Spoke too soon

[micky2001]

was at a match tonight with a single referee, no NARs or CARs as they aren't required in many league matches here.

Anyway, player running down line and takes ball out of play and referee shouts "not whole ball, play on" even though the player stops, expecting a throw in. Spoke to referee after match and he said if he hadn't already shouted play on then he would have given it as a throw.

What would you have did having already shouted?

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

Deleted my previous answer: wrote it thinking OP was AR

So ref says 'ball still in' and the defender stops? That's his tough luck!
We all know players are going to call for it to be out the moment it goes anywhere near the line. Just because the defender stops doesn't make it out. Referee has his own opinion, he shouted it - assuming the shout was in response to the defender stopping then IMO it's good refereeing. No real question about his actions here.

I can understand the point that if he hadn't shouted he would have given it - it's impossible to be 100% accurate on these without AR's, so the dirty little secret is that we will use player's reactions a little (same as how we sometimes do in deciding who's throw it is). But here he had clearly made his decision, so no choice.

 

[HoofItYouDonkey]

If the ball is OOP then you have to stop play and restart with a throw

 

[Beezer]

Don't get this ? If the ref shouts "play on not whole ball " he thinks its still in !

Defenders fault for not playing to the whistle .

and if he said after he would have given the throw if he hadn't shouted .......he is making decisions on players reactions !

all he had to say was " IMO it was still in play " argument over

 

[micky2001]

@Beezer it was the attacker that stopped which gave it away that he knew it was out.

He played on but struggled to sell it because the attacked stopped.