The Ref Stop

Keeper losing his mind

higdawgy

Member
Yesterday refereed a semi-final game 1st (red) vs 2nd (blue) AA men. (In Australia, the winner goes through to Grand Final, the loser to the Preliminary Final).

80th minute, Red is winning 1 nil.
The blue goalkeeper comes out to the edge of the penalty area to collect the ball, is off balance, takes a step and ends up outside their penalty area before dropping the ball.
Handball offence, no attacking players nearby so it wasn't a DOGSO etc.
Defenders argue a little, nothing bad, I state that "no, I had a good view of it and the ball ended up about a foot outside the line still in his hands".
They are disappointed but start moving back slowly.
The attacker slowly jogs up and collects the ball, places it on the spot and asks if we are good to go, I say yep and he passes it into the open goal as the keeper hadn't bothered getting ready yet.
It's a goal.
I explain to the defenders that they need to get ready and I don't have to stop the game. (I know that there are people who think that you should stop every attacking free-kick and wait for the defence to be ready before you whistle but you are wrong and penalising the attacking team who wants to restart quickly).

The keeper then follows the goalscorer back to halfway, "that's a dog act, that's ****ing bullshit, you're a dog" etc. He has to be restrained by one of his teammates from getting closer to the attacker, I warn him to stop and move away. He doesn't and I show him a yellow card when he stops and heads back to the goal area.

The match kicks off and a couple of minutes later we are back down that end, free-kick to red near the area and someone alerts me that he is going off again, same stuff being said but a bit more aggressive. I show him a second yellow and then a red.
As he departs the field he threatens the red player "wait till I see you after the game".

We are waiting for blue to organise a replacement keeper when someone gets my attention to something behind the benches, the keeper that was sent off is now behind the red bench attempting to fight about ten people. Eventually, the scuffle dies down and he eventually goes back to his area and collects his gear.
I talk with my assistant on that side and he left the field and went to collect his things then decided to walk behind the benches before attempting to headbutt someone from the other club.

While the fight was going on I considered abandoning the match, but the players on the field, including his own team were pissed off at what he had done and some of them were pretty ashamed of it.
After talking to both coaches and captains we restarted the match and ended up with about 9 minutes of injury time.

Considerations for me here are about the quick free kick. But this wasn't a super fast rushed one while players were speaking to me, they just didn't start moving back and the keeper had his back turned. It was very naive play and I don't think calling it back or making the red player wait would have been fair.
I also considered whether I should have sent him off for the first incident as the language used was offensive and insulting, the only reason I didn't was that the red player was saying to me, it's fine I understand why he is upset which made me change my mind.
I don't think that a red for the first incident would have changed anything else that happened.

It was disappointing that it happened as the match had been very good up until that point.
Blue was awarded a penalty that was saved, numerous good saves from both keepers and only 1 goal in the game. It should have ended as a game that both teams could be proud of.

After the match, my assistants and I had multiple people from both sides saying that they thought we had done a great job with the game. We also had supporters from both sides say the same thing on the way back to our cars. Which was quite comforting as you don't normally get that sort of feedback when you have an incident like that.

If anyone remembers, this is also the keeper/coach that confronted me after a match earlier in the year and threatened me on the way back to the carpark after a game.
 
The Ref Stop
It sounds like this guy has a screw loose and is likely to loose it whatever happens.

Personally I would never allow a quick free kick outside the area. I would ask them to wait for my whistle. Regardless of issues of fairness it's just asking for trouble.
 
It sounds like this guy has a screw loose and is likely to loose it whatever happens.

Personally I would never allow a quick free kick outside the area. I would ask them to wait for my whistle. Regardless of issues of fairness it's just asking for trouble.

Match control out the window if you allow the qfk here, honestly, it's not worth the hassle. Even with decent players you can have serious issues.
 
In that position for me to allow a quick free kick, I’d want a fouled player to immediately jump to their feet and play the pass/shot within 2/3 seconds otherwise it isn’t happening

Not an excuse for the keepers reaction however it’s worth noting that this can be avoidable. Nobody would have complained if you didn’t allow the quick free kick
 
Once you got there and began managing it there's no way it can be quick. I feel you've contributed to the afters on this occasion. Quaverref and JamesL have explained it perfectly.
This.

