There is a lot of talk on the Tyrone v Mayo thread about handy/soft/easy frees that were awarded to Mayo.
What is everyone's definition of such a free?
A. Is it one were contact was accidental?
B. Is it one where the tackler has committed a foul but only a little bit? (Wee tug on the geansai)
C. Is it one where the contact is the norm for a physical game?
Any ideas?
I've no love of hurling but I do appreciate their 'only blow up when it's obvious everyone needs a breather' style of refereeing. Goes against the rules of the game, but goes fully with the spirit of the game.
Football doesn't have that spirit. Mainly because everyone is obsessed with winning frees and seem genuinely shocked when any decision isn't their way. It's never a case of 'fair play boss', always a case of 'you didn't blow for the same thing earlier'.
Bring in the Aussie rules tackle I say. f**k interpretation.
How many steps are you allowed in football anyway? Looks a lot like Rugby League at times...
Anything that involved Philip Jordan going to ground
A handy/soft free is any free given against your team.
Losing teams tend to notice these more than the winning team.
Quote from: regal on August 26, 2013, 09:09:07 PM
Anything that involved Philip Jordan going to ground
You read my mind :)
Quote from: Aristo 60 on August 26, 2013, 10:14:36 PM
Quote from: regal on August 26, 2013, 09:09:07 PM
Anything that involved Philip Jordan going to ground
You read my mind :)
He may have retired but I can still see him rolling with both hands on his face
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on August 26, 2013, 09:27:12 PM
A handy/soft free is any free given against your team.
Nail hit on head.
I'd like to out a smilyface but apparently that upsets some of your County folk Godhelpus.
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on August 26, 2013, 08:24:45 PM
How many steps are you allowed in football anyway? Looks a lot like Rugby League at times...
About 10 if you don't show hesitation. If you do hesitate, about 3, it's more about perception than anything else. The application of this rule has always annoyed me.
If you're 6'5" you're allowed 5 steps tops.
If you're 5'7", you're allowed anything up to 12.
Quote from: blanketattack on August 27, 2013, 12:05:49 PM
If you're 6'5" you're allowed 5 steps tops.
If you're 5'7", you're allowed anything up to 12.
In terms of distance covered both circumstances would even out!
Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on August 26, 2013, 09:27:12 PM
A handy/soft free is any free given against your team.
Losing teams tend to notice these more than the winning team.
So you've never seen a soft free given to Mayo? I've seen plenty given to Waterford over the years. Maybe we're just lucky that way.
A handy/soft free is one where the decision could just as easily have gone the other way. Some fouls are obvious, some are not, but the ref doesn't have a choice of putting them on a number line. A good example of a soft free is when there is a dodgy 65/45. The ref is suddenly alive to the possibility of square balls or pushing by attackers.
Quote from: Mario on August 27, 2013, 11:54:55 AM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on August 26, 2013, 08:24:45 PM
How many steps are you allowed in football anyway? Looks a lot like Rugby League at times...
About 10 if you don't show hesitation. If you do hesitate, about 3, it's more about perception than anything else. The application of this rule has always annoyed me.
Yep. Kevin McMenamin's goal in the All-Ireland final two years ago was a classic of the genre. It should have been disallowed, simple as that. Yet if a free had been awarded against him, even the Kerry players/fans would have been surprised.
If two lads are hauling each other the referee tends to give it to the person who falls first, I don't, they are both doing it so fcuk them, the balls usually drops and is played on, the soft frees in my view are the shirt pulling, never any complaints from players or management.
The push on back when player is dipping the ball, this is annoying as I'll never blow if the player doesn't push him, he can have his hand on his back but actually needs to push him or apply pressure for it to be a push. If the player falls and there is no push I tell him to get up. Trips are an easy soft free, they will be a black card next year so watch out.
Square balls are really no existent now, in football the player can enter the square after the ball's been kicked very rare now to see players doing it. Haven't called one this year, hands on the keeper while he's in the small square is a given, outside the square he's a normal player, normal rules apply.
As for taking too many steps it can be annoying as a defender when you count out the four steps and tackle the opponent only for him to take an extra 2 steps to get away from you. In some cases the player is being held back and the referee has 2 things he can do, blow for a free for the pulling of the player on the ball or give the player an extra few steps, using the advantage rule. Frustrates players/management but in the rules. There are ones that are blantant overcarrying but the referee can't get it right all the time, have to give the armchair/barflys something to moan about ;)
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 27, 2013, 02:44:32 PM
hands on the keeper while he's in the small square is a given, outside the square he's a normal player, normal rules apply.
