Question re Advantage rule

[Smokin Joe]

In the Armagh senior club final today an attacker was fouled, Paudie Hughes the referee signaled advantage.  The attacker then immediately made an illegal handpass.

To the surprise of the crowd the referee awarded a free out against the attacker for a throw ball.

Was the referee correct, or did he make a mistake?  I'm assuming that (in the referee's eyes) as the player made an illegal handpass this technical infrinegement overruled the advantage he was receiving.

It certainly seemed odd as the attacker got absolutely zero advantage.

[TheManInBlack]

He was 100% correct in his application of the rule.

[Smokin Joe]

He was 100% correct in his application of the rule.

And what is the rule?

That a technical foul (?) by the attacker sees that he immediately loses the advantage?

[TheManInBlack]

The rule regarding advantage is defined under section 4.36 and 5.39. However what is not specified is that if the player given the advantage commits a foul - technical or aggressive, the normal rule is applied. That is why Paudie was correct in his application of the rule.

[Smokin Joe]

Thanks for the clarification

[macdanger2]

Is it not inherent in the word "advantage" that if he fouls the ball and has a free awarded against him then no advantage has accrued and therefore play should be brought back for the free in??

[Rossfan]

He got his advantage he made a balls if it so correct decision.....but.,
If he gets his advantage and makes a balls of it by kicking a wide ...he then gets to take his free.

[TheManInBlack]

Only if said balls up is within the allotted 5 seconds.

[David McKeown]

The rule regarding advantage is defined under section 4.36 and 5.39. However what is not specified is that if the player given the advantage commits a foul - technical or aggressive, the normal rule is applied. That is why Paudie was correct in his application of the rule.

Thats not how I read the rule at all.  The problem with the rule though is that advantage is not properly defined.  Take for example the forward in a shooting position being fouled.  For me its an advantage if he has a shot from a closer range or a better angle to where the free would be from.  It doesn't matter what happens that shot (i.e. whether its goes over, into the net or wide) its the shot that is the advantage not the outcome of the shot.  I know others disagree but i think that just highlights why exactly the word advantage should be clarified.

That said Paudie's interpretation of what constituted an advantage was somewhat suspect today, allowing Cullyhana to shoot and miss twice before awarding frees and then allowing Maghery to play on even though they still hadn't shot within the 5 seconds but were about to.

[Il Bomber Destro]

Going from the wording of the rule, it is not actually an advantage rule but in fact a free shot rule.

[time ticking away]

If what the man in black is saying is true then this is just another example of a shite rule. Why do the GAA insist on getting things wrong

[TheManInBlack]

David - that is how referees where instructed to apply the advantage rule.  That came down from the Administrators in Croke Park (Pat Doherty at the time), Pat McEn (chairman of ref committee) and supported by senior intercounty referees.  In fact they quoted an O'Byrne Cup match Dublin v Westmeath, where such an incident occurred and cited it as good practice. 

As for applying advantage, it can cause more problems than it solves.  A ref could use it to free up play a bit especially in a foul ridden game, refs hate those games as much as spectators.  Some days you'd be better blowing the foul as it happened.

[rosnarun]

David - that is how referees where instructed to apply the advantage rule.  That came down from the Administrators in Croke Park (Pat Doherty at the time), Pat McEn (chairman of ref committee) and supported by senior intercounty referees.  In fact they quoted an O'Byrne Cup match Dublin v Westmeath, where such an incident occurred and cited it as good practice. 

As for applying advantage, it can cause more problems than it solves.  A ref could use it to free up play a bit especially in a foul ridden game, refs hate those games as much as spectators.  Some days you'd be better blowing the foul as it happened.

so if a player is fouled and advantage is played and thisd causes the player to commit a tecnical offense such fall over and handle the ball on the ground or stumble  out of play then 'no Advantage' ? soulds like a shit rule all right

Another question for reffing buffs
if a player is given advantage from a foul and is fouled again with in 5 seconds and is now in a more advantageous position such as has moved from out side to in side penalty area , what is the correct decision? reffs alway seem to back to 1st foul and end up penalizing the attacker

[Esmarelda]

David - that is how referees where instructed to apply the advantage rule.  That came down from the Administrators in Croke Park (Pat Doherty at the time), Pat McEn (chairman of ref committee) and supported by senior intercounty referees.  In fact they quoted an O'Byrne Cup match Dublin v Westmeath, where such an incident occurred and cited it as good practice. 

As for applying advantage, it can cause more problems than it solves.  A ref could use it to free up play a bit especially in a foul ridden game, refs hate those games as much as spectators.  Some days you'd be better blowing the foul as it happened.

I argued the point that David has made above but was told that my interpretation is wrong.

David's example is how the rule is applied in soccer. If the tackled player gets himself into a better position than when he was fouled then that is the advantage he has achieved. If he then kicks it wide the ball is not brought back as he has already used his advantage.

I wasn't aware of the O'Byrne Cup game being used as an example. I was told, by a few, that regardless of what happens in the five second period, that the ref can call the play back. Certainly, referees are applying the rule in this way. Well, the ones that apply it at all.

[TheManInBlack]

The proper implementation of the rule is to give 'further' advantage e.g. having already being fouled and awarded advantage, a player is fouled again - the ref is to award advantage again - but from the point of the latest foul.

Problem that arises there (apart from almost everyone wanting to take your head off), if the advantage breaks down and the defending team regain posession to launch an attack - how do you remember who commited the fouls, have you applied the requisite disciplinary measures, do you stop the game to apply those measures or wait to the next break in play?