RefSix

Red or Advantage?

RobOda

RefChat Addict
#2
Huh, so yeah; Advantage and caution is the ideal decision here isn't it?

I think I would have gone with the advantage, but as late as I could. I would say probably the ultra-safe decision is to give the penalty and in this case unfortunately for the referee the goal was still on. Wouldn't like to be in his position if the penalty was missed!
 

OIREF!

RefChat Addict
#3
This is usually a no win situation for a referee - damned if you do and damned if you don't. It's also difficult with such a blatant foul as your natural instinct is to blow for it right away. However, in this case it looks clear that the ball is going into the goal and I would have expected the referee to have waited a second before blowing up.
 

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
#4
The correct answer depends on how long is left in the game
Typically, a red card equates to one and half goals over 90 minutes or two thirds of a goal if there's half an hour left. This varies according to ability level. That's quite a lot to consider in a short space of time and complicated to explain to dimwit players!
 

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
#5
The correct answer depends on how long is left in the game
Typically, a red card equates to one and half goals over 90 minutes or two thirds of a goal if there's half an hour left. This varies according to ability level. That's quite a lot to consider in a short space of time and complicated to explain to dimwit players!
No, sorry. I agree that there are a lot of factors to consider, but I don't think knowing the number of goals per minute that an extra player represents is part of that equation. Should the referee consider if that number is correct for the league he's in, or how far he should adjust it by based on each team's relative position in the league? You then have to cross-reference this with the number of minutes left in the game and almost instantly divide by a non-round number. Not having that I'm afraid, the referee shouldn't be expected to base his decision on that.

The laws and precedent are pretty clear - the agreed on "best" thing to happen for the attacking team here is a goal, with the penalty/red card being considered less good. By blowing too quickly, the referee can be expected to be slightly marked down regardless of the time left in the match.
 

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
#6
Pk and red for me,
Yip, it seemingly would have ended well but, at the point of the foul, its not clear advantage enough for me to risk it, and thats what it would have been, a risk

To play advantage instead of a red and pk am looking for a clearer situation than that.


And it must be a day of Brigadoon appearing as I totally agree with the above poster, the time has no bearing on deciding to play on or reduce to 10
However as I dont feel there is a definate right or wrong here, I would be able to support either action, and no marking down.
 
Last edited:

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
#7
Damned if you do damned if you don't. If you give the goal and the keeper then has a worldy and keeps everything out they'll say you should have given the penalty and sent him off, if you gave the penalty and they missed it they'll say you should have given the goal.

Personally speaking I think I would play advantage there as only one of two things was happening, it was going in or it wasn't. If it didn't quite make it you could easily sell pulling it back for the penalty and red card. You could even shout out "if it doesn't cross the line we are coming back for the penalty".

Personally I agree with Big Cat and think the time in the game perhaps should play a factor. If that is in the first minute and you don't send off you are potentially giving the offending team a huge advantage, even more so if they don't have a sub keeper, or as in this case the sub keeper had never played a first team game before. Obviously you wouldn't know those things at the time, but the opposing team would sure as hell tell you after ..!
 
Likes: JH

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
#8
No, sorry. I agree that there are a lot of factors to consider, but I don't think knowing the number of goals per minute that an extra player represents is part of that equation. Should the referee consider if that number is correct for the league he's in, or how far he should adjust it by based on each team's relative position in the league? You then have to cross-reference this with the number of minutes left in the game and almost instantly divide by a non-round number. Not having that I'm afraid, the referee shouldn't be expected to base his decision on that.

The laws and precedent are pretty clear - the agreed on "best" thing to happen for the attacking team here is a goal, with the penalty/red card being considered less good. By blowing too quickly, the referee can be expected to be slightly marked down regardless of the time left in the match.
I didn't consider that anyone would take my answer literally :egg:
I donned my gambling cap with the reply
Like Rusty said, one might consider how long is left in the game, but we would be ruling with our instant reaction and taking such things into consideration is not realistic. Some would argue that a goal is always better than a statistical goal and a half, so the best thing to do is play the advantage and show the yellow
Goal + YC = No Grief
Pen Scored + RC = No Grief ( + Grief before Pen is taken )
Pen Missed + YC = Grief
So why risk the grief?
 
