A&H

Entering fop without permission and interference.

R

RobOda

RefChat Addict
Level 3 Referee
Got a question regarding the above offence:

http://www.theifab.com/laws/the-players-2018/chapters/player-outside-the-field-of-play-2018

There's the IFAB link.

So, I had an incident this Saturday just gone. Player was injured, sent off the pitch for treatment. He stood where the throw-in was being taken. Team went for a long throw, player asked to come on, I said 'wait', he came on. Now, the throw went up the field, so say he entered in between the drop zone and the thrower.

I stopped play, gave an indirect freekick, cautioned and then sent the player off as it was his second caution. Cue, his entire team trying to gaslight me by saying I gave him permission to come on. :wall:

So two questions here:

1. I'm pretty sure I'm correct on this sanctioning him for entering without permission. Right?

The big question is:

2. Was the re-start correct?

I know it's indirect if no interference and direct if there is interference. So, I'm thinking should I have given that as a direct free-kick, because whilst technically he's not interfering with the play, he has, by coming on and distracting me, interfered with me and he has gained a potential advantageous situation if the ball goes back towards him.

So, would someone distracting you by entering/leaving be justification enough for 'interference' with the match official, or does it need to be a stronger incident than that?

It's a rare offence for me to see, but I'm interested in your thoughts on this. :)
 
The Referee Store
Because you were going to issue a red card you were right to stop play. We need to bring in the advantage law which says that you should not play advantage for SFP, VC or SBO.
I would say he has not interfered with play, and I dont think you having to deal with him counts as interfering with match official so idfk restart correct imo.
 
If i can be honest here, reading the op, i do not think I would have done as you did, unless he was involved in play.
Not doubting technically it sounds like you did the right thing but unless I was itching to put him off for some other reason, or if the first card was amber, then I think I would have let it pass

Am very willing to accept that sounds like am picking and choosing which laws to apply but thats my take on it.
 
Big Cat said:
I may have looked to excuse the player (I hope) if it was an honest mistake,
Click to expand...

Ciley Myrus said:
Not doubting technically it sounds like you did the right thing but unless I was itching to put him off for some other reason, or if the first card was amber, then I think I would have let it pass
Click to expand...

His first caution was for dissent earlier on. To me, I was very clear to him to wait, I shouted that verbally and held out my hand to say 'stop', but I felt he intentionally ignored me and came on anyway. No chance of mishearing either, I wasn't that far away seeing as it was a throw-in.

JamesL said:
I would say he has not interfered with play, and I dont think you having to deal with him counts as interfering with match official so idfk restart correct imo.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. What about the distraction issue caused from diverting attention away from play? I'm just trying to get a frame of reference for what constitutes an interference with a match official that isn't a physical one via getting in the way or blocking as those are the only two things that immediately comes to mind.

AlexF said:
Note: IFK from position of the ball if there's no interference...
Click to expand...

One for me to remember if it happens again!
 
RobOda said:
His first caution was for dissent earlier on. To me, I was very clear to him to wait, I shouted that verbally and held out my hand to say 'stop', but I felt he intentionally ignored me and came on anyway. No chance of mishearing either, I wasn't that far away seeing as it was a throw-in.



Fair enough. What about the distraction issue caused from diverting attention away from play? I'm just trying to get a frame of reference for what constitutes an interference with a match official that isn't a physical one via getting in the way or blocking as those are the only two things that immediately comes to mind.



One for me to remember if it happens again!
Click to expand...
if being distracted because they came on is interference I fail to see the point in the rest of the law. Id imagine you just note he has come on and carry on. Caution at next stoppage.
Interference with match official could be physical, could be verbal, so dissent e.g.
 
one said:
You are picking and choosing which laws to apply. Don't be LWR. :)
Click to expand...

I will wait till it happens then decide !! am not saying I would 100% be cautioning (esp 2nd yellow) but, I might!!

I hope like Big Cat, I would at least try to work out quickly if I had caused the confusion. if he is told to stay off though then runs on anyways and gets involved with play, no brainer..
 
WilliamD said:
what was the logic in not letting him on when he asked?
Click to expand...
Law 5
...stops play if a player is seriously injured and ensures that the player is removed from the field of play. An injured player may not be treated on the field of play and may only re-enter after play has restarted; if the ball is in play, re-entry must be from the touchline but if the ball is out of play, it may be from any boundary line.
 
Hoosier Ref said:
Law 5
...stops play if a player is seriously injured and ensures that the player is removed from the field of play. An injured player may not be treated on the field of play and may only re-enter after play has restarted; if the ball is in play, re-entry must be from the touchline but if the ball is out of play, it may be from any boundary line.
Click to expand...

Yes I know that. Sorry - for me the OP isn’t 100% clear if the player came on before or after the throw. If it’s before the throw ok fine defo caution especially after saying wait. But if it’s after the throw I hope we aren’t saying no to a player asking to come on only because they are close ish to the drop zone.
 
JamesL said:
if being distracted because they came on is interference I fail to see the point in the rest of the law. Id imagine you just note he has come on and carry on. Caution at next stoppage.
Interference with match official could be physical, could be verbal, so dissent e.g.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

I fail to see the significance of "interference" in this case. We're not talking about offside.

For me, unless I'm much mistaken, the issue of the restart (ie DFK or IDFK) is whether or not there is physical contact isn't it?

Any offence involving physical contact (which includes spitting) attracts a DFK.

Anything outside that (including the ref stopping play to issue a caution for e.g USB etc) is an IDFK.

Innit? :confused:
 
one said:
You are picking and choosing which laws to apply. Don't be LWR. :)
Click to expand...

I don't think that's right or fair. We are told to punish the physical and manage the technical, this is a classic example where it can and usually should be 'managed'. Clearly we are lacking the context, but this caution on face value seems unnecessary unless the player was an utter dick who had gone past his last chance or the match temperature warranted a caution.

I know it's correct in Law, but at my level at least i'd be expected to manage that. The OP hasn't really explained why the player wasn't allowed on as soon as the throw-in was taken, and it could be that the referee has been seen to cause the offence, so to speak.
 
WilliamD said:
Yes I know that. Sorry - for me the OP isn’t 100% clear if the player came on before or after the throw. If it’s before the throw ok fine defo caution especially after saying wait. But if it’s after the throw I hope we aren’t saying no to a player asking to come on only because they are close ish to the drop zone.
Click to expand...
Really? I'm more than happy to delay a player re-entering if I think there's a danger of him gaining an advantage by coming from an opponent's blindside. I thought that was fairly standard practice and I've never had much objection to doing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top