A&H

Juventus v Sampdoria

The Referee Store
I would say so. Just because the goal is disallowed, doesn't mean the subsequent offense hasn't happened.
 
I have wondered this also. The caution is for removing top at celebration of a goal. But if there is no goal, is there an offence???
 
Ciley Myrus said:
I have wondered this also. The caution is for removing top at celebration of a goal. But if there is no goal, is there an offence???
Click to expand...
Something for IFAB to clarify, the player has taken it off in celebration of a goal, nothing to say it has to be a goal that stands!
 
There was a case of this happening elsewhere sometime in the last 3-4 months, and I seem to recall that the caution was rescinded... a caution for dissent (at the same time) however was not.
 
1:20 - JUV handball (VAR)
2:20 - SAM handball
3:02 - SAM disallowed goal (VAR)

What do we think of the handballs then? Both extremely harsh for me.
 
Why is this any different to any other offense? If a goal is scored and you then book a defender for dissent, he doesn't lose the caution just because the goal is disallowed.
 
JH said:
1:20 - JUV handball (VAR)
2:20 - SAM handball
3:02 - SAM disallowed goal (VAR)

What do we think of the handballs then? Both extremely harsh for me.
Click to expand...
Either all top flight referees are morons, or they're all working to the same mandate
I'd bet a lot of money on the latter. I therefore fear that this will be reflected in Law soon. The VAR reviewed HB was a very wrong (but we're seeing this all the time, more pens,,, more goals,,, everyone's happy,,,, except that it's not in the interests of fair play). The second HB was harsh, the ball had travelled a long way however, so not so much of a protest :meh:
 
alexgr said:
Why is this any different to any other offense? If a goal is scored and you then book a defender for dissent, he doesn't lose the caution just because the goal is disallowed.
Click to expand...


because the actionable offense is "celebration of a goal".
Dissent and say, v/c is the same at any point in the game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JH
one said:
In principle the yellow should stand even if the goal is cancelled at a later time because the player knowingly and deliberately acted against what LOTG requires him to do so..

View attachment 2835
Click to expand...


for me that also must mean as per the last sentence, if the goal is cancelled, then, no goal existed, so you cannot caution someone for removing jersey at celebration of a goal.
don't know if sending in a caution for this offence and the full time score was 0-0 would make perfect sense.
 
Opens a whole can of worms. If a player is sent off for serious foul play and VAR bring play back to prior to the incident, the red card stands but is it reported as SFP or as VC? makes no different to the game but minimum suspension is generally different.

IMO, any sanction for a cynical/professional/deliberate foul should stand as USB, even if its SPA (and DOGSO also to downgrade to USB).
 
AlexF said:
SFP.

There was still play, even though it ends up counting for nothing in the end.
Click to expand...
So by that definition, the goal in OP is till a goal but counts for nothing. It really is a interpretation thing. No real definition is given. Like what constitutes an own goal.
 
one said:
So by that definition, the goal in OP is till a goal but counts for nothing. It really is a interpretation thing. No real definition is given. Like what constitutes an own goal.
Click to expand...
There's no such thing in the Law as an 'own goal'. Who scored the goal is irrelevant to the Law. It's relevant to the statisticians among us. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: JH
AlexF said:
There's no such thing in the Law as an 'own goal'. Who scored the goal is irrelevant to the Law. It's relevant to the statisticians among us. :)
Click to expand...
That's beside the point I was making though. :)

Who scores the goal is important to competitions. Referees follow competition rules also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top