Last edited:

AlexF

RefChat Addict
#9
Personally speaking I think I would play advantage there as only one of two things was happening, it was going in or it wasn't. If it didn't quite make it you could easily sell pulling it back for the penalty and red card. You could even shout out "if it doesn't cross the line we are coming back for the penalty".
Our association recently took a stand on this and stated that the delayed whistle (silent advantage) is appropriate if there's an obvious goal scoring opportunity (ie, empty net, etc). If the player can't score on that, caution to the offender and go from there.

Now, an obvious goal scoring opportunity requires that the player have their balance and that it's obvious to everyone that a goal should be scored here.

If it isn't obvious, blow and deal with the situation as is.
 

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
#10
Is there a risk or doubt about red card and pen? No
is there (an element) of risk and doubt about the ball going over the line? YES! even the defender rushing back is nearly there

I would like to think top level refs would do the safe thing here.
 

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
#11
Is there a risk or doubt about red card and pen? No
is there (an element) of risk and doubt about the ball going over the line? YES! even the defender rushing back is nearly there

I would like to think top level refs would do the safe thing here.
I was working on the basis that the ball was defo going in the goal in the OP
 

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
#12
You also run the huge risk of, giving them the two proverbial bites of the cherry if that ball does not go in
more so, ball does not go in....can you really sell DOGSO, as, clearly, no obvious goal scoring opportunity was denied.....
 

QuaverRef

I used to be indecisive but now i'm not so sure
#13
You also run the huge risk of, giving them the two proverbial bites of the cherry if that ball does not go in
more so, ball does not go in....can you really sell DOGSO, as, clearly, no obvious goal scoring opportunity was denied.....
Is playing advantage for a ball rolling towards a goal really two bites of the cherry?

And if you can’t sell that as DOGSO when giving the pen, then I’m not sure I understand DOGSO
 

one

RefChat Addict
#14
I don't think in this case the ref thought about which is better, advantage or pen+send off. He just acted with instinct.

I also agree with @Big Cat (although not sure about his wet finger in the air estimation of how many goals a player is worth :) ). Other factors have an impact, time left, score at the time, skill level... Let's say its a cup game and it was the last few seconds in the game with score at 0-0. Would anyone think a pen and send off is better than a goal?

As a general rule 'a Bird in the Hand is Worth Two in the Bush'. Delay the whistle a little and Bob's your uncle.
ball does not go in....can you really sell DOGSO, as, clearly, no obvious goal scoring opportunity was denied.....
Yes i can sell it and yes it was denied. The reason a goal was not scored is because the attacker was illegally prevented to follow through and tap the ball in.
 
#16
I wonder what the goalkeeper and defending side would have actually wanted here ?

Would he have wanted yellow and a goal or red and a penalty, i suppose a lot depends on the score at the time and the time of the incident.

EDIT
Just checked and the incident happened after 3 minutes with the game at 0-0
 

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
#18
I don't think I got my point across. I don't know how to without, painting another scenario along the same lines...
Is playing advantage for a ball rolling towards a goal really two bites of the cherry?

And if you can’t sell that as DOGSO when giving the pen, then I’m not sure I understand DOGSO


