Rules scenario / query

Sasa

Well-Known Member
Had this come up in discussion and we never got to an answer. What’s the views / ruling on here?

I’ll stress that I don’t know the answer.
I think the goal stands and it’s just an unfortunate quirk of the game.

Player A (red team) is booked earlier in the game.

Later on in the game, Player B (blue team) is running through and player A wipes him out for a clear second yellow.

However his teammate runs onto the ball, therefore the ref plays advantage. Said teammate has a shot at goal which the keeper catches. So the ball remains in play.

Goalkeeper kicks it out, player A controls it and then scores.

So - if you’ve followed it - a player who should have been sent off ends up scoring a goal and (presumably) being sent off after as the ball is now dead.

Is that the correct ruling?
 
I’d agree the goal stands. Bit of a bastard if it happens against at you.

However, could/should the referee not pull it back for the foul/booking when the keeper saves it, ie the advantage fails to materialise? There’s arguments both ways in all honesty.
 
I’d agree the goal stands. Bit of a bastard if it happens against at you.

However, could/should the referee not pull it back for the foul/booking when the keeper saves it, ie the advantage fails to materialise? There’s arguments both ways in all honesty.
You could be right. I assumed it could only be stopped by the ref when the ball went dead, but maybe not.
 
Yep, the if its a second yellow after advantage it would only be issued at the stoppage in play and if that is following the goal he has scored then so be it.
 
Law 12 part 3 apparently:

Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul play, violent conduct or a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear opportunity to score a goal. The referee must send off the player when the ball is next out of play, but if the player plays the ball or challenges/interferes with an opponent, the referee will stop play, send off the player and restart with an indirect free kick, unless the player committed a more serious offence.
 
Would be a goal that then would stop play allowing the Ref to deal with the offence he played advantage on
 
I’d agree the goal stands. Bit of a bastard if it happens against at you.

However, could/should the referee not pull it back for the foul/booking when the keeper saves it, ie the advantage fails to materialise? There’s arguments both ways in all honesty.
Guessing it would be down to the time frame between the challenge and shot. If its immediate then yeah, if its after the second player burst from the halfway line then prob not.
 
May as well ask the same question in this thread as it's sort of relevant.

The penalty tonight for Man Utd was retaken because the keeper left his line. I'm fairly certain he also left his line early on the retake which Fernandes scored.

Likewise encroachment. If the other team put their foot in ahead of the kick and it misses it gets pulled back. If you were quick enough you could assess the penalty going in and put your foot in deliberately.

Does it only apply if the keeper saves it/the players misses?
 
I’d agree the goal stands. Bit of a bastard if it happens against at you.

However, could/should the referee not pull it back for the foul/booking when the keeper saves it, ie the advantage fails to materialise? There’s arguments both ways in all honesty.

What if the keeper saves it because the player getting the advantage fluff’s the advantage eg over runs it/ fall’s over his own feet.
Goal should stand then the second yellow.
 
Yes. Assuming
May as well ask the same question in this thread as it's sort of relevant.

The penalty tonight for Man Utd was retaken because the keeper left his line. I'm fairly certain he also left his line early on the retake which Fernandes scored.

Likewise encroachment. If the other team put their foot in ahead of the kick and it misses it gets pulled back. If you were quick enough you could assess the penalty going in and put your foot in deliberately.

Does it only apply if the keeper saves it/the players misses?

Yes.

Attacking team won't be penalised for the defending team encroaching.
 
May as well ask the same question in this thread as it's sort of relevant.

The penalty tonight for Man Utd was retaken because the keeper left his line. I'm fairly certain he also left his line early on the retake which Fernandes scored.

Likewise encroachment. If the other team put their foot in ahead of the kick and it misses it gets pulled back. If you were quick enough you could assess the penalty going in and put your foot in deliberately.

Does it only apply if the keeper saves it/the players misses?
That one I do know.

No advantage is to be gained from encroachment.
 
Law 12 part 3 apparently:

Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul play, violent conduct or a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear opportunity to score a goal. The referee must send off the player when the ball is next out of play, but if the player plays the ball or challenges/interferes with an opponent, the referee will stop play, send off the player and restart with an indirect free kick, unless the player committed a more serious offence.
Clears it up nicely. Well played.
 
Ek8v2F5XYAMHcSa.jpg:large
 
To answer OP, advantage can be played up to the point where the 'offending' player controls the ball from the kick out. Play should be stopped at that point.

So in short, no goal and sending off for player A.
 
I believe if the fouls is bad enough to merit a dismissal the referee should not play advantage in any circumstances.
 
Law 12 part 3 apparently:

Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul play, violent conduct or a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear opportunity to score a goal. The referee must send off the player when the ball is next out of play, but if the player plays the ball or challenges/interferes with an opponent, the referee will stop play, send off the player and restart with an indirect free kick, unless the player committed a more serious offence.
This makes sense
 
Clears it up nicely. Well played.
Not really. That states 'unless there is a goal scoring opportunity'. Seeing as the ball ends up with the keeper because of a shot, advantage was the correct decision and play can now only be stopped when the ball is next out of play.

Goal stands, player is sent off.
 
Not really. That states 'unless there is a goal scoring opportunity'. Seeing as the ball ends up with the keeper because of a shot, advantage was the correct decision and play can now only be stopped when the ball is next out of play.

Goal stands, player is sent off.
Advantage played because his teammate had a ‘clear goal scoring opportunity’. That’s how I interpret the scenario in the OP. Therefore,

“The referee must send off the player when the ball is next out of play, but if the player plays the ball or challenges/interferes with an opponent, the referee will stop play, send off the player and restart with an indirect free kick, unless the player committed a more serious offence.”
 
