• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

You are the Ref

SteveAWOL said:
2) His quick thinking has saved him. He has not denied a goal, so there is no red card offence. Award the goal, then show the defender a yellow card for his deliberate hand ball. Thanks to Nathan Booth.
Click to expand...

Disagree with this if you consider it two actions:
- 1. Handled the ball, ball stays in play;
- 2. Realises the position he's in, scoops the ball into the net

He has denied a goal but scored an own goal shortly after. Surely you have to recognise the first foul for what it is, not what transpired after (unless you're going to argue that the ref played advantage?)
 
Effectively the ref would be playing and advantage and then the goal would be scored so I agree with it.
 
THFC said:
Effectively the ref would be playing and advantage and then the goal would be scored so I agree with it.
Click to expand...

You can play the advantage allow the goal and still issue a red card for the original hand ball offence seeing as it clearly states he stops a goal being scored by his hand ball.
 
camspur said:
You can play the advantage allow the goal and still issue a red card for the original hand ball offence seeing as it clearly states he stops a goal being scored by his hand ball.
Click to expand...

I understand that the referee is not allowed to play advantage for a red card. Got a mention during World Cup, but their experts aren't infallible.

The whole thing is driven by the Laws of the Game, and Guidance to Referees ..... both of which are amended periodically.

Always worth a look in http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/laws/football-11-11/law-1---the-field-of-play

There's a scrollbar on the right that gives you the laws - 12 .. fouls & misconduct. At the bottom of that page is guidance for 2014/15 - I can't be arrsed to go further, but I learn that the TV expert was a bit over-simplistic.
 
Whiffler said:
I understand that the referee is not allowed to play advantage for a red card. Got a mention during World Cup, but their experts aren't infallible.

The whole thing is driven by the Laws of the Game, and Guidance to Referees ..... both of which are amended periodically.

Always worth a look in http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/laws/football-11-11/law-1---the-field-of-play

There's a scrollbar on the right that gives you the laws - 12 .. fouls & misconduct. At the bottom of that page is guidance for 2014/15 - I can't be arrsed to go further, but I learn that the TV expert was a bit over-simplistic.
Click to expand...

Just read the Interpretation of the Laws for Law 12, you are correct that you cannot allow the advantage and issue a red. Well thats what a few years away from refereeing does they go and change the laws :)
 
If you can't play advantage after a red card offense then the correct answer is penalty, red card, goal disallowed.
 
@guardian_sport: In this week's You are the Ref: A foam-evading wall, a flying striker and a cheeky throw-in http://gu.com/p/4x937/t

BwtVGprIQAANJ8H.jpg:large
 
1. As the wall did not encroach on the free kick there is no problem. Continue play.

2. Defender did not make contact so no card. Attacker simulated a foul, second yellow and a Red card.

3. He was summoned back onto the pitch and entered. If the ball then goes out of play for a throw to his side he can step back out of the field of play to take it. Let the game carry on.
 
Agree with sandman on 1 and 3 but a reckless challenge is still a foul even if the player didn't make contact. Excessive force. Not sure if it is a indirect free kick or a penalty. Depending on strength of challenge booking and off.

Question states that players dive was to "avoid contact" but contradicts this as it also says dive was theatric which implies it was to con the ref.

He was alright taking evasive action but the theatric side is simulation so yellow for him and off.
 
chicken_badge said:
Agree with sandman on 1 and 3 but a reckless challenge is still a foul even if the player didn't make contact. Excessive force. Not sure if it is a indirect free kick or a penalty. Depending on strength of challenge booking and off.

Question states that players dive was to "avoid contact" but contradicts this as it also says dive was theatric which implies it was to con the ref.

He was alright taking evasive action but the theatric side is simulation so yellow for him and off.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this, but if ref feels the guy took action to avoid the tackle it can be as pretty/ugly/gymnastic as he likes. A word from the ref might be in order to set the tone.

I think this came into play when Owen got the penalty against Argentina - no contact, but hurdled and went down sideways.
 
1. No action as the wall didn't encroach (unless moving sideways actually brought them closer, diagonal lines etc)

2. Reckless challenge = red card

3. No action, player joined field of play then left it to take throw in.
 
as has been said, 1 and 3, no offence was committed, play on

2, to my mind should be a straight red for the defender (you don't need contact for it to be a foul) and a penalty, no action against the attacker, as has been said he's avoiding getting creamed, he can jump and fall however he likes
 
1. As long as they didn't go towards the ball and over the line, then shuffling left and right is ok. The line is just a guide and the ref isn't gonna spray a line across the whole pitch!

2. Seeing as you can get red cards for not actually making contact, if the defender is studs up then its another yellow or a straight red. No action on the attacker, as 'evasive action' means it doesn't matter how you get out the way. So probably a penalty aswell?

3. Play on.
 
1. As long as they only move sideways, no problem

2. Penalty and either a second yellow, or a straight red, for the defender depening on the nature of the tackle. No action against the attacker.

3. Can't see a problem with it, but who knows.
 
Definitely red card for the defender. Well, if a slight brush on a players shirt, which sees that player throw himself spectacularly on the floor, results in a penalty being awarded to the diving player then I see no difference here. Red card & penalty.
 
Keith Hackett's verdict

1) The foam line is just there as a visual guide – the final call on whether the players also moved forward as well as sideways is yours. If they did not move forward before the ball was kicked, play on. If you believe they did, award a retake. The foam is a useful introduction and does reduce controversy – though I look forward to seeing what happens when there is snow on the ground. Thanks to John Henderson.

2) Send the defender off – a second yellow, then a red. He clearly attempted to trip the attacker with a reckless challenge. Restart the game with a penalty for the attempted trip: it doesn't matter that no contact was made. In this situation, you cannot also punish the attacker for simulation, as, had he not dived out of the way, he could have been seriously hurt. Tom McKenzie wins the shirt.

3) No. The player has rejoined the game with your permission – albeit briefly. So he is well within his rights to step back – he does not need your permission to leave the field in these circumstances – catch the ball, and take the throw. Just be sure the ball was fully out of play before he caught it. Thanks to Paolo Manini.

Danny-Welbeck-You-are-the-001.jpg
 
1. Depends if 4th officials are allowed to influence the referee like the linesman can. If so, the referee will consider what the 4th official says and stick with the decision, or award the throw the other way.

2. Thats a sending off. Very petty, but it is a threat of physical abuse to the referee.

3. Goal stands, its the defenders fault he's not paying attention. Plus maybe a booking for having a foreign object in his hands during play?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back