A&H

WHM v LIV

I think that's arguably defensible and does open up an interesting discussion around if a player not realising they have an advantage neutralises that advantage and/or if we can penalise for trifling fouls if the outcome a few second later means they're later seen to be less trifling than initially thought. We have to accept AT has seen a foul where there isn't one, but that's just a standard error in judgement and it then opens up that other question.

But 1) he's then got the restart wrong and 2) why does he feel the need to tell the keeper to act injured? Even taking that charitable read, we're back to the subterfuge, and the fact that he's killed some clock in attempting to hide/cover for the mistake(s). If he's "cancelling an advantage" then just do that and get on with the free kick, don't tell the keeper to go down and waste some time and then restart pretending like it was a genuine injury!
 
The Referee Store
For me this is akin to all defenders stopping due to an AR raising the flag for an attacker who has not committed an offside offence. If a goal is scored, it really is ultimately the defenders fault. The referee has a bad option or a worse option. In AT's case, for me, he chose the worse option.

He did everything right up till the moment he decided to stop the game. He rightfully played advantage and didn't do anything to give Areola or anyone else that he'd given a FK. From that moment, he turned a bad situation for himself and the keeper, crated by a Kepler's lack awareness, to a worse situation where he had to make stuff up to avoid a game being replayed.
 
As an ex-grass roots GK, I was intrigued by Demot Gallagher's opinion, kept repeating AT's mistake/mess but my view is the GK has made the bigger mistake. Assumed he has been given a freekick, hasn't heard a whistle to stop the game, has thrown the ball towards a Liverpool attacker, if you expect a free kick then place the ball in the six yard box as you were fouled by your post.

Without the GK's stupidity, no-one would be calling out an AT mistake.
 
DJIC said:
As an ex-grass roots GK, I was intrigued by Demot Gallagher's opinion, kept repeating AT's mistake/mess but my view is the GK has made the bigger mistake. Assumed he has been given a freekick, hasn't heard a whistle to stop the game, has thrown the ball towards a Liverpool attacker, if you expect a free kick then place the ball in the six yard box as you were fouled by your post.

Without the GK's stupidity, no-one would be calling out an AT mistake.
Click to expand...
Pretty much agree with this. The problem is, if AT had played some form of advantage, he hasn't signalled it. At least from the footage I saw (been moving house this weekend, so saw sod all football!)

I know he sort of waves his arm a bit, but that doesn't really mean anything in the context.
 
Runner Ref said:
Pretty much agree with this. The problem is, if AT had played some form of advantage, he hasn't signalled it. At least from the footage I saw (been moving house this weekend, so saw sod all football!)

I know he sort of waves his arm a bit, but that doesn't really mean anything in the context.
Click to expand...
That’s interesting - so then, it means AT’s signal was not clear. It was a kinda carry on hurry up half advantage. It was not clear on TV if it was a foul or not, and we can guess it was not clear to Areola.

And maybe that’s the learning for us mere mortal refs. Advantage is advantage - proper signal and shout - everyone in the ground knows.

And with GKs it is normally smart refereeing to whistle the foul, especially for late hits when there are players around and the ball is in play.
 
santa sangria said:
That’s interesting - so then, it means AT’s signal was not clear. It was a kinda carry on hurry up half advantage. It was not clear on TV if it was a foul or not, and we can guess it was not clear to Areola.

And maybe that’s the learning for us mere mortal refs. Advantage is advantage - proper signal and shout - everyone in the ground knows.

And with GKs it is normally smart refereeing to whistle the foul, especially for late hits when there are players around and the ball is in play.
Click to expand...

There definitely wasn't a foul. Even by 'safe refereeing' or 'protect the GK' standard there wasn't a foul, so I feel AT's signal was definitely a 'get on with it' signal.
Had he thought there was enough for a foul / playing advantage I feel like he probably would have restarted with a DFK.
 
santa sangria said:
That’s interesting - so then, it means AT’s signal was not clear. It was a kinda carry on hurry up half advantage. It was not clear on TV if it was a foul or not, and we can guess it was not clear to Areola.

And maybe that’s the learning for us mere mortal refs. Advantage is advantage - proper signal and shout - everyone in the ground knows.