Crossed wires here I think..
if giving the pk there and then, then,dogso. Bye bye gk
If delaying whistle to watch ball roll into net and it does not, then, you can bring it back for a pk but, (and here is the difficult part), you cannot dismiss for dogso.
The clear and obvious gs opportunity has not been denied, granted the ball did not roll over the line, but, that clear and obv opportunity still existed. As we know, its a clear opportunity to score a goal, not the actual scoring of the goal itself we are to judge.
I probably have not worded that properly, but to go back, award pk, and send off gk (if the ball does not roll in), is two goes at it. And ideally, it should be either or.
Which is why am sure this ref did the safe thing.
Nobody can argue its, not a foul, not a pk, and not a red card
At the exact time of contact, I dont see 100% the ball will go in.
Looking at it as we do on the clip, we are not in the refs shoes, we have no pressure, no game plan, no knowledge of the teams, no crowd noise, no AR shouting 'penalty" on the comms, so of course our thinking will be different
If we are to consider the time as a factor, how many of us, esp I find on the line, want to get a big first offside right, to set us up for the rest of the game?
How keen are we as referee not to mess up our first big call?
Very, its a long long way back if we get the first one wrong,or, it does not work out the way we hoped it would
Three mins in, this could be his first big call. No chances, safe refereeing, the referee badge allows you to referee games, not be a superhero, pk, red card,

I might be inclined to consider time as a factor (and score) if team are 5-0 up with five to go and this is the winning team going forward.

I still remember and I stand by a training class years ago, where the instruction was, unless the attacker only has to fall over the ball to score, give the pk.

As ever, you might have been taught otherwise, and thats fine too.
 

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
#19
I don't think I got my point across. I don't know how to without, painting another scenario along the same lines...




Crossed wires here I think..
if giving the pk there and then, then,dogso. Bye bye gk
If delaying whistle to watch ball roll into net and it does not, then, you can bring it back for a pk but, (and here is the difficult part), you cannot dismiss for dogso.
The clear and obvious gs opportunity has not been denied, granted the ball did not roll over the line, but, that clear and obv opportunity still existed. As we know, its a clear opportunity to score a goal, not the actual scoring of the goal itself we are to judge.
I probably have not worded that properly, but to go back, award pk, and send off gk (if the ball does not roll in), is two goes at it. And ideally, it should be either or.
Which is why am sure this ref did the safe thing.
Nobody can argue its, not a foul, not a pk, and not a red card
At the exact time of contact, I dont see 100% the ball will go in.
Looking at it as we do on the clip, we are not in the refs shoes, we have no pressure, no game plan, no knowledge of the teams, no crowd noise, no AR shouting 'penalty" on the comms, so of course our thinking will be different
If we are to consider the time as a factor, how many of us, esp I find on the line, want to get a big first offside right, to set us up for the rest of the game?
How keen are we as referee not to mess up our first big call?
Very, its a long long way back if we get the first one wrong,or, it does not work out the way we hoped it would
Three mins in, this could be his first big call. No chances, safe refereeing, the referee badge allows you to referee games, not be a superhero, pk, red card,

I might be inclined to consider time as a factor (and score) if team are 5-0 up with five to go and this is the winning team going forward.

I still remember and I stand by a training class years ago, where the instruction was, unless the attacker only has to fall over the ball to score, give the pk.

As ever, you might have been taught otherwise, and thats fine too.
Disagree completely, but only because I think you've misinterpreted the scenario in the original video. If no foul occurs, that ball is going over the line one way or the other - either using it's own momentum, or it's being tapped in by the striker. The "denial" occurs when the striker is pulled down, but the "obvious goalscoring opportunity" exists as soon as the striker gets in front of the GK - because he's going to be the first to get to the ball. For me, this is the textbook example of
unless the attacker only has to fall over the ball to score
and as such, is one of the rare situations when a penalty area advantage is actually appropriate.
 

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
#20
So unlike you to dismiss my rationale out of hand. A first for everything !!

Given the striker is, 16 yards from goal, at an angle, I very much doubt he is in position to fall over the ball to score

I will stick to the teaching and guidance that I received, whilst of course being open to alternative suggestions. The advice I got from the powers that be, was to give the pk unless the striker can only fall over the ball and cant fail to score

Each to own view, but at point of contact, am not 100% (90 maybe but not 100) that this will go in so, call me, dull, boring and SAFE, but, am giving the pk and sending off the gk.

the absolute bottom line here is there is factually no right or wrong. (as much as some folk find it amusing to think otherwise).

[Edited out unnecessary comment]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top