Round Nine - Local league thread

[razza]

1) hmmm...i still stand by my comment as essentially I am more experienced then I was 8****** rounds ago! Ask any ref- they would have felt a big difference after 2 weeks of refereeing
2) If you read the comment- it wasnt made because of my 'experience'- omni and Gus shred me in that department (duh!). My comment was implying that a lesser experienced ref was more prone to doing that. Omni and Gus wouldnt do that due to their experience and I wont now due to however little or much experience I possess!

They might not do it, but what about other experienced referees. I know a lot of referees that would allow the final kick even if it is 5 or 10 seconds over the time limit. The referee is the sole keeper of time. Why not be flexible in your approach to refereeing and use common sense rather that causing unneccessary trouble for yourself.

However i must admit, this is a very stick point and i would not criticise a referee for blowing on the second

 

[Kareem]

1) hmmm...i still stand by my comment as essentially I am more experienced then I was 8****** rounds ago! Ask any ref- they would have felt a big difference after 2 weeks of refereeing
2) If you read the comment- it wasnt made because of my 'experience'- omni and Gus shred me in that department (duh!). My comment was implying that a lesser experienced ref was more prone to doing that. Omni and Gus wouldnt do that due to their experience and I wont now due to however little or much experience I possess!

Why not be flexible in your approach to refereeing and use common sense rather that causing unneccessary trouble for yourself.

i dont see what i said wrong?
flexible...i am under obligation to follow rules as a referee and in two situations
1) I blow fulltime b4 freekick- I have rules on my side even if freekick team isnt happy
2) I let freekick take place- I dont have anything except fairness to support me which doesnt go very far- defending team wont be happy (if they know) and it is fair enough for them to be so.
Note: Only time when people will realise overtime is if referee has countdown timer (which is one of the advantages of me using a stopwatch- no1 knows except me).
Common Sense- I was using common sense to clarify that IMO (which the letter IMO were stated before)  that an experienced referee would understand the need to call time immediately.
I didnt cause unneccesory trouble for myself- i wasnt the one with an inflammatory comment...

Please to everyone reading.
I personally 100% would like an NRL type approach- last play (I have experienced problems in open play as a player where we 'think' we are about to score a goal.
This approach would include time to take freekick if it occurred b4 fulltime (like in NRL with penalties I believe) and wait until next out.
But guess what...it hasnt happened and probably never will happen as it is too complicated and hence I personally believe I am under obligation to follow the rules to the letter
NOTE: i refer to rules not laws as it really isnt part of the "lwas of the game" so much as Laws of the game include stoppage time thus anullifying this problem!

 

[Gopher of Pern]

1) hmmm...i still stand by my comment as essentially I am more experienced then I was 8****** rounds ago! Ask any ref- they would have felt a big difference after 2 weeks of refereeing
2) If you read the comment- it wasnt made because of my 'experience'- omni and Gus shred me in that department (duh!). My comment was implying that a lesser experienced ref was more prone to doing that. Omni and Gus wouldnt do that due to their experience and I wont now due to however little or much experience I possess!

Why not be flexible in your approach to refereeing and use common sense rather that causing unneccessary trouble for yourself.

i dont see what i said wrong?
flexible...i am under obligation to follow rules as a referee and in two situations
1) I blow fulltime b4 freekick- I have rules on my side even if freekick team isnt happy
2) I let freekick take place- I dont have anything except fairness to support me which doesnt go very far- defending team wont be happy (if they know) and it is fair enough for them to be so.
Note: Only time when people will realise overtime is if referee has countdown timer (which is one of the advantages of me using a stopwatch- no1 knows except me).
Common Sense- I was using common sense to clarify that IMO (which the letter IMO were stated before)  that an experienced referee would understand the need to call time immediately.
I didnt cause unneccesory trouble for myself- i wasnt the one with an inflammatory comment...

Please to everyone reading.
I personally 100% would like an NRL type approach- last play (I have experienced problems in open play as a player where we 'think' we are about to score a goal.
This approach would include time to take freekick if it occurred b4 fulltime (like in NRL with penalties I believe) and wait until next out.
But guess what...it hasnt happened and probably never will happen as it is too complicated and hence I personally believe I am under obligation to follow the rules to the letter
NOTE: i refer to rules not laws as it really isnt part of the "lwas of the game" so much as Laws of the game include stoppage time thus anullifying this problem!

Ok, since it isn't fair for them to let some extra time go by for us to take a free kick, how is it fair to us that they got to foul us without any punishment? If they hadn't of fouled, we might have had a shot on goal, maybe even a goal. As it was, they committed a foul, and we had no recompense. Is that fair to us? Especially as, IMO, the foul was worthy of a yellow. Slide tackle from behind on a player heading towards goal?

 

[Bear]

Such is life....

 

[T]

I've had a goal disallowed because it crossed the line as the ref blew his whistle..... is not a good feeling.