Were you managing the situation already?
You don’t say where you were.
You were talking with players.
Did the quick free kick get taken from the right place?

To allow a quick free kick in an attacking area: you need to be away from the place of infringement (so you are obviously NOT managing) and the kick must be taken from the right place.

(I have messed this up and allowed a quick free kick from the wrong place leading to goal - in a video review - with the national head of referees!)

The “wrong place” is also your get-out-jail-free in these situations to avoid disaster;)

In your case, you have blown for an offence so unusual you had to explain it, you are not wrong in law to allow a quick one, but it is not what football expects. Of course, the defence think it is unfair. Smart refereeing is about avoiding this situation;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kes
It sounds like this guy has a screw loose and is likely to loose it whatever happens.

Personally I would never allow a quick free kick outside the area. I would ask them to wait for my whistle. Regardless of issues of fairness it's just asking for trouble.
I agree on the first, but think the second is completely improper. The team that commits the foul has no rights—except to not have the referee confuse things.

if the offended team is on top of things to take the kick quickly, the R is improperly interjecting himself to force a ceremonial kick unless there is a good reason.

here, IMO, the OP doesn’t give enough info for any of us in the comfort of our chairs to answer whether there was a good reason. “I don’t like quick kicks near the goal“ isn’t a good reason. But confusion and interaction with players may well be. I’d the R does anything that might suggest to the defense that it will be ceremonial, then it needs to be so that the defense isn’t unfairly disadvantaged. But defenders don’t get to just yell at the ref to make it ceremonial--unless they are bad enough to get the R to stop for a caution. (frankly, while I say so with some discomfort, it’s pretty foolish for the defensive team to not interfere with the ability of the opponent to take a quick kick in this scenario, as the caution for DR is pretty well worth it…)

If you have time to ask it's not a quick free kick.
My instruction to players is, if you want it quick just go. If it's not right I will bring it back

i don’t agree with this. I think the term “quick kick,” which is nowhere in the Laws, is a misnomer. An offended team is free to take the kick any time they want unless the R tells them otherwise. Indeed, you let teams take slow “quick kicks“ all the time--pretty much every single OS free kick is a “quick kick” as it isn’t on the whistle. I don’t think a player asking if he can go in any way should make it ceremonial—he’s just checking to make sure he isn’t goi g to get called back (and possibly cautioned) for taking it when he isn’t supposed to.
 
i don’t agree with this. I think the term “quick kick,” which is nowhere in the Laws, is a misnomer. An offended team is free to take the kick any time they want unless the R tells them otherwise. Indeed, you let teams take slow “quick kicks“ all the time--pretty much every single OS free kick is a “quick kick” as it isn’t on the whistle. I don’t think a player asking if he can go in any way should make it ceremonial—he’s just checking to make sure he isn’t goi g to get called back (and possibly cautioned) for taking it when he isn’t supposed to.
We'll have to agree to disagree. Football expects a whistle for ceremonial free kicks around the penalty area. If I am in situ and the team are saying can I take it, the answer is on the whistle now I am here.
By making myself complicit in what happens next puts a target on my back and kiss my match control sweet goodbye, and possibly my status as a level 3 referee if I can't deal with the ensuing 💩storm.
If you want to surprise the opposition with a quick free kick, go right ahead, but don't bring me into it. You just go. You ask me, around the penalty area then you're going to wait for a whistle.
The term "quick free kick" does appear in the laws of the game, more than once, and is even defined in the glossary.

"Quick free kick
A free kick taken (with the referee’s permission) very quickly after play
was stopped" (emphasis my own)

In my opinion (law 5 ;)) if you have time to ask then it isn't taken  very quickly and thus aren't getting my permission. My permission is implied provided you take it very quickly.
 
if the offended team is on top of things to take the kick quickly, the R is improperly interjecting himself to force a ceremonial kick unless there is a good reason.

Here's a good reason:

The DFK on the edge of the PA has been caused by the GK handling outside his box. The GK in question is not yet on his line and has his back to the ball. A goal scored scored from a quick take passed into goal because nobody is expecting it will result in pandemonium.

If you're happy to deal with the fallout that allowing a quick FK in those circumstances then go you. For sure, it's within the laws. You're a braver man than I.
 
