Do you....?

[mikedn]

Fair enough in that context - in my example, most of the players weren't looking at me, they had turned and were walking away. I stood there with my arm pointing for the corner, but without my whistle, only a few people saw me - so the rest of the players noticed when they started to object and it had already become a "contentious decision", rather than because I made a clear decision and used the whistle to reinforce that.

Just goes to show never the same twice

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

When in Rome. Where I started refereeing, it was conventional to do so. Therefore, I did. Where I last refereed it wasn't, so I didn't.
If it's close ball/in out scenario then you have to either way.
Whether you do or don't - it's when there's an attacking foul a moment before that can be difficult. I find a couple of short blasts helps to differentiate from a 'goal' whistle here.

 

[YorkshireReferee]

When in Rome. Where I started refereeing, it was conventional to do so. Therefore, I did. Where I last refereed it wasn't, so I didn't.
If it's close ball/in out scenario then you have to either way.
Whether you do or don't - it's when there's an attacking foul a moment before that can be difficult. I find a couple of short blasts helps to differentiate from a 'goal' whistle here.

Well for me that's a reason not to use the whistle to communicate an obvious goal.

In England players do not expect the whistle for an obvious goal. If you're blowing your whistle for an obvious goal then they're going to be double checking you aren't giving a foul. If I'm disallowing a goal due to a foul I will also point to where I want it taken to help differentiate between the foul and indicating the direction and indicating a goal scored.

But as you say, when in rome. If assessors expect one thing then you're going to do that aren't you. I always find it funny at promotion events when there's big discussions about what to do, where to stand etc. People have such conflicting views and I'll just simply say "An assessor will expect you to '....'". At the end of the day in most matters it doesn't overly matter what you think is right, it's what the assessors, and by extension the FA, expect you to do.

 

[Russell Jones]

At the end of the day in most matters it doesn't overly matter what you think is right, it's what the assessors, and by extension the FA, expect you to do.

You'll go far

 

[HertsFinest]

You'll go far

Indeed. For ones stature to go up, ones tongue must go brown, where the CFA are concerned

Using the whistle for goals is a pet hate of mine. See it in the European leagues and it just looks clumsy.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

When you're used to doing it, not whistling for goals just looks bored and disinterested ;-)

 

[SM]

I think not mate. Giving it a few fist bumps and jumping in the air screaming "get in there you f....ing dancer!" Ensures I am not seen as disinterested, I think you will find!

 

[PinnerPaul]

When you're used to doing it, not whistling for goals just looks bored and disinterested ;-)

I think "disinterested" as in we don't care who wins , can be quite a good look for referees at times!

 

[ref craig]

The only team that should be winning all the time is us

 

[mikedn]

I usually find that if the players hear a whistle when a goal is scored they think there has been a foul/offside and the ref is blowing for it... you(well i do) normally get a few players quickly look at me to see if i am indicating(pointing at the centre spot) for the goal, no player has ever(in 10 years) said to me about blowing the whistle for a goal, not that i ever had or ever will its just not cricket(football)