 

[Kareem]

1) hmmm...i still stand by my comment as essentially I am more experienced then I was 8****** rounds ago! Ask any ref- they would have felt a big difference after 2 weeks of refereeing
2) If you read the comment- it wasnt made because of my 'experience'- omni and Gus shred me in that department (duh!). My comment was implying that a lesser experienced ref was more prone to doing that. Omni and Gus wouldnt do that due to their experience and I wont now due to however little or much experience I possess!

Why not be flexible in your approach to refereeing and use common sense rather that causing unneccessary trouble for yourself.

i dont see what i said wrong?
flexible...i am under obligation to follow rules as a referee and in two situations
1) I blow fulltime b4 freekick- I have rules on my side even if freekick team isnt happy
2) I let freekick take place- I dont have anything except fairness to support me which doesnt go very far- defending team wont be happy (if they know) and it is fair enough for them to be so.
Note: Only time when people will realise overtime is if referee has countdown timer (which is one of the advantages of me using a stopwatch- no1 knows except me).
Common Sense- I was using common sense to clarify that IMO (which the letter IMO were stated before)  that an experienced referee would understand the need to call time immediately.
I didnt cause unneccesory trouble for myself- i wasnt the one with an inflammatory comment...

Please to everyone reading.
I personally 100% would like an NRL type approach- last play (I have experienced problems in open play as a player where we 'think' we are about to score a goal.
This approach would include time to take freekick if it occurred b4 fulltime (like in NRL with penalties I believe) and wait until next out.
But guess what...it hasnt happened and probably never will happen as it is too complicated and hence I personally believe I am under obligation to follow the rules to the letter
NOTE: i refer to rules not laws as it really isnt part of the "lwas of the game" so much as Laws of the game include stoppage time thus anullifying this problem!

Ok, since it isn't fair for them to let some extra time go by for us to take a free kick, how is it fair to us that they got to foul us without any punishment? If they hadn't of fouled, we might have had a shot on goal, maybe even a goal. As it was, they committed a foul, and we had no recompense. Is that fair to us? Especially as, IMO, the foul was worthy of a yellow. Slide tackle from behind on a player heading towards goal?

As I have been saying. It isnt fair IMO either way...and if it was my decision to make the rules I would make sure this wouldnt happen. But it isnt- i am only a ref aka. a rule enforcer
hence i follow rules. I personally (not as a ref but as a player) agree 100% that you should have a freekick and the other team should endure the consequences whether it be another 10 secs until they get or drink or a goal!
But what I or you think (no offence) doesnt matter...and thats what I was trying to point out. From a rules point of view its in their favour and it sucks but like Bear said

Such is life....

basically wat I am trying to say is...at the endo of the day ref's try to do wat is fair within the realms of the rules. The reason this has never been that much explored is due to the presence of stoppage time which easily prevents any issues like this happening! No-one important cares about us amaetures

 

[Kanwal Bull]

I guess as long as all ref's do it consistently, 1 way or the other. I mean it was frustrating for us when he blew half time just as we were having a shot, but then at full time we were on the defence like crazy 1 more minute and they couldve scored. Not sure if the ref blew full time right on time or let a little time go though... but in that case if he was consistent then fair enough.

 

[Gopher of Pern]

It's a bit different in open play. I agree that if time is up, that's it, game stops. But if the other team commits a foul, the other team should be allowed the time to take their free kick. If the foul had been commited inside the box, this wouldn't be debated, because we would have had the kick, and it would have been resolved. So why is it different just because it is outside the box? A free kick, with 5, maybe 10 seconds after the kick is taken for it to resolve, then time off. Surely if that was implemented, only in the case of a foul, not a corner or throw in, it would not extend time too long for amatuer games?

I guess it was just the shock of the half ending like that, as i've never seen or heard of a half ending before a kick is taken. You see all the time where a team kicks off, then the ref blows the whistle to end the half. Just seems wrong to finish the half without the ball in play....

 

[Gen (MarinerMum)]

17B's lost to Gwandalin Whingers 2-1.  Better team won however, they still repeatedly complained yet they got the better end of the calls.  Elbow's to faces & heads were missed.  That's football at CCF.

We are back to 3rd I think on goal difference.

 

[Capn Gus Bloodbeard]

Gopher - to be honest, I'm with you.  The laws specifically state that if a penalty kick is awarded, then it must be allowed to occur - though I think the laws should state the same for free kicks.

Unfortunately, they don't.  When you have stoppage time it's easy to work around it and allow the kick to occur - but when you don't have stoppage time, what's fair?  Short answer is, there's no fair solution - one team potentially saves a goal with a cheap foul, but if time is extended for just that foul, then is that unfair because it's inconsistent with the others?

As for why it's different for a penalty kick - maybe it's because a penalty kick takes a while to set up, and it can ONLY occur on the referee's signal, whereas a free kick in regular play can be taken the moment the ball is returned to the location of the foul and stopped (unless there's an injury, or the ref needs to talk to/card a player).

I certainly agree wholeheartedly with your proposal though, I believe that's the fairest approach.  Sometimes referees will apply that now - although whenever a ref operates outside of the rules provided there's the potential for problems.