Antrim Football Thread

[BelSaft]

It's really quite simple actually. If there is no clear advantage after 5 seconds you go back to the free?

[Milltown Row2]

It's really quite simple actually. If there is no clear advantage after 5 seconds you go back to the free?

So after 5 seconds? After 5 seconds you are into 6 seconds.

The referee determines whether during the period of 5 seconds if there is an advantage, not managers, players or some boyo behind the fence.

If the ref feels that it's not going anywhere then he'll call it back, tell me about last night that it didn't work out for you?

In fairness to the ref he was shouting out each second

[BelSaft]

Yea he was but where is the advantage when a player is forced to run in to a tackle and then get a free given against him for too long? Happened to both teams last night. Is taking a pop shot under pressure within those 5 seconds considered advantageous? Should the wide count? Or should it be taken back to the free? Genuine questions? You are the expert.

[Milltown Row2]

Yea he was but where is the advantage when a player is forced to run in to a tackle and then get a free given against him for too long? Happened to both teams last night. Is taking a pop shot under pressure within those 5 seconds considered advantageous? Should the wide count? Or should it be taken back to the free? Genuine questions? You are the expert.

No expert but if a shot is taken and missed within his 5 seconds then bring it back, if a player wins an advantage out the pitch and plays it into a corner forward who wins it but loses it after the 5 seconds there are cries of no advantage, he can only give 5 seconds, if the attacker drops or loses possession well that's on him. And that's an example from last night..

I didn't come away from last night thinking he's ballsed up the advantage rule.

The best cry is, we'll take the free! It's only a free if he blows his whistle or raises his arm for advantage.

I'd done a college game earlier that day, now it didn't change the result, but I'd raised the arm for a free inside the box so it's a penalty, shot taken and saved so I blew, penalty call, but the ball spilled to another attacker who put it in the net.. I probably blew a second early if I'm being honest and said that at the time, anyways, boy steps up and misses the penalty ffs!!

So with all the will in the world, it's not easy, I prefer the old school stuff of the 'slow whistle' it worked best as we'd been doing 'advantage' rule long before it was officially brought in

[BelSaft]

But if you raise your hand to indicate advantage it is a free in essence? If you raise your hand and I intentionally drop the ball am I awarded the free automatically?

[Milltown Row2]

But if you raise your hand to indicate advantage it is a free in essence? If you raise your hand and I intentionally drop the ball am I awarded the free automatically?

Yeah players can stop, or drop it and they will get the free.

I didn't see that last night though, I've also taken into account around 30 meters a decent free taker will punish them so it's handier to ask the captain before the game, would they prefer a scoreable free? Some want the free every time.

Duine Inteacht Eile, I get what you're saying but it's 5 seconds, and if the rule said if shot is taken and missed,  tough, then yeah, no probs. So yeah for you the rule is an ass

[imtommygunn]

Whatever about the rest of this but I've always disagreed with the advantage rule in relation to players having a shot from a better position, missing it and it getting called back for the free. For me, the advantage is that you are given an opportunity to shoot from a better position. If you don't capitalise on it, that's tough. The rule means that you effectively get 2 frees for 1 foul. That doesn't sit right with me.

I want to clarify for the tetchy folk. My disagreement is with the rule itself, not how the referees apply it.

Yes that has always annoyed me. You got the advantage and you didn't take it - tough.

[Milltown Row2]

But if you raise your hand to indicate advantage it is a free in essence? If you raise your hand and I intentionally drop the ball am I awarded the free automatically?

Yeah players can stop, or drop it and they will get the free.

I didn't see that last night though, I've also taken into account around 30 meters a decent free taker will punish them so it's handier to ask the captain before the game, would they prefer a scoreable free? Some want the free every time.

Duine Inteacht Eile, I get what you're saying but it's 5 seconds, and if the rule said if shot is taken and missed,  tough, then yeah, no probs. So yeah for you the rule is an ass

That's interesting.
Teams are asked how they want a rule applied before the game. Could that not lead to the rule being applied totally differently for 2 opponents? While I understand that there is logic there, surely that's problematic?