This one is a real gear grinder. Nearly all refs give a free if you tackle the keeper even outside his small square. In fact you can tackle him anywhere, even in the small square. The only thing you can't do, that's legal to do to any other player, is shoulder charge him in the small square.
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 27, 2013, 02:44:32 PM
In some cases the player is being held back and the referee has 2 things he can do, blow for a free for the pulling of the player on the ball or give the player an extra few steps, using the advantage rule. Frustrates players/management but in the rules.
Am I reading this correctly? Under normal rules of play, 4 steps is the maximum number permitted before a solo/bounce. However, the rule doesn't apply if the referee allows play to continue under the advantage rule and the player can be allowed to continue and take extra steps. I never knew that
Quote from: Mario on August 27, 2013, 11:54:55 AM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on August 26, 2013, 08:24:45 PM
How many steps are you allowed in football anyway? Looks a lot like Rugby League at times...
About 10 if you don't show hesitation. If you do hesitate, about 3, it's more about perception than anything else. The application of this rule has always annoyed me.
Dead right. Drives me cracked too. You'll sometimes see a player penalised after throwing a few dummies and turning a few times but without having taken too many steps or having fouled the ball, and the commentator(Canning) will say, "Yes, he held on to the ball too long". There's no such rule as far as I know.
Quote from: Asal Mor on August 28, 2013, 11:14:20 AM
Quote from: Mario on August 27, 2013, 11:54:55 AM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on August 26, 2013, 08:24:45 PM
How many steps are you allowed in football anyway? Looks a lot like Rugby League at times...
About 10 if you don't show hesitation. If you do hesitate, about 3, it's more about perception than anything else. The application of this rule has always annoyed me.
Dead right. Drives me cracked too. You'll sometimes see a player penalised after throwing a few dummies and turning a few times but without having taken too many steps or having fouled the ball, and the commentator(Canning) will say, "Yes, he held on to the ball too long". There's no such rule as far as I know.
There actually is,
When a player is in possession of the ball, it
may be:-
(a) carried for a maximum of four consecutive
steps or held in the hand(s) for no longer
than the time needed to take four steps;
Quote from: Asal Mor on August 28, 2013, 11:14:20 AM
Quote from: Mario on August 27, 2013, 11:54:55 AM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on August 26, 2013, 08:24:45 PM
How many steps are you allowed in football anyway? Looks a lot like Rugby League at times...
About 10 if you don't show hesitation. If you do hesitate, about 3, it's more about perception than anything else. The application of this rule has always annoyed me.
Dead right. Drives me cracked too. You'll sometimes see a player penalised after throwing a few dummies and turning a few times but without having taken too many steps or having fouled the ball, and the commentator(Canning) will say, "Yes, he held on to the ball too long". There's no such rule as far as I know.
+1. This is often influenced by spectators hahooing at the ref when something unusual like this occurs that messes with their processing powers and causes them to confuse skill with fouling the ball.
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on August 28, 2013, 11:26:09 AM
Quote from: Asal Mor on August 28, 2013, 11:14:20 AM
Quote from: Mario on August 27, 2013, 11:54:55 AM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on August 26, 2013, 08:24:45 PM
How many steps are you allowed in football anyway? Looks a lot like Rugby League at times...
About 10 if you don't show hesitation. If you do hesitate, about 3, it's more about perception than anything else. The application of this rule has always annoyed me.
Dead right. Drives me cracked too. You'll sometimes see a player penalised after throwing a few dummies and turning a few times but without having taken too many steps or having fouled the ball, and the commentator(Canning) will say, "Yes, he held on to the ball too long". There's no such rule as far as I know.
There actually is,
When a player is in possession of the ball, it
may be:-
(a) carried for a maximum of four consecutive
steps or held in the hand(s) for no longer
than the time needed to take four steps;
I took Asal to mean frees given when the ball hasn't actually been fouled, by taking either too many steps or too many seconds.
Which is another stupid wording of a rule. What is the time needed to take four steps? Is it four sprinting steps (about .8 of a second) or four strolling steps (depends on how slowly you're strolling)?