Last edited:
Not really. That states 'unless there is a goal scoring opportunity'. Seeing as the ball ends up with the keeper because of a shot, advantage was the correct decision and play can now only be stopped when the ball is next out of play.

Goal stands, player is sent off.

Wrong.

Advantage was correct but, Law states that if the 'offending' player plays the ball or challenges/interferes with an opponent play must be stopped. So in this case, its stopped when he receives it from the GK.
 
Had this come up in discussion and we never got to an answer. What’s the views / ruling on here?

I’ll stress that I don’t know the answer.
I think the goal stands and it’s just an unfortunate quirk of the game.

Player A (red team) is booked earlier in the game.

Later on in the game, Player B (blue team) is running through and player A wipes him out for a clear second yellow.

However his teammate runs onto the ball, therefore the ref plays advantage. Said teammate has a shot at goal which the keeper catches. So the ball remains in play.

Goalkeeper kicks it out, player A controls it and then scores.

So - if you’ve followed it - a player who should have been sent off ends up scoring a goal and (presumably) being sent off after as the ball is now dead.

Is that the correct ruling?

Edit.
 
I'm sure, if the booking is a second one and therefore a red card, advantage shouldn't be played.

That was my thinking. I think a red card offence stops the game.

Query would be about it being a yellow incident itself though.

Is the ref meant to manage the situation differently and realise directly that the player has already been booked.
 
I've thought about this before, personally I think that in this scenario the whistle should be blown as soon as the advantage changes to the other team, eg. as soon as player A or one of his teammates takes control of the ball.

Works great in ice hockey and would be a good add to football.
 
Disagree.:) We know from the scenario in the OP that his teammate broke through and had a shot at goal. Was that a ‘clear goal scoring opportunity’? That’s how I’m interpreting it.;)
Edit, I was right up to the point I bothered reading but it clearly says that as soon as our man touches the ball, he is ofski.

No goal, red card.

As you were.
 
That was my thinking. I think a red card offence stops the game.

Query would be about it being a yellow incident itself though.

Is the ref meant to manage the situation differently and realise directly that the player has already been booked.
You'd like to think so as the two AR's and 4th official take note of bookings too.


I've thought about this before, personally I think that in this scenario the whistle should be blown as soon as the advantage changes to the other team, eg. as soon as player A or one of his teammates takes control of the ball.

Works great in ice hockey and would be a good add to football.
Already applies mate, see above. Certainly for player A anyway.
 
I’d agree the goal stands. Bit of a bastard if it happens against at you.

However, could/should the referee not pull it back for the foul/booking when the keeper saves it, ie the advantage fails to materialise? There’s arguments both ways in all honesty.
No because the advantage has been played.

The guidance referees are given is to show a red card for a red card decision and not to play advantage.

Because then you can’t pull it back.
 
Advantage can be played but if that leads to nothing the referee can stop the game, award a free-kick and a second yellow card for the offender which is then a red or give a straight red.
 
Had this come up in discussion and we never got to an answer. What’s the views / ruling on here?

I’ll stress that I don’t know the answer.
I think the goal stands and it’s just an unfortunate quirk of the game.

Player A (red team) is booked earlier in the game.

Later on in the game, Player B (blue team) is running through and player A wipes him out for a clear second yellow.

However his teammate runs onto the ball, therefore the ref plays advantage. Said teammate has a shot at goal which the keeper catches. So the ball remains in play.

Goalkeeper kicks it out, player A controls it and then scores.

So - if you’ve followed it - a player who should have been sent off ends up scoring a goal and (presumably) being sent off after as the ball is now dead.

Is that the correct ruling?
Yes. The player is still involved in the game until the referee takes action.
 
No because the advantage has been played.

The guidance referees are given is to show a red card for a red card decision and not to play advantage.

Because then you can’t pull it back.
Rules extract posted further up the thread. Referee entitled to play advantage for the teammate running through on goal but then has to stop play when the ball comes back to Player A and before he scores the goal.
 
Rules extract posted further up the thread. Referee entitled to play advantage for Rhe teammate running through in goal but then has to stop play when the ball comes back to Player A and before he scores the goal.
Apologies didn’t read the OP correctly. I’ve got it now.

I really shouldn’t have answered as it took me a few times to read the OP and I still didn’t fully understand the situation he was hypothesising.

Got a mate that’s a ref and he says the guidance given is to issue the red straight away as soon as a red card situation occurs, even a second yellow.

Which would help avoid the chaos that would ensue if the team didn’t score from the advantage.
 
No because the advantage has been played.

The guidance referees are given is to show a red card for a red card decision and not to play advantage.

Because then you can’t pull it back.

What should happen with advantage is when the referee signals it by raising his arm or arms there is no going back, that is his decision in the same way that a whistle would indicate play is to stop. Doesn’t really work that way though.
 
It a good question by the way OP.

The ignorance of the Laws of the Game, in general terms (not this specifically), never fails to amaze me.

With the amount of investment we all have in football, whether financially or with time you’d think supporters would familiarise themselves with the Laws.
 
This is a weird one, because it happens to be similar to the IFAB question of the day.

My understanding from the post below, is the goal would stand and he would be sent off after the goal. Because the advantage has been played so the referee just can’t blow his whistle and stop the game to issue a yellow card. He has to wait till the ball is out of play.

That happens with any advantage. You see it all the time, the referee runs back to find the player and book him for an earlier foul. But has to wait till the ball is out of play, in your instance, a goal.
4020-E557-6-ABA-4-AD7-902-C-4-AAF7-B9-B623-F.png
Nah it’s been answered with the rules earlier in the thread.

Advantage allowed to continue. Send the lad off at the sooner of:

- next break in play
- next time he actively interferes in play.
 
Back
Top