That's a cop out when you're talking about a match changing decision when your approach has no basis in law and is against the intent of the law. There are lots of aspects of the job where I don't like I have to do it a certain way but I still have to because that's the job.Some referees like there way of doing things and this is one of them
But then you are effectively rewarding the defender for standing over the ball - something that he is specifically not allowed to do and can be immediately cautioned for. The defender wants to delay the re-start and you have let him do exactly that.I'd extend his definition of when the referee has to interfere to include any instructions to the wall. If a defender is standing over the ball specifically to stop a QFK, it seems harsh to instruct him to move away and then let the free kick be taken as soon as they start stepping back!
i think this may have been covered before somewhere, but it all depends on whether the defender makes a motion to block the kick or if its kicked at him, inadvertently or otherwiseAlways an interesting topic. On the Arsenal vs. Porto incident, I am of the opinion that the referee has intervened according to Capn's criteria by asking for the ball; from that point it must be ceremonial. If the Porto players had been able to collect the ball themselves and execute this move, then fine. The referee could even have booked Fabianski for delaying the restart of play if it came to it, but again a ceremonial kick is required by nature. In fact, I cannot think of a back pass offence which wouldn't be managed in such a manner. And I recall Wenger's complaints about the decision were based on this reading of the game.
Secondly, as to my own matches, I would say 80% of quick free kicks around the box are taken about 5 yards away from the original offence, which is reason for me to ask for a retake. It allows me to have it both ways really, because I often tell the players I am happy for them to take it quickly, but it is their responsibility to do so from the right place. I also think you would be hard pushed to caution for failing to respect required distance on very quick free kicks; so you can make a rod for your back if you allow a quick one, the defending team inadvertently intercepts, and then breaks away. I know they have a duty to retreat ten yards, but sometimes that is physically impossible in the time an attacker tries to release the ball. Would others pull back in this situation or play on much like a botched advantage?
Whoah Nelly, let's hold our horses just a minute. Allowing the attacking team to take a quick free kick is one thing (and which I am all in favour of) but once the referee has taken complete control of the situation as he has done here, to the extent of actually taking the ball away from a player and holding it in his hands, you have completely different situation. At this point I think the referee has to go with a ceremonial free kick. To use Capn Bloodbeard's phrase, the referee has most definitely "inserted himself into the situation" here - and in a major, major way. If the ball had just been loose on the ground and the forward had run up and taken the ifk quickly with the referee a mere observer, that would be perfectly fine. But in this case, the referee has clearly taken charge of the situation and as far as I'm concerned once he's become involved in this way, the kick should become ceremonial.This famous incident happened in a CL game between Arsenal and Porto.
I'll allow a quick free kick if they take it quick. What I won't allow is a player putting the ball in place, taking his time, players are starting to organise the wall, the goalkeeper is at his post organising the wall and then he says "Can I have it quick?" No, it's ceremonial at that point.
I don't agree with this.I agree with this example. It's pretty much how I go about it.
I don't agree with this.
If you haven't already signalled that it's ceremonial you are clearly giving advantage to the defending team if you stop the attacker from playing just because the defence is setting up a wall and the goalkeeper is out of position.
Players should be expecting to play, be able to play, unless you tell them otherwise.
Why haven't you already asked the attacker if they want ceremonial?
As I have already indicated a couple of times in this thread, I am strongly in favour of quick free kicks being allowed - and that is pretty much regardless of the offence. But there are situations where it is not recommended such as when a disciplinary sanction is required or an injured player needs attention or when the referee has already intervened and is controlling the situation.[...]would I be guessing, @Peter Grove, that you would be ok with a QFK in those scenarios? and that your argument against a QFK is pretty much limited to these technical sorts of infringements with no opposing possession?
What about DHB by a defender with no attacker near?
The team that committed the offense has the following rights: NONE, ZILCH,NADA!! (except not to be confused by the referee).
The defense has no rights on a free kick, except the right not to be misled by something the referee says or does.
Once [the referee] chose to intervene by actually grabbing the ball and placing it, [...] the kick should now be headed down the ceremonial path.
Additionally, if [the referee has] already intervened, then [he] needs to make it ceremonial. In this instance, [he] placed the ball. By doing that, [he's] already controlling the kick, so make it ceremonial.
I do (did). If it's in their own half, they can play it as quick or slow as they wish and I won't be there to oversee. Once I'm in my dropping zone position, I blow the whistle to get them to take it (naturally hurries them up). If it's anything. Resembling an attacking position for a FK, and they haven't taken it yet by the time I get there, I ask the guy standing over the ball "quick or whistle?". He says "quick", I take 2 steps backwards and tell him to "play". He says "whistle", I tell him to wait for my whistle and then inform the entire world that this free kick is on the whistle and then do the rest accordingly (wall, my position etc)I agree with you on the 5-10 seconds. I think it is best if you know within a couple of seconds.
Who here asks the attacker then?
I don't agree with this.
If you haven't already signalled that it's ceremonial you are clearly giving advantage to the defending team if you stop the attacker from playing just because the defence is setting up a wall and the goalkeeper is out of position.
Players should be expecting to play, be able to play, unless you tell them otherwise.
Why haven't you already asked the attacker if they want ceremonial?