Quote from: Hardy on August 28, 2013, 11:27:59 AM
Quote from: Asal Mor on August 28, 2013, 11:14:20 AM
Quote from: Mario on August 27, 2013, 11:54:55 AM
Quote from: Arthur_Friend on August 26, 2013, 08:24:45 PM
How many steps are you allowed in football anyway? Looks a lot like Rugby League at times...
About 10 if you don't show hesitation. If you do hesitate, about 3, it's more about perception than anything else. The application of this rule has always annoyed me.
Dead right. Drives me cracked too. You'll sometimes see a player penalised after throwing a few dummies and turning a few times but without having taken too many steps or having fouled the ball, and the commentator(Canning) will say, "Yes, he held on to the ball too long". There's no such rule as far as I know.
+1. This is often influenced by spectators hahooing at the ref when something unusual like this occurs that messes with their processing powers and causes them to confuse skill with fouling the ball.
Drives me nuts as well. I term this the "Arra don't be trickacting" offence, where the player changes his mind and gets blown for it. It doesn't matter if this offence is tightly sandwiched between hops or solos, the fact that people were anticipating a certain outcome, such as a pass, and the player gives them something different, like keeping it, is the offence.
I reckon about 10% of a hurling or a football match crowd turn up wanting to see everything first timed and the ball advanced upfield as quick as possible and by any means necessary. These are the ones who hoot their approval at volleys, pulls, doubles, etc. regardless of whether any net benefit accrues.
By the same token, their blood pressure rises at anything delaying such as indirect ball movement occurs. These are the major callers of these "trickacting" fouls.
The funny thing is hardy that a lot of people don't even realise the rule about the 'time'. 3-5 seconds is the guideline depending on the ref and the circumstances, and that came from a ref!!! These types of rules are obeyed in the breach rather than strictly applied and is not one of the greatest 'gear grinders' unless it results in a goal against my team them I'm fit to burst someone!
The rule re 'the time needed to take four steps' is vague, but what's the alternative? If you don't have it, then what's to stop a player standing still with the ball firmly clasped into his bosom? He won't be using any 'steps' and it would be practically impossible to dispossess him without fouling him.
Quote from: take_yer_points on August 28, 2013, 09:19:48 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 27, 2013, 02:44:32 PM
In some cases the player is being held back and the referee has 2 things he can do, blow for a free for the pulling of the player on the ball or give the player an extra few steps, using the advantage rule. Frustrates players/management but in the rules.
Am I reading this correctly? Under normal rules of play, 4 steps is the maximum number permitted before a solo/bounce. However, the rule doesn't apply if the referee allows play to continue under the advantage rule and the player can be allowed to continue and take extra steps. I never knew that
When i say he's allowed a few extra steps the referee usually gives the player on the ball an extra few steps if the player is being held, it's either that or blow a for a free for holding. Which would you prefer? play stopped for each pull or an advantage to keep the game flowing? Again hard to keep everyone happy
Quote from: deiseach on August 28, 2013, 11:51:56 AM
The rule re 'the time needed to take four steps' is vague, but what's the alternative? If you don't have it, then what's to stop a player standing still with the ball firmly clasped into his bosom? He won't be using any 'steps' and it would be practically impossible to dispossess him without fouling him.
I think 5 seconds would be a reasonable time frame to implement.
Quote from: deiseach on August 28, 2013, 11:51:56 AM
The rule re 'the time needed to take four steps' is vague, but what's the alternative? If you don't have it, then what's to stop a player standing still with the ball firmly clasped into his bosom? He won't be using any 'steps' and it would be practically impossible to dispossess him without fouling him.
How about four steps or three seconds? I think more than three seconds is too long, but that's just a opinion.
Quote from: brokencrossbar1 on August 28, 2013, 11:51:22 AM
The funny thing is hardy that a lot of people don't even realise the rule about the 'time'. 3-5 seconds is the guideline depending on the ref and the circumstances, and that came from a ref!!! These types of rules are obeyed in the breach rather than strictly applied and is not one of the greatest 'gear grinders' unless it results in a goal against my team them I'm fit to burst someone!
Referees (as far as I'm aware) will count 1 through to 4, not quickly like a opposing player/supporter will count but like a normal second takes ;). If the player goes into 5 then he should blow unless the player hops/bounces the ball then we start again, not rocket science, but it's down to the referee with the whistle.