We'll have to agree to disagree. Football expects a whistle for ceremonial free kicks around the penalty area. If I am in situ and the team are saying can I take it, the answer is on the whistle now I am here.
By making myself complicit in what happens next puts a target on my back and kiss my match control sweet goodbye, and possibly my status as a level 3 referee if I can't deal with the ensuing 💩storm.
If you want to surprise the opposition with a quick free kick, go right ahead, but don't bring me into it. You just go. You ask me, around the penalty area then you're going to wait for a whistle.
The term "quick free kick" does appear in the laws of the game, more than once, and is even defined in the glossary.

"Quick free kick
A free kick taken (with the referee’s permission) very quickly after play
was stopped" (emphasis my own)

In my opinion (law 5 ;)) if you have time to ask then it isn't taken  very quickly and thus aren't getting my permission. My permission is implied provided you take it very quickly.
Oh my. I forgot they added that definition. But it does nothing to say if it isn’t taken “very quickly” it needs to become ceremonial. But since it says “with the referee’s permission,” I don’t think the powers that be think that asking the ref about that permission takes away the option.

My sense is that culturally the UK is more antagonistic to quick kicks in the attacking third than is the case in the US. And where refs don’t allow them at all, it certainly reinforces the expectation for better or worse. (And that may be compounded by the extent to which you have far more games with only one R and no ARs at levels we wouldn’t.)

I also think you have a good point about where the ref is. If the ref is coming in and giving the impression that he is taking control, you get to what I was saying above about the R not confusing things. I’m not going to the spot of the FK unless I’m going to take charge or am concerned about a hot spot developing. And as soon as I’m taking charge, I’m giving the point-ar-the-whistle signal to make sure it is clear to the attacking team that they are waiting for the whistle.
 
Here's a good reason:

The DFK on the edge of the PA has been caused by the GK handling outside his box. The GK in question is not yet on his line and has his back to the ball. A goal scored scored from a quick take passed into goal because nobody is expecting it will result in pandemonium.

If you're happy to deal with the fallout that allowing a quick FK in those circumstances then go you. For sure, it's within the laws. You're a braver man than I.

Totally disagree that the laws think that is a good reason. Are you going to prevent a TI because the GK was out of the PA to kick the ball out, too? The GK committed an offense. The Laws don’t provide that we wait till he is ready for the team to restart. Referees certainly have the power to prevent a quick free kick, but by doing so, they are denying the offended team do something they have a right to do. (As noted in my other answer, I think there is more cultural resistance to quick FKs in the UK, so I’m going to bow out as this is a mostly UK forum.)

(And as a GK this was never going to happen, as I was never giving that ball back right away, as I knew what could happen.)
 
Oh my. I forgot they added that definition. But it does nothing to say if it isn’t taken “very quickly” it needs to become ceremonial. But since it says “with the referee’s permission,” I don’t think the powers that be think that asking the ref about that permission takes away the option.

My sense is that culturally the UK is more antagonistic to quick kicks in the attacking third than is the case in the US. And where refs don’t allow them at all, it certainly reinforces the expectation for better or worse. (And that may be compounded by the extent to which you have far more games with only one R and no ARs at levels we wouldn’t.)

I also think you have a good point about where the ref is. If the ref is coming in and giving the impression that he is taking control, you get to what I was saying above about the R not confusing things. I’m not going to the spot of the FK unless I’m going to take charge or am concerned about a hot spot developing. And as soon as I’m taking charge, I’m giving the point-ar-the-whistle signal to make sure it is clear to the attacking team that they are waiting for the whistle.
I think we are saying largely similar things. I am by no means a no quick free kick ref. But I perhaps place a lot of emphasis on very quickly and certainly as soon as someone involves me in it I am out.
As I say by all means, get on with the game at your pace, just don't place anything on me as the referee. Just take the damn thing and we can move on.
 
A quick free click is just that, quick, within a couple of seconds. If it is not quick and around a PA, go with ceremonial. The OP was not a QFK, it was a surprise free kick. I have seen it times and again taking the rest if the game down the Darin with it.

Having said that the keeper's behaviour was appealing. I would have prob sent him of on the first incident.
 
Totally disagree that the laws think that is a good reason.

The laws are not the only consideration. You can do all sorts of things within the laws that are not good for your match control.

