according to reports game was held up for 5 minutes whilst decision debated. There are photo's of ref with 2 of the other officials. i can't understand how any official can get this wrong let alone 4 of them who are all miked up with comms kit.
http://news.sky.com/story/england-u19-women-qualify-after-18-second-replay-10364217 the last secondsHappend in a womens international a couple of years back: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....omen-u19-replay-norway-referee-penalty-howler
Better to use the new chart from the new Laws (which, while similar, is a bit more expansive:View attachment 1210
For all the new refs on here
Better to use the new chart from the new Laws (which, while similar, is a bit more expansive:
View attachment 1211
Though, it does remove the Offence by defending player and attacking player... Alas, can't have everything!
Backwards vs forwards (where forwards == towards goal).Question, When it says ball kicked backwards in the table above, I've seen a few on you tube where the taker has [...]
I suppose you can read that two ways!!! Kicked backwards towards another striker or literally kicked 'facing' backwards??
Is this illegal or just not done through sportsmanship!!!
Agree that one man can make a mistake under the pressure you describe but what about the other three officials? Sorry but I don't feel as though they need cutting any slack because if all of them are persuaded that easily, they shouldn't be doing the job they're asked to do.This was quite a big mistake but can any of us say we have gone through our long or short ref careers without getting something in law wrong. Its easy to sit here but sometimes the blinkers go on and you are convinced you are right, so convinced you can convince the rest of the team. As well as having 50,000. geordies watching you . Lets cut the guys some slack, yes an error in law has been made but we all have bad days at work, its just we don,t have cameras on our backs the whole time.
Allegedly, one of the assistants was trying to tell him the correct course of action but Mr Stroud wasn't having any of it.........allegedly.
They've all been removed from this weekends appointments,so IF that is true, he will be pretty fed up!
ermmm not to state the obvious here matey, but the IDFK will be for the defending team as the offence was by the attacking teamI notice that the law says that for a penalty kick kicked backwards, or a team-mate of the identified kicker taking the kick, or feinting to kick the ball once the kicker has completed the run-up, play will be restarted with an indirect free kick - but doesn't actually say which team takes the IDFK...
but doesn't actually say which team takes the IDFK...
No, there's no wording error. David Elleray explained this when talking about the ways they had reduced the number of words in the Laws. One was by removing the repeated reference to the opponents taking the free kick, on the basis that it is logically self-evident that when a player on one team commits an offence, it's the opponents who get to take the resulting free kick.I don't think there's any reason to panic!
Think he was pointing out a wording error!
No, there's no wording error. David Elleray explained this when talking about the ways they had reduced the number of words in the Laws. One was by removing the repeated reference to the opponents taking the free kick, on the basis that it is logically self-evident that when a player on one team commits an offence, it's the opponents who get to take the resulting free kick.
I had a feeling that this was mentioned somewhere in the Laws document but on a quick scan through just now, I can't find it. If anyone else can, please let us know.