Search results

"Former team-mate" only to indicate that the encroaching player might have a better idea than most which way the ball was going and thus which way the GK should dive, especially after seeing the kicker's run up. Defender encroaches and is gesticualting to the GK who goes the right way and saves...

This cropped up in a discussion about why statistics include what happens during extra time but not penalty shoot-outs. The laws of the game say the duration of a match is two equal halves of 45 minutes (law 7). You have to go to law 10 (determining the outcome of a match) for the following...

What if the encroaching defender is a former team-mate of the kicker and points to tell the GK which way to dive, and the GK saves it? Without encroachment there's not much to be done about that. But if encroaching, could it count as clearly impacting on the kicker?

PL doing its own thing again?

I like that, but think how many one on ones are OGSOs but don't result in a goal, especially at lower levels. A sending off, especially early in a game, for an accidental handball "when trying to play fairly" really does not shout "spirit of the game". Frankly, if a defender is running when...

But then it wouldn't be "the result of a player attempting to play fairly". If the "unnaturally bigger" wording involves "an element of calculation" then that's not "non deliberate" and not playing fairly. I'm not trying to be funny, but that explanation "the result of a player attempting to...

Not exactly the same. The careless trip is the result of a deliberate calculation, the handball is purely the result of a non-deliberate action.

And the answer to the question "If a player attempting to play fairly, commits a non-deliberate handball offence outside the penalty area and denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, what does the referee do next?" is The same as if he'd punched someone.

C unless I'm missing something. Mind you, I'm still processing why a non-deliberate handball which is "the result of a player attempting to play fairly" (from the IFAB explanation) should be a YC (which could be a second YC).

Photo shows Kane kicking Dumfries's foot. Dumfries got none of the ball because Kane shot over. If it had been on target, it would have been a great block. Especially if an England defender had done it.

Gvardiol should just have ignored the ball and pushed Garnacho in the back or wrestled him to the ground. Mr Madley could have been anonymous with that.

Well, colour me surprised if the referees support the referee's decision. And the people on the receiving end of decisions are less inclined to go with the opinion of the referees. And the electricity regs change almost as often as the laws of football. But you really don't have to be...

Gosh. You can't take "careless" as meaning that "careful" is the opposite. How can you carefully head-butt an opponent?

But the hand moves to avoid the ball (or at least to get the arm closer to the body) so am attempt to avoid the ball looks like "hand to ball" and so looks deliberate. If a substitute comes on and uses a hand to deny a goal I'm calling that deliberate. It's pointless talking about arms in an...

So if a player has their arm out in a position justifiable by their movement, then the ball is hit toward the arm, and they try to move the arm to avoid it but it then hits the arm, is that deliberate or non-deliberate? Because that distinction didn't previously matter. And how can a substitute...

"Yes, we know he's a Luton fan and we condemn you for pointing that out" I always cite Halsey's story that as a QPR fan he'd reffed them against Millwall and had to give Millwall two penalties, and asked never to ref QPR again. It is remarkable how few of the top refs support the top teams!

"In situations where: a player moving from, or standing in, an offside position is in the way of an opponent and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball this is an offside offence if it impacts on the ability of the opponent to play or challenge for the ball" You can't...

GK with even one finger on the ball has possession and can't be challenged for the ball. It might be an accidental challenge but still satisfies the wording.

Then the diagram should have the caveat. And is it only an offence if the OP is standing that close to the GK?