The problem is consistency, the referee who blows for the first overcarrying needs to make sure he times every other call to the first overcarrying call. I will shout if the player is being held to play on and allow more steps so the players know I'll allow more steps (of course this can go on from one end line to another, as you'll blow for a foul). Never easy and you can't keep everyone happy, just informed on what you are doing. I do feel that the rules could be more straight forward but you'd be surprised how well you'd do on an exam of the rules
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 28, 2013, 12:05:18 PM
The problem is consistency, the referee who blows for the first overcarrying needs to make sure he times every other call to the first overcarrying call......
First off, at the top level, I really believe all refs are out to be unbias and completely fair. After all isn't in there interest! But consistency is exactly the crux of the problem. The rules appear to magically change between refs and during a game. Players are left adapting, second guessing what will be pulled for a foul and what will not. Supporters are frustrated when they see opposite teams not been pulled for a foul when earlier in the game there team has! Refs than starts to balance decisions up so to be somewhat fair. My advice, ref the match at the start as you do during and at the end.
Quote from: AMayoFan on August 28, 2013, 12:28:44 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 28, 2013, 12:05:18 PM
The problem is consistency, the referee who blows for the first overcarrying needs to make sure he times every other call to the first overcarrying call......
First off, at the top level, I really believe all refs are out to be unbias and completely fair. After all isn't in there interest! But consistency is exactly the crux of the problem. The rules appear to magically change between refs and during a game. Players are left adapting, second guessing what will be pulled for a foul and what will not. Supporters are frustrated when they see opposite teams not been pulled for a foul when earlier in the game there team has! Refs than starts to balance decisions up so to be somewhat fair. My advice, ref the match at the start as you do during and at the end.
At club level I played for many years and knew how individual referees ref'd the game, certain referees blew for everything, some referees made you really work for a free and tried to let the game go and so on we all know how a referee will do it in your own county. As you have said at the top level it's hard but these referees have done a lot of games and we should know how they referee by now.
Part of a managers speech before a match will be about the referee and how he likes to do it, some referees even talk to the players before a match. I even got a National referee to speak to my players about the referee who was in charge of a game we were involved in during an All Ireland run.
Its daft that we should even be thinking about the referee, he should just be there to call the game and the players should play within the rules ;)
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 28, 2013, 11:55:47 AM
Quote from: take_yer_points on August 28, 2013, 09:19:48 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 27, 2013, 02:44:32 PM
In some cases the player is being held back and the referee has 2 things he can do, blow for a free for the pulling of the player on the ball or give the player an extra few steps, using the advantage rule. Frustrates players/management but in the rules.
Am I reading this correctly? Under normal rules of play, 4 steps is the maximum number permitted before a solo/bounce. However, the rule doesn't apply if the referee allows play to continue under the advantage rule and the player can be allowed to continue and take extra steps. I never knew that
When i say he's allowed a few extra steps the referee usually gives the player on the ball an extra few steps if the player is being held, it's either that or blow a for a free for holding. Which would you prefer? play stopped for each pull or an advantage to keep the game flowing? Again hard to keep everyone happy
Yes ok, I have you now.
I'd prefer your idea of permitting the extra steps and I noticed in a later post there you mentioned that you make the player in posession aware that it is happening. It is definitely the common sense approach and should result in a more free flowing game.
However, I have 2 problems with it that are quite closely linked:
1) It's not in the rule book (I don't think - I stand to be corrected);
2) It's not consistently applied.
Obviously it's not consistently applied because it's not in the rule book. Perhaps it should be included as part of the advantage rule - when a ref raises his arm(s) to indicate advantage is being played, then the step count restarts at zero. However currently as that's not in the rule book I don't think it's an ideal way to approach it - it only takes a player a few seconds to overcarry so if the fouled player overcarries I think the foul should be given - 2 wrongs don't make a right and all that. I think the rules should be there to allow for a free flowing game, the ref should just faciliate that rather than interpret the rules in his own way - to me, that's what leads to the inconsistency issue.
Quote from: take_yer_points on August 28, 2013, 01:47:40 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 28, 2013, 11:55:47 AM
Quote from: take_yer_points on August 28, 2013, 09:19:48 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 27, 2013, 02:44:32 PM
In some cases the player is being held back and the referee has 2 things he can do, blow for a free for the pulling of the player on the ball or give the player an extra few steps, using the advantage rule. Frustrates players/management but in the rules.