Not really, it's something that you'd ask not before the game but certainly you'll here the captain say we'd prefer the free, it's his call for his team, I can apply it or not, not sure how it's problematic though. Surely that's good communication? Providing a scoreable free is smart? That's a good advantage?

[Milltown Row2]

It's just you said you'd ask it before the game.

Regardless, I would have thought that rules are applied as the referee saw it, not how an individual player judges it on an ad hoc basis.

It's problematic in that the rule is being applied inconsistently throughout the game, depending on how each captain wants (either before or during) it at any given time, if the captain is even within range of delivering that message to the referee.

You have another 14 players on the pitch who might not agree, subs, management and supporters. The referee isn't able to explain to all of these people that the captain called it. Next thing they're going mental that identical infractions have 2 totally different decisions given. I also wouldn't trust captains to back you and claim that they said fcuk all.

I think the referee should be calling all the shots and applying every rule consistently for both teams.

But, I'm not a referee.

I think the last line says it all

I've never had any hassle with it nor lose sleep over it. I suppose you could look for hassles with it. But not every captain or player will 'ask' for the free, but if you're ever on the pitch these calls are are called all the time. Ultimately it's the referee to decide within that 5 seconds to decide.

I'm experienced enough from lots of different positions to judge what I think is best, and stand over it, but happy to give 30 yard frees if a player deliberately drops ball or kicks a wide within the 5 seconds.

The rule book has always been open for interpretation. Your beef as you have said is with the rules.

[EOC1923]

It's just you said you'd ask it before the game.

Regardless, I would have thought that rules are applied as the referee saw it, not how an individual player judges it on an ad hoc basis.

It's problematic in that the rule is being applied inconsistently throughout the game, depending on how each captain wants (either before or during) it at any given time, if the captain is even within range of delivering that message to the referee.

You have another 14 players on the pitch who might not agree, subs, management and supporters. The referee isn't able to explain to all of these people that the captain called it. Next thing they're going mental that identical infractions have 2 totally different decisions given. I also wouldn't trust captains to back you and claim that they said fcuk all.

I think the referee should be calling all the shots and applying every rule consistently for both teams.

But, I'm not a referee.

I think the last line says it all

I've never had any hassle with it nor lose sleep over it. I suppose you could look for hassles with it. But not every captain or player will 'ask' for the free, but if you're ever on the pitch these calls are are called all the time. Ultimately it's the referee to decide within that 5 seconds to decide.

I'm experienced enough from lots of different positions to judge what I think is best, and stand over it, but happy to give 30 yard frees if a player deliberately drops ball or kicks a wide within the 5 seconds.

The rule book has always been open for interpretation. Your beef as you have said is with the rules.

Everyone sees it different I didn't see or notice any faults in the refereeing on Thursday night, was more concerned about the St Brigids social media operator, seems to have went AWOL with ten mins to go 

[country bumpkin]

Despite a productive youth programme which has paid dividends for St Brigid's for years wonder whey the had to borrow, a lad from Michael Davitts (sanction) for the under 19 final.....

[Milltown Row2]

Despite a productive youth programme which has paid dividends for St Brigid's for years wonder whey the had to borrow, a lad from Michael Davitts (sanction) for the under 19 final.....

Stop talking about clubs taking players from other clubs.... Every club does it

[Milltown Row2]

I don't think that's his point. Rather why are clubs with a stack of players sanctioning players to play for them? And it's a fair point. Why would you want to deny your own players game time to facilitate other clubs' players? To win obviously but it's very shortsighted and not very moral.

If Davitts didn't enter a team should that player be unavailable? Is it fair to play for a team, within the rules? Or just deny him that opportunity of playing in an A competition?

Kerry have encouraged players from junior clubs to play at a higher grade come championship. Seems to work for them

[Saffrongael]

It's absolutely a fair point, especially with the numbers St Brigids have.

[Milltown Row2]

It's absolutely a fair point, especially with the numbers St Brigids have.

That's a st Brid's problem, the Davitts lad is playing his age group as a sanctioned player, and that's ok. If Davitts had entered a team then yeah, that's not ok