Question Number: 15662

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 5/31/2007

RE: Travel Under 17

George of Albany, NY USA asks...

Attacker on a breakaway inside the penalty area feints around the keeper, who lunges and trips the attacker headed for the open goal, who stumbles to his knees. I delay the whistle and say "Advantage" relatively quietly from about 15 yards behind, upon which the attacker grabs his ankle in an exaggerated manner and rolls on the ground. After the sweeper clears the ball, the attacker miraculously recovers and is ready to take the PK. I send off the keeper for DGF, caution the attacker for USB and award the PK.

I believe that the attacker exaggerated the injury to ensure that the keeper was sent off. However the foul was not trivial. I sometimes use the quiet "Advantage" call to remind players that they have this opportunity, and follow with a loud "Play on" and arm signal when it's realized.

Would you have handled the situation differently, and did my mechanics contribute to a send off that could have been avoided? A quicker "Play On" might have forced the attacker to get up and complete the play, but I don't think would have been proper.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

I'm having problems understanding your mechanics. "Advantage" and "Play on" mean the same thing. Doesn't matter how loudly or quietly you say it. And did I miss it, or did you not describe any advantage? An attacker is on his knees, the sweeper is rushing in to clear the ball. Unless those two things are separated by some amount of time, it doesn't sound very advantageous for the fouled attacker to me. Delaying your call slightly to see if the ball might squib into the net on its own would be a good technique, and if it doesn't go in you can then whistle. As you can see by my colleague's answers, we all have a different view of what happened based on our reading of your words.

That aside, if you feel the fouled player is exaggerating his foul or an injury, then you are certainly right to caution him, along with sending off the goalkeeper as your description appears to be Denying a Goal-Scoring Opportunity. If you feel the attacker was diving, manufacturing a foul where none really existed, then the only misconduct would be that of the attacker.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

The question here is "Did the attacker choose not to take the advantage or was he unable to take advantage due to the fact that he was on his knees." Perhaps one had to be there. If he's on his knees from the foul, which he appears to be, I don't see how he can take the advantage even though it's subsequently clear he exaggerated his injury. That is to say, he was taken down in the penalty area, the referee viewed it to be at least careless, and had the keeper NOT done this a goal most certainly would have been scored. Thus, there is no advantage and the keeper is sent off and shown the red card. Restart with a penalty kick. The fact that the attacker grabbed his leg immediately AFTER hearing the word "advantage" was an attempt to deceive the referee and is unsporting behavior for which he is cautioned. I agree with the rest of the panel that giving a "quiet advantage" is very poor mechanics but it's obvious the attacker heard this as he didn't exaggerate the injury until it was spoken. I know I'm trying to read the attacker's mind but I think this was done to get the keeper sent off for a trip with serious foul play not DOGSO. We're not told how quickly the sweeper clears the ball. If it was just a second after the trip it would make the advantage even less likely. Please note this is just opinion.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

It is my opinion, [OPINION!] the advantage was realised as soon as the attacker involved himself in unsporting behaviour. You played advantage because you saw an open goal in front of an attacker after foul play. He ignored the advantage and because of that the goal was NOT denied, it was ignored. I tend to think, using that logic, not sending-off the keeper, just like we are expected to do when a goal is scored after foul play, is most correct! I hope that I would stop play for the USB, then caution the keeper for his careless trip and unsporting behaviour in trying to deny the goal [should it nave been] THEN caution the attacker for simulation and restart indirect, comming out!

In his simulation the attacker has taken my ability to decide, without doubt, if the keeper denied the goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick. Because of the doubt I must not send-off. I still may caution because he tried to, of this I have no doubt. BUT the advantage was realised and because of that I can't return to the original foul.

Let's now look to the use of a quiet advantage call, NO WAY, no how, NOT. When you're playing advantage be forceful in announcing your decision, shout it out! "There's your advantage, take it". There are those who'll shout "Advantage, play on!" and those using one or the other and those saying "Advantage" then saying "Play on" when the advantage is realised, but all tend to shout their decision to play advantage, don't keep it a secret, is shouldn't be.

One man's opinion,

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Quiet advantage???

I do see it as more along a delayed whistle where we could eat the whistle for a brief second to see if a favorable result is in the offering instead of calling out ADVANTAGE to see if favorable play will develop.

I am in the crowd of when I see a foul whereby a player has attempted to cheat an opponent to stop halt or disrupt play and may have failed to do so I yell ADVANTAGE! and signal with my arms until I SEE the advantage as realized. I then call out PLAY ON!
In my opinion you must CLEARLY announce you SAW the foul that needed to be seen and you let all in attendance know that it was not missed, nor trivial or doubtful!

My colleague Ref Fleischer and I both have little respect for players who try to deceive and seek retaliation for an event that WE as referee plainly saw and got it right! The advantage call ensures this knowledge to any player but a simplistic moron of we SAW it and felt likely your opponent has failed to stop you from completing you task so go ahead and finish it!

For the player to take it upon himself, to suspend play and roll around on the ground is a pathetic engineered display of obtuse behavior or as we call it in law simply USB.
Retaliation or simulation by a player especially after an advantage signal indicated we saw do not stop shows he has no faith in the referee to manage the match and the punishment handed out could be mitigated by further reaction.

The keeper send off is likely still justified and a PK with a caution as you did for the fake injury as the player was actually tripped then went to theatrics still an indfk out, cautions to both keeper and player would certainly send a clear message! Might not be liked but certainly heard.
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee MrRef

Interesting situation this one... We took the liberty of going to the top of the food chain in America and England. Both dislike the mechanics of a quiet advantage because it's the main thing contributing to the referee's demise. Let no one on the park wonder if you aren't emphatic about seeing a goal to be taken.

America, most assuredly, likes the idea of not saying advantage in the penalty area, delaying the whistle an instant for an eventuality is preferred. Once there is no goal taken give the penalty and as punishment for the denied goal the goalkeeper is sent-off. A caution to the attacker for his simulation is in order.

England likes the idea of making sure the player KNOWS his advantage is taking the goal. In this case he refuses, falls down in a feigned fit of agony, so that changes everything. Caution and show the yellow card, instantly, to the attacker and restart indirect to the defense.