Search results

Well, it's not a new thing. The mighty Lev Yashin almost always wore black. Look at this from the 1966 World Cup - and no, there are not 4 officials.

Yes the referee must consider the movement of the arms but it is not necessary for the arm to move to the ball for a handball to be given; nor does the player need to know where the ball is going. Take the example of the player on the goal line with his arms stretched wide. If a close range shot...

The SFA really say this should be a retake? I'm amazed! It's irrelevant now as the law has been changed to address exactly this situation but that seems to be making things up at a level previously seen only in the US:). How do they feel about players running up to take free kicks and then...

From the FA website: Both Jonjo Shelvey and Paul Dummett have had their suspensions withdrawn with immediate effect after their wrongful dismissal claims were successful following an Independent Regulatory Commission hearing. The Newcastle United pair were dismissed for violent conduct and...

This illustrates my point perfectly - there used to be a grey area around the ball not coming in to play from a throw-in - was it a retake or should the throw be awarded to the other team. This has now been clarified (albeit indirectly): it is a retake.

I have watched the second penalty about six times and I am still not sure whether it was a foul or not and this is one of the problems with video technology for football - there is often no 100% correct decision. In the latest law re-write "in the opinion of the referee" has been completely...

First one, Lansbury fouls Shelvey, Shelvey then kicks out at Lansbury, Lansbury makes an absolute meal of it but still VC from Shelvey. I think the correct decision would have been red for Shelvey, yellow for Lansbury and a DFK to Newcastle. Second one, I'm not sure if Lansbury once again makes...

Interesting clarification by default that a throw-in that doesn't enter the field should be re-taken. I expect that most on here were already doing this but it seems to me that the law states: Procedure At the moment of delivering the ball, the thrower must: • face the field of play It would...

The initial point was about ARs. How, as an AR,do you change the direction that you run so that the sun isn't in your eyes?

It's difficult to see but I think that the attacker kicks out at the keeper when they are both on the ground so should definitely have been shown a red. Keeper and defender 2 could also quite justifiably seen red.

He seemed to indicate that Shawcross played the ball. Rather than getting confused, I just think he was a long way behind a fast break, ended up in a poor position and simply didn't see what had happened correctly.

I don't really see how it can be USB - as you have not dismissed you are saying that the language used is not offensive, insulting or abusive so why would you give any punishment at all? Why is it unsporting?

I would dismiss for "queer" and I think most of the players that I referee would have no real arguments with that so I am surprised that you think that society isn't there yet although I would accept that the region where I referee is probably one of the more liberal and "gay-friendly" in the...

I have always considered that, as long as it is within the legal limits, the ball pressure is up to the home team - similar to something like the width of the pitch. And yes, I do have a pressure gauge.

I think this is all a bit harsh on the ref - I suspect time was up before or shortly after the corner was taken; he allowed the corner, the shot from the clearance and when that shot was blocked he blew his whistle - no real way that he could have know that the clearance would fall to a player...

What would you be cautioning for? Surely this is OFFINABUS or nothing.

...and the ref seems to quite clearly give an IDFK...

No, these are two different things, there is no contradiction. The definition that you have pasted is for Serious Foul Play which as you rightly say states Serious foul play A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as...

As Monotone said, the definition of excessive force in the LOTG is "when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off" If the safety of the opponent was not endangered then it was not excessive force according to the LOTG. Not saying...

A player is allowed to touch the ball a second time. He is just not allowed to score a goal without another player touching it.