On Sunday evening I left Barbados and its tropical sunsets. 48 hours later and I'm in Sidcup, at the home of Cray Wanderers, to watch son Jack in Sevenoaks Reserves last match of the season. A good result, a 3-0 win and the possibility of avoiding relegation in the Kent League. Cray are not famous for their diplomacy or tact and the match was well handled, although the ref did need to calm down a linesman who got a little over-annoyed at being sworn at by a Cray official.
I was interested to see other referees' interpretation of how to play advantage and my view was confirmed that referees are drifting further down the rugby route and being prepared to bring play back after a longer delay than has been seen in the past. The Laws of the Game don't help much as they're not very precise on this point but referees are trying to make sure that players do not suffer as a result of being fouled. Last night I noticed a couple of whistles blown a good five or six seconds after the offence, which is longer than the two or three seconds that used to be recommended. I'm all for it.
2 comments:
How did the players take to having the whistle blown so long after the fact? I find in the youth, and amateur games I call, that a whistle after 2-3 seconds is better off not being blown - BOTH teams object to the call being made so late, even though both are (presumably) aware that the ref is factoring advantage into the situation. Six sesonds is an eternity to some of the pinheads I seem to get assigned to - by then, they have forgotten what the whistle might have been for, evn if the foul was pretty obvious.
indeed steve, you're right, it did create annoyance, especially as the ref's "advantage" call wasn't that loud. That said, as long as players are under no doubt about what he's up to, letting play flow for a few seconds to find out if ad advantage accrues is something i find quite attractive.
Post a Comment