickly myself.Depends what has been said, nothing wrong with taking a quick one.
For match control in my game, I am not even letting it get close. Il be telling them on my whistle as soon as I am there.
Agree, I think you need to allow a bit more leeway. For me, if I get to the scene of the crime and one of the first things the attacker says is "Can I go ref?", I'll usually (barring cards, injury etc) say yes and start running.Given the referees already close proximity this doesn't seem fair as he is already there by this statement that excludes any quick free kick being taken.
Need to be aware that if your presence means no quick kick you keep away to stop you inadvertently preventing what is perfectly permissible in law
fair, but if i've got players in my face the chances of a quick fk are very smallI don't really like this because it means if you protest and argue then the free kick can't be taken quickly.
Nothing in the Laws says or suggests that a team should ask or tell the R that they are taking the kick. A free kick is a a free kick the team can take at any time they want unless the R tells them it is on the whistle. We can’t hear what is being said around the R, which could change my mind, but i don’t think the R did anything wrong here—I don’t see him doing anything that suggests he has made it ceremonial. like @JamesL above, I think we have to be careful about letting defensive protests infringe on the rights of the offended team. I read the attacker bit differently than you do—he’s trying to get the ball down and the opponents are in the way.The issue with this one is a) they don't seem to ask/notify the ref as he is reacting to the pass rather than acting before the ball moves and b) attacking team have possession of the ball and are trying to argue the toss about the exact foul position for a few seconds, which isn't in line with a QFK for me. No issue with the fact that R&W team isn't paying attention, but it's just to slow to be a quick FK for me.
"Nothing in the law" determines a huge number of things we do in the name of sensible and preventative refereeing, I'm getting a little frustrated with that being used as an objection on here when it's obviously an unrealistic standard. And the management of FK's in a particular example of this.Nothing in the Laws says or suggests that a team should ask or tell the R that they are taking the kick. A free kick is a a free kick the team can take at any time they want unless the R tells them it is on the whistle. We can’t hear what is being said around the R, which could change my mind, but i don’t think the R did anything wrong here—I don’t see him doing anything that suggests he has made it ceremonial. like @JamesL above, I think we have to be careful about letting defensive protests infringe on the rights of the offended team. I read the attacker bit differently than you do—he’s trying to get the ball down and the opponents are in the way.
I don't get this part. If the R doesn't agree with where the ball is being placed, all he has to do is blow the whistle. And that probably is going to make it ceremonial. And if it is taken before the R can stop them and the R doesn't like where it was taken from, then it wasn't taken and comes back to be taken. As the R didn't stop it or bring it back, that would indicate that the R was satisfied with the spot where it was taken.I don't want to implicitly encourage players to scrum the spot of the foul but also, where it happens organically here, it does effectively prevent that ball being placed. It's a bit of a side note but I also think it's been played from the point where the fouled player landed rather than where he was actually fouled - and the ref has zero chance of effectively managing or judging that, which is a thing in law that causes an issue here.
Offside?
Bad camera angle, but if you freeze frame its unclear whether the defender tying his laces! is playing him onside or not.
Obviously could be another defender out of shot, but not that likely.
Say what now??If they've not asked for a wall, then no whistle is needed.
Ummm nope.it's the attacking teams choice to take the kick quickly, or ask for a ceremonial (wall). They decide to take it quickly - As per the laws:
"when a free kick is taken, an opponent is closer to the ball than the required distance, the kick is retaken unless the advantage can be applied; but if a player takes a free kick quickly and an opponent who is less than 9.15 m (10 yds) from the ball intercepts it, the referee allows play to continue."
Attackers took the chance here; gainted the advantage, and the goal should stand.