I would defend any referee who chooses to allow that free kick, and to be clear that decision in no way justifies what happened afterwards, but I would not allow it because it's guaranteed to result in outrage.
 
It's rather like expecting cars to stop at a zebra crossing. As a pedestrian you're certainly within your rights to step out whenever you please and it's not your fault if you get flattened by a bus. However, it's a situation that's perfectly avoidable if you take a slightly more cautious approach.
Fantastic analogy. Really like it Just not sure which side of the argument it's for 😂
 
No way should any kick outside the box be by default 'ceremonial'. Just think about this for a minute. Not only has the attacking side been fouled against and they have lost their advantage now we are letting the GK get in position, set up a wall, get all his defenders back in place (possibly from 50m away) and reorganise his defence.

In what universe is this fair on the attacking side who has been disadvantaged by the foul near the box?

By deeming every foul near the box 'ceremonial' we are disadvantaging the attacking side and advantaging the side that did the wrong thing. In effect rewarding them for their foul.

No way, no how, is this right. I will die on this hill. Am very passionate about this and will argue long and loud with my ref colleagues who automatically default to ceremonial. It is a cop out and, to be frank, a bit gutless. They do it because it's easier to manage and 100% it is easier to manage BUT that doesn't make it right. Be brave enough to make the tough calls even if it causes a sh#tstorm.

The last bloke I saw boot it straight into the goal was only a month or 2 ago. He started walking up to the ball from 2 or 3 metres away (I was right there) and I said to him 'do you want them back 10' and he said 'No' so I took 2 steps to the side.

Boot! Goal! Cue mayhem from all and sundry. Bad luck fellas.



Having said all that, they need to take that kick pretty quickly. (Within a couple of seconds otherwise I say 'it's on the whistle now fellas'.)
 
Last edited:
No way should any kick outside the box be by default 'ceremonial'. Just think about this for a minute. Not only has the attacking side been fouled against now we are letting the GK get in position, set up a wall, get all his defenders back in place (possibly from 50m away) and reorganise his defence.

In what universe is this fair on the attacking side who has been disadvantaged by the foul near the box?

By deeming every foul near the box 'ceremonial' we are disadvantaging the attacking side and advantaging the side that did the wrong thing. In effect rewarding them for their foul.

No way, no how is this right. I will die on this hill. Am very passionate about this and will argue long and loud with my ref colleagues who automatically default to ceremonial. It is a cop out and, to be frank, a bit gutless. They do it because it's easier to manage and 100% it is easier to manage BUT that doesn't make it right. Be brave enough to make the tough calls even if it causes a sh#tstorm.

The last bloke I saw boot it straight into the goal was only a month or 2 ago. He started walking up to the ball from 2 or 3 metres away (I was right there) and I said to him 'do you want them back 10' and he said 'No' so I took 2 steps to the side.

Boot! Goal! Cue mayhem from all and sundry. Bad luck fellas.



Having said all that, they need to take that kick pretty quickly. (Within a couple of seconds otherwise I say 'it's on the whistle now fellas'.)
Philosophically, I completely agree with you that anything a referee does to further disadvantage an attacking team is unhelpful and unwarranted. For that reason, I will generally try and 'hang back' from getting too quickly to the spot of attacking free kicks near the penalty area, precisely in order to keep alive the possibility of the quick free kick. However, like the vast majority of my colleagues, once I'm at the spot of the free kick, I'm then taking charge of the situation and immediately indicating (by voice and action) that the free kick will be on the whistle.
Whilst it's entirely acceptable in law to allow a "quick" free kick despite your presence on the scene, it's also entirely unexpected based on the current norms and therefore will indeed produce the sh#tstorm you describe!

Any one referee swimming against the prevailing tide is likely to have a pretty rough time of it. And this isn't unique to this FK situation. I'm often tempted to call a foul throw when a team knowingly takes a throw in from 30m closer to their own goal .. they are normally doing it precisely to gain an advantage and we knowingly turn a blind eye. Frustrating but c'est la vie. Likewise with GKs and 6 seconds .. often get the urge to simply penalise when they take the p##s but at the end of the day I'm not going to be 'that referee'.

At the end of the day, no one can say a referee is inherently 'wrong' to unexpectedly influence the game by doing thigs that are correct in law. It's simply a question of whether it's recommended practice or not
 
Back
Top