Question Number: 30165

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 3/2/2016

RE: Rec Adult

russell of Sydney, Nsw Australia asks...

This question is a follow up to question 30154

A follow up to the 30154 posted replies.

Thank you refs McHugh and Dawson for their comments of the incident, and as always, there is good insights to consider and in-particular the advise to wait and see over signally advantage.

Still, I am keen to read more thoughts on the main question in the post - about when does a phase continue long enough that the DOGSO aspect is dropped from consideration.

Imagine if, in the particular play discussed, that the attacker did not slip over, and tactically feigns an attempted shot only to tap the ball further in field to try to round the keeper to make his shooting angle more open and then slipped over.

Imagine if the player had not yet attempted to shoot or pass off the ball and feigning a few times to shoot but doesn't, and then slips over.
Or what if he did eventually shoot after two or three tactical feigns, however, he either misses the goal or the keeper blocks the shot. Was he still denied or did he take to long going back n forth with his tactical feigns.

Imagine if he remained on his feet, feigns a few times and then upon seeing a supporting team mate attempts to pass the ball off, however, slips (of his own accord) in the process and so does not get the pass off. Do we still go back to the foul or consider the opportunity lost?

BTW, as for the studs up challenge that went unpunished in the match - the Match Review Panel deemed it worth two games.

Sent from my iPhone

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Russell
There is no definitive answer here. The referee has to evaluate each situation and reach a conclusion as to whether advantage was realised or not.
Perhaps look at it this way. If a goal is not scored within the time frame of advantage being realised as per the law which is within a few seconds then the best *advantage* is to call the foul.
Rarely do teams ever complain about a penalty award or a red card DOGSO. They can complain about a goal being chalked off and where a clear foul is not called when there is no obvious reason to not call it.
In this situation the referee wished that he had allowed the advantage to allow the goal.
http://www.uefa.com/trainingground/referees/video/videoid=746585.html?autoplay=true
The best decision would have been a goal and a caution. It took Barcelona until late in the 2nd half to equalise. If say Barca had not scored then there was little possibility of say going with a goal kick citing that advantage had accrued. Most if not all refs would bring it back to the foul at this level.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Russell,
A red card sending off with the opponents playing a man down is usually advantageous tactically though some teams do well and a free kick from a decent scoring position.

I think my colleague Ref McHugh has it right
"If a goal is not scored within the time frame of advantage being realized as per the law which is within a few seconds then the best *advantage* is to call the foul. "
I suspect you could even drag it past 5 seconds as the situation in a one on one evolving situation in front of goal would be captivating. Perhaps less so if he took the ball away to the corner and they played dodge ball for awhile. The reality of wait and see is to formulate an idea of what COULD occur. Once inside the PA the very REAL possibility is a PK from another foul. You also need to consider that OTHER players are rapidly closing in which will likely factor into an ultimate position. Misconduct is NOT waved if you play advantage only the foul restart is waved. I see nothing in LOTG that prevent you showing a card at the next stoppage for the DOGSO same as if the tackle was reckless or excessive. Would I think it a good idea? No!"

It is always possible for the league to sanction misconduct that occurred unacknowledged or out of sight of the officials. Good they caught the studs tackle ,bloody leg breakers!
Cheers