Search results

I agree, psychologically I think it's almost inevitable when you have a 'safety net' that you would go for the softer option and wait to be told to be more severe.

Ok, so definitely a caution in law, but you could arguably manage it depending on the game.

Completely agree. Even on replays it's a debatable one, so nowhere near obviously wrong for me. I'm a Liverpool fan and I'd have been very surprised had it not been given after the offside was checked.

I completely agree with your view about the scourge on the game and the fact that too often it is rewarded. To an extent, that in part is the point of course - how do you objectively decide what is enough contact to go down 'injured', or enough contact (in a contact sport) to be a foul. Given...

But if there's any plausible deniability (which there will inevitably be, given the nature of the sport), that just leads to appeals and yet more coverage about refereeing decisions.

Except if you are allowing treatment you must stop the game for that to happen. Otherwise it ends up like that other sport with medical people all over the pitch 😄

I could've saved myself some typing! 😄

As I read it, there is no offside as the only teammate of the attacker playing the ball was the goalkeeper, and you've said she was onside at that moment. You are maybe confusing the situation with one where a player is in an offside position when the ball is played, but a defender tries to...

I think there is also the issue that mistakes in the women's game (by both players and officials) are highlighted far more widely than in lower league mens - sometimes for dubious reasons. This was a poor error (I was watching, and it was clear everyone was immediately surprised by the decision...

I suspect it was something to do with not being in a normal state of mind at the time...

Well, the tone would have been different but the unprofessionalism would be the same. In the actual video, these things compound the offence for me, rather than change it. The reality is that of course none of us, being human, are completely impartial - for example we have bias and prejudice...

Couldn't agree more. As has been said earlier, the issue is that the role fundamentally requires impartiality. This shows prejudice (whether deserved or not) and is expressed in the most extreme way. This in turn is hugely damaging not just for Coote but for the PGMOL and FA more widely...

Probably works even better if accompanied by the hand gestures

Ouch. FA Social Media Policy...??

I think this is an excellent observation - and a situation I recognise. Those of us with a friendlier disposition want to have games where everyone plays by the rules (;)) and realises that you're just trying to do your best in difficult circumstances. I used to try and explain everything on...

He scoops the ball up as it is running along the touchline. More a product of him being outside the technical area than anything else...

We posted simulataneously I think. Just to clarify, I agree if this was a clear foul throw, just not a marginal one.

Looks to me like his heel is touching the line. In any case, very trivial and wouldn't see it as a C&O error.

That's all true, but what it does is mean that any further action comes as no surprise to anyone and you can almost hold your hands up and say you had no choice. Just another tool in the arsenal.

Sounds to me that the player was almost certainly onside. Chances are they don't understand the laws, or were just aggrieved at conceding and needed to blame someone else in the moment!