And with GKs it is normally smart refereeing to whistle the foul, especially for late hits when there are players around and the ball is in play.
Click to expand...
There are three separate gestures
- a one-armed Advantage signal - that arguably could be pointing for a foul if you imagine a whistle as well (which is exactly why I was wary of the one-armed advantage being introduced)
- but this is followed immediately by a "get up" gesture that is repeated multiple times - that makes no sense to me if it's following a foul signal, so confirms for me that the one-armed point was intended to signal advantage and also explains why he feels he can't restart with a FK after the incident
- and a separate "hurry up" wave of the arm over the head after he's confirmed the keeper is fine, has jogged backwards a few steps and just before he turns to run forwards towards the half way line.

They're a little clearer in this TNT twitter video than they are in the stop-start youtube clip posted earlier:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1784256946012364826
 
GraemeS said:
There are three separate gestures
- a one-armed Advantage signal - that arguably could be pointing for a foul if you imagine a whistle as well (which is exactly why I was wary of the one-armed advantage being introduced)
- but this is followed immediately by a "get up" gesture that is repeated multiple times - that makes no sense to me if it's following a foul signal, so confirms for me that the one-armed point was intended to signal advantage and also explains why he feels he can't restart with a FK after the incident
- and a separate "hurry up" wave of the arm over the head after he's confirmed the keeper is fine, has jogged backwards a few steps and just before he turns to run forwards towards the half way line.

They're a little clearer in this TNT twitter video than they are in the stop-start youtube clip posted earlier:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1784256946012364826
Click to expand...
First time I've seen that footage. So he's definitely seen a foul and played advantage. But it gets to an awkward stage of him asking the goalkeeper to get on with it, and it goes on for too long. At that point, he should just stop play and give the free kick imo
 
Last edited:
JamesL said:
Was the keeper not challenged whilst in control of the ball?
Click to expand...

Technically yes he was. I haven't seen the video posted above that shows the whole incident, so maybe my 'definitely' was a little incorrect 😆
(I saw a video on tiktok which very briefly shows the build up to the incident, but then stops.)
 
george.g said:
On the technicality he stops for the injury, is he incorrect in law to restart with a dropped ball?

Many injuries aren’t apparent, and while in this case the GK wasn’t writhing in pain, he has taken a knock potentially, and AT has applied the LOTG in such a way where he has stopped play and checked on the GK.

Telling him to go down is something I tell players, it gives them time to get their breath back and is rarely part of me ‘selling a stoppage’.

It’s untidy, but reffing isn’t pretty sometimes.
Click to expand...
Well done George. A very good and constructive reply.
 
GraemeS said:
We never know for sure any player might not have a little knock. That doesn't mean we randomly stop the game seconds before a player is about to score in an open goal.

As much as we can possibly know AT doesn't think he really has a knock, we do. He's close by and assesses the incident initially, waves play on, moves to the drop zone and then only reacts when the goal is about to be scored. He then tells the player to act injured. None of those are things a referee does if he thinks the GK is incapable of playing on. His entire body language/gestures/actions are all consistent with a ref who is expecting a drop-kick up the field from a perfectly healthy keeper.


OK fine, now you're engaging with the actual discussion. This is a valid restart if he's assessed an injury - but how do you think that can be correct given he's already motioned to play-on, having assessed from much closer?


This is what I mean by you making up an injury. The most obvious reading of this is that he's assumed he has a FK and has gone to take it. But for some reason, you are choosing to breeze past the obvious and assume there's an injury. Despite zero evidence and the player having to actually be told to go down to make it look like an injury.
Click to expand...
Are you sure that there is zero evidence. Not for me, there is clear evidence, he is unsteady on his feet & not really sure what’s going on.
 
one said:
For me this is akin to all defenders stopping due to an AR raising the flag for an attacker who has not committed an offside offence. If a goal is scored, it really is ultimately the defenders fault. The referee has a bad option or a worse option. In AT's case, for me, he chose the worse option.

He did everything right up till the moment he decided to stop the game. He rightfully played advantage and didn't do anything to give Areola or anyone else that he'd given a FK. From that moment, he turned a bad situation for himself and the keeper, crated by a Kepler's lack awareness, to a worse situation where he had to make stuff up to avoid a game being replayed.
Click to expand...
I have watched many times & in my world, he hasn’t made anything up. Yes, messy, yes could have been dealt differently, but made up, not for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top