Recent content by shorty

If the player had gone down, I definitely would have gone with the send-off straight away. The reason it didn't come was honestly thought that they were both moving slowly, and if the foul hadn't occurred, the defender probably would have recovered and covered the goal. I only played on because...

It was a one-sentence answer, based on how long play had continued rather than the substance of what had been described. Compare it to your answer, and the one before that from es1. However, this seems to me to be more a defence of who was answering rather than what was said. If that's what...

So you believe that was enough for an obvious goalscoring opportunity, in spite of the distance to the ball when the offence occurred?

Thanks. Based on the reaction of players on both teams, the crowd noise, and my assistants, the foul decision was correct, so your experience lets you down here. So back to the topic at hand, was a caution correct, or should a send-off have been applied, given that a foul was called?

FWIW I went with penalty kick and caution for unsporting behaviour for committing a foul for the purpose of breaking up a promising attack. There were no complaints about the penalty kick, but there was some questioning as to why a caution was required. I let it go for a second or two to see if...

Well, if it doesn't clearly state that the FAQ has precedence, and is available in combined form on the website, with the inconsistent wording still in the body of the text, you don't think that's going to be very confusing for a large number of referees?

Even at the point where the defender was clearly holding the attacker, preventing the attacker from getting to the ball, you don't think there was a foul there?

I'll put it down to cultural differences.

Does anyone else want to have a stab with a sensible answer?

And it says that where on the IFAB website / in the FAQ?

I sometimes referee youth football when there is a lack of coverage in my area. Today I had an under 16s game, played at a social rather than competitive level. Ball is knocked over the top, and an attacker and defender are chasing after it, towards the goal. Just before they enter the penalty...

This feels different, because it's the opponents' restart. In this case it's simply their own restart they've delayed. I see your point of view, but I don't think I'd be cautioning for this.

No, never. But generally when a collection of documents are released, they are all given equal consideration.

We are talking about the same thing, right? Ball, is out of play, and a player walks up behind an opponent and springs an index finger against a thumb and flicks them in the ear? You're surely having a laugh if you don't think that's violent conduct. If I was playing and someone did that to me...

Of course I'm reading the responses. I simply don't agree that this is an "offence". It's simply a procedure infringement, and like any other wrongly taken restart, the caution for delaying the restart should only be applied if it obviously delays the restart. I don't buy that this should be...