Am I reading this correctly? Under normal rules of play, 4 steps is the maximum number permitted before a solo/bounce. However, the rule doesn't apply if the referee allows play to continue under the advantage rule and the player can be allowed to continue and take extra steps. I never knew that
When i say he's allowed a few extra steps the referee usually gives the player on the ball an extra few steps if the player is being held, it's either that or blow a for a free for holding. Which would you prefer? play stopped for each pull or an advantage to keep the game flowing? Again hard to keep everyone happy
Yes ok, I have you now.
I'd prefer your idea of permitting the extra steps and I noticed in a later post there you mentioned that you make the player in posession aware that it is happening. It is definitely the common sense approach and should result in a more free flowing game.
However, I have 2 problems with it that are quite closely linked:
1) It's not in the rule book (I don't think - I stand to be corrected);
2) It's not consistently applied.
Obviously it's not consistently applied because it's not in the rule book. Perhaps it should be included as part of the advantage rule - when a ref raises his arm(s) to indicate advantage is being played, then the step count restarts at zero. However currently as that's not in the rule book I don't think it's an ideal way to approach it - it only takes a player a few seconds to overcarry so if the fouled player overcarries I think the foul should be given - 2 wrongs don't make a right and all that. I think the rules should be there to allow for a free flowing game, the ref should just faciliate that rather than interpret the rules in his own way - to me, that's what leads to the inconsistency issue.
But in the case I used he's being pulled so allowed to overcarry to break free of the pulling, so then if you would prefer that the referee blows for the initial free (pulling) then we will have a stop start non contact sport, in my mind it's not what I'd like to see. I hear the advantage rule may be tweaked next year to allow for a call back to the original foul after 6/7 seconds, not sure tbh. Think this would be better.
The referee will always interpret a foul or non foul as he 'sees' it, that's the thing, you from the advantage of the slow-mo telly replay or even if you're at the game will see it at different angle/distance and call it your way, the referee can only see it his way and blow/not blow
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 28, 2013, 02:23:42 PM
Quote from: take_yer_points on August 28, 2013, 01:47:40 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 28, 2013, 11:55:47 AM
Quote from: take_yer_points on August 28, 2013, 09:19:48 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 27, 2013, 02:44:32 PM
In some cases the player is being held back and the referee has 2 things he can do, blow for a free for the pulling of the player on the ball or give the player an extra few steps, using the advantage rule. Frustrates players/management but in the rules.
Am I reading this correctly? Under normal rules of play, 4 steps is the maximum number permitted before a solo/bounce. However, the rule doesn't apply if the referee allows play to continue under the advantage rule and the player can be allowed to continue and take extra steps. I never knew that
When i say he's allowed a few extra steps the referee usually gives the player on the ball an extra few steps if the player is being held, it's either that or blow a for a free for holding. Which would you prefer? play stopped for each pull or an advantage to keep the game flowing? Again hard to keep everyone happy
Yes ok, I have you now.
I'd prefer your idea of permitting the extra steps and I noticed in a later post there you mentioned that you make the player in posession aware that it is happening. It is definitely the common sense approach and should result in a more free flowing game.
However, I have 2 problems with it that are quite closely linked:
1) It's not in the rule book (I don't think - I stand to be corrected);
2) It's not consistently applied.
Obviously it's not consistently applied because it's not in the rule book. Perhaps it should be included as part of the advantage rule - when a ref raises his arm(s) to indicate advantage is being played, then the step count restarts at zero. However currently as that's not in the rule book I don't think it's an ideal way to approach it - it only takes a player a few seconds to overcarry so if the fouled player overcarries I think the foul should be given - 2 wrongs don't make a right and all that. I think the rules should be there to allow for a free flowing game, the ref should just faciliate that rather than interpret the rules in his own way - to me, that's what leads to the inconsistency issue.
But in the case I used he's being pulled so allowed to overcarry to break free of the pulling, so then if you would prefer that the referee blows for the initial free (pulling) then we will have a stop start non contact sport, in my mind it's not what I'd like to see. I hear the advantage rule may be tweaked next year to allow for a call back to the original foul after 6/7 seconds, not sure tbh. Think this would be better.
The referee will always interpret a foul or non foul as he 'sees' it, that's the thing, you from the advantage of the slow-mo telly replay or even if you're at the game will see it at different angle/distance and call it your way, the referee can only see it his way and blow/not blow
Is the highlighted bit in the rules? If so, then that sounds perfect - an extra few steps to get away is a common sense point of view.
