A&H

Playing Advantage in EPL

one

one

RefChat Addict
I have been watching a few live EPL games recently and TBH I find four out five advantages played are a misapplication of the law. It seems that retaining possession and sometimes position is the only criteria considered (disregarding opportunity). I would be less critical if they just allowed play to flow without signalling advantage but signalling it is just a misapplication of the law. In some cases playing advantage actually benefits the opponents (a free kick clearly being a better option for the attackers). Its the sort of misapplication you would expect to see at grassroots.

Of course sometimes you could get lucky and something may come off it but that's just down to luck.

Here are a couple of examples I picked up from Liverpool Vs Stokes. The links should take you to the exact time but they are on 5:00 and 21:20 on the clips.

https://ok.ru/video/697037425154?fromTime=300

https://ok.ru/video/697037425154?fromTime=1280
 
The Referee Store
I agree on your two examples that these two do not seem to be "advantage" situations.

However, you have to trust the referee. He is right there and can see, hear and feel the reaction of the players. If he has Henderson screaming that they want to keep playing, and Salah/Mane/whoever want to keep passing the ball... then it's "great" refereeing. In this game, Liverpool perhaps don't want to pump high balls or free kicks into the box from 30 yards as that is the (only) Stoke strength in defence.

But I do agree. Both are risky advantages. The second does pay off and ends up with Liverpool in possession in the box. But neither are "advantage" situations in law as you say. Good spot.
 
There's also the fine line between tiny fouls where everyone just wants to continue ("carry on") and fouls that are still little but stronger where advantage seems like overkill but you want to state something - perhaps that is the case here?
 
Have been thinking this for a while. There are only a couple of teams in the league (City, maybe Liverpool) where possession anywhere on the pitch is more beneficial to them than a free kick.
 
At that level the players want to play on, so leave them to it. Also the referees play to the cameras / observers, as they signal advantage long after it has accrued and weren't really playing advantage in the true sense. Marriner did a classic example of this yesterday where a Liverpool player was slightly pulled in the penalty area. He was moving away from goal and out of the area but kept the ball, and once the attack continued advantage was signalled. Clearly there was no advantage as had he given the foul it would have been a penalty, the offence was so minor that few referees would ever give a penalty for it, so signalling advantage afterwards was very ill advised.
 
santa sangria said:
I agree on your two examples that these two do not seem to be "advantage" situations.

However, you have to trust the referee. He is right there and can see, hear and feel the reaction of the players. If he has Henderson screaming that they want to keep playing, and Salah/Mane/whoever want to keep passing the ball... then it's "great" refereeing. In this game, Liverpool perhaps don't want to pump high balls or free kicks into the box from 30 yards as that is the (only) Stoke strength in defence.

But I do agree. Both are risky advantages. The second does pay off and ends up with Liverpool in possession in the box. But neither are "advantage" situations in law as you say. Good spot.
Click to expand...
Ok, first example, he ends up explaining to the fouled player why he didn't give a free kick (keep watching another 10 seconds or so). So at least one player who wanted a free kick.

I wouldn't call the second advantage paying off, but 'nearly' paying off. The only advantage that pays off (without a doubt) is one that leads to a goal. A free kick from the of the PA had a much better chance off paying off, especially at this level where set piece specialists from that range are in abundance.

As i said these two are just examples. I find that the majority of advantages in EPL are not 'true' advantages.
 
I think both examples are absolutely fine (especially in England).

I'd certainly be a bit frustrated to get a free-kick for the first clip if I was playing. They retain possession of the ball and keep it moving. In those circumstances, the attacking team are generally happy to keep the ball flowing, and giving a freekick, making the wall move back etc etc just gives the defending team an opportunity to break up play and organise themselves. The second one is similar but slightly different.

When the referee signals advantage in these instances, what he's saying is "I could give a free-kick but you can play on and keep it flowing". There's not an advantage in terms of a chance created but by your example if you were to blow up in those instances especially the first one there'd be many occasions at that standard of play where the team with possession want to be able to continue playing and would be frustrated about having to stop and try and take a short free-kick which many do. If you blow up on the first example, Liverpool would either want to take a short free-kick quickly and resume their possession so the free-kick would be pointless or they'll have to lump the ball into the box which they may not want to do and would prefer the play to continue.

I don't think it's necessarily about getting lucky and hoping something comes off, it's more about letting the game flow and using your experience and knowledge to make that call without constantly blowing up.
 
Last edited:
I'm confused... An advantage doesn't have to be or result in a promising attack or goal scoring opportunity. Sometimes retaining possession is advantage in and of itself, particularly if it lets the game flow and the team in possession continue to craft out an attack.

I do similar to the EPL referees in signalling the advantage a bit later than usual, and using it even where the offence in question in minor - as a communication thing, I prefer this to be known rather than calling out 'seen it, play on' or whatever, this signal allows me to communicate to both teams and everyone else, that, yes, there is a foul, but the attack is still progressing.

In this instance I'm in complete agreement with @NorthLondonRef , though I'll agree it is a tool that needs to be used with some caution and experience at grassroots level.
 
Advantage is an artform and as RustyRef has said, possession _can_ be an Advantage depending on how the team likes to play. It also relates to the state of a game. For example: A team might be guarding a 2-1 lead with a minute to go. There is a minor foul on the half way line, you play advantage, and they end up playing backwards all the way back to their keeper or right back. Bring it back? Nope, they may well be quite happy with the situation as they might be comfortable in possession and running down the clock.
 
alexgr said:
Have been thinking this for a while. There are only a couple of teams in the league (City, maybe Liverpool) where possession anywhere on the pitch is more beneficial to them than a free kick.
Click to expand...

Have to disagree - all teams in top 2 levels tend to want to keep possession rather than have a free kick I believe.
 
PinnerPaul said:
Have to disagree - all teams in top 2 levels tend to want to keep possession rather than have a free kick I believe.
Click to expand...

Oh certainly an argument to be made for that, I'll concede that, more so compared to grassroots. Just want to stress it isn't a panacea though, and even at the top level some sort of consideration should be made as to whether advantage or a free kick benefits a team's style of play more, taking into account all match conditions.
 
PinnerPaul said:
Have to disagree - all teams in top 2 levels tend to want to keep possession rather than have a free kick I believe.
Click to expand...

Just as important, when you referee in the Premier League, helping to produce an entertaining match for fans and television is part of the referees job. Blowing for simple fouls when the players just want to keep playing is bad for both match control with the players AND match entertainment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top