However, if it's not in the rules then that's where I can see inconsistency coming from - some refs will apply common sense and faciliate a free flowing game by allowing the player the extra few steps (whilst ignoring the rule book) and other refs will apply the rules to the letter of the law. I'd prefer the former, but I think all refs need to be consistent in that approach - the only way I can see that happening is to have it in the rule book.
Quote from: take_yer_points on August 28, 2013, 02:41:15 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 28, 2013, 02:23:42 PM
Quote from: take_yer_points on August 28, 2013, 01:47:40 PM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 28, 2013, 11:55:47 AM
Quote from: take_yer_points on August 28, 2013, 09:19:48 AM
Quote from: Milltown Row2 on August 27, 2013, 02:44:32 PM
In some cases the player is being held back and the referee has 2 things he can do, blow for a free for the pulling of the player on the ball or give the player an extra few steps, using the advantage rule. Frustrates players/management but in the rules.
Am I reading this correctly? Under normal rules of play, 4 steps is the maximum number permitted before a solo/bounce. However, the rule doesn't apply if the referee allows play to continue under the advantage rule and the player can be allowed to continue and take extra steps. I never knew that
When i say he's allowed a few extra steps the referee usually gives the player on the ball an extra few steps if the player is being held, it's either that or blow a for a free for holding. Which would you prefer? play stopped for each pull or an advantage to keep the game flowing? Again hard to keep everyone happy
Yes ok, I have you now.
I'd prefer your idea of permitting the extra steps and I noticed in a later post there you mentioned that you make the player in posession aware that it is happening. It is definitely the common sense approach and should result in a more free flowing game.
However, I have 2 problems with it that are quite closely linked:
1) It's not in the rule book (I don't think - I stand to be corrected);
2) It's not consistently applied.
Obviously it's not consistently applied because it's not in the rule book. Perhaps it should be included as part of the advantage rule - when a ref raises his arm(s) to indicate advantage is being played, then the step count restarts at zero. However currently as that's not in the rule book I don't think it's an ideal way to approach it - it only takes a player a few seconds to overcarry so if the fouled player overcarries I think the foul should be given - 2 wrongs don't make a right and all that. I think the rules should be there to allow for a free flowing game, the ref should just faciliate that rather than interpret the rules in his own way - to me, that's what leads to the inconsistency issue.
But in the case I used he's being pulled so allowed to overcarry to break free of the pulling, so then if you would prefer that the referee blows for the initial free (pulling) then we will have a stop start non contact sport, in my mind it's not what I'd like to see. I hear the advantage rule may be tweaked next year to allow for a call back to the original foul after 6/7 seconds, not sure tbh. Think this would be better.
The referee will always interpret a foul or non foul as he 'sees' it, that's the thing, you from the advantage of the slow-mo telly replay or even if you're at the game will see it at different angle/distance and call it your way, the referee can only see it his way and blow/not blow
Is the highlighted bit in the rules? If so, then that sounds perfect - an extra few steps to get away is a common sense point of view.
However, if it's not in the rules then that's where I can see inconsistency coming from - some refs will apply common sense and faciliate a free flowing game by allowing the player the extra few steps (whilst ignoring the rule book) and other refs will apply the rules to the letter of the law. I'd prefer the former, but I think all refs need to be consistent in that approach - the only way I can see that happening is to have it in the rule book.
Agreed, if in the rule book then it puts it to bed, the 'slow whistle' isn't in the rule book but refs this year were told to apply it..... go figure
I do not agree with allowing a player to foul the ball just because he was being fouled. That is no good. There is no rule of "a few extra steps". To get an advantage when being fouled the player must release the ball. The advantageous movement of the ball (for a score or good pass) is the advantage, not the right to commit an entirely separate foul. The rules are the rules and should be played. No ref has a right to make up his own rules.
The problem is that if a player is being fouled and the ref gives him an advantage and he doesn't release the ball then the ref must ignore the first foul (as it was dealt with by non-retractable advantage) and instantly give a free against the fouled player for over-carrying. This would be correct and in keeping with the rules. but it is of course morally unjust.
However the new advantage rule (motion 19 at congress 2013) will account for it. If the lad is fouled and given advantage and then he runs on and fouls the ball the ref can stop him for over-carrying but retract to the original foul and award him the free kick. The new rule allows advantage with five seconds to see if there really was any advantage. Clearly fouling the ball two steps into your advantage is no advantage so the ball goes back to your original free. Again this is correct and in keeping with the rules and this time IS morally just.
From next year there will be no need to ignore the rules just to even up the spirit of things.