Search results

Yes the attitude of the players was very different but that case serves to highlight how the authorities assess deliberate contact on a match official by a participant. @RustyRef the FA could charge him, the regulations state 'The Association may issue a Charge against a Player in relation to...

In the Mitrovic case the commission stated "'excessive force' in the context of a match official falls to be considered from the admitted starting point, namely that it is unacceptable to use any force or put hands on a Match Official." Furthermore the commission agreed with the FA's application...

It is Nike for next season though I don't know when it runs to. I assume it is the Referee III range as what else would it be?

There is no change to sending off offences, although it could result in fewer second cautions. The DOGSO change means a player will no longer be cautioned following a goal scored after advantage. i.e. it will now be DOGSO offence, no advantage, free kick awarded = sending off DOGSO deliberate...

Law 4: How practically are referees supposed to know if an 'accessory' is dangerous if a player has covered it? Are we expected to ask all players to show us their 'accessories' before they cover them? Why no restrictions on the colour of coverings when we have restrictions on the colour of...

Each to their own. Trainee referees might be encouraged to avoid social media, because it can cause headaches for County FAs if misused. But there is no blanket ban. I've followed Eric Edge's YouTube channel 'Behind the Whistle' since it started. It hasn't done him any harm yet as a L5 and it is...

In the last 12 months I have officiated on 55 matches, 41 of those being in the middle.

In Law I'd say this can be justified as a foul for holding as the defender is held down by the attacker. I doubt it would meet PGMO's punishment threshold for clear material impact or extreme non-footballing action.

It is not necessary for the ball to have reached him in Law, also in the PGMO guidance they want to punish where there is 'clear material impact' OR an 'extreme non-footballing action' which is the category this incident falls into.

KMI panel unanimously voted that the holding offence should have been penalised and the VAR should have intervened. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cwy659x1rzzo

This was a Women's National League match. Northampton's X feed for that match says Henry was cautioned in the 28th minute and in the 67th minute 'loses his head with the referee' and was sent off alongside another member of his coaching staff being cautioned. At this level of the women's game...

Could be a browser extension messing with things?

Law 5.3 The referee: ... takes action against team officials who fail to act in a responsible manner and warns or shows a yellow card for a caution or a red card for a sending-off from the field of play and its immediate surrounds, including the technical area; if the offender cannot be...

Stop play when there is a potential serious injury. Law 5 says to allow play to continue until the ball is out of play 'if a player is only slightly injured'. So you need to be confident it is not a serious injury in order to continue.

@RustyRef if the contrarian pundits are going to complain either way, I'd rather at least have it reffed according to the LOTG than ignoring offences like this.

@RefereeX I thought it would be worth doing a bit of analysis based on the PGMO guidance. 'Acts of holding that have clear material impact and/or are extreme non-footballing actions will be penalised.' Material impact is defined as 'Opportunity for opponent to challenge for or play the ball'...

Law only requires player movement to be impeded for there to be a holding offence, which is clear and obvious in this case. When I refer to 'questionable officiating for holding offences' it is mainly referring to PGMO's overall approach to it.

Even without a law change the professional competitions could issue a warning that further similar incidents will have the circumstances assessed, and clubs charged with bringing the competition into disrepute where it is considered probable that the injury was non-existent or exaggerated.

First highlight 00:51 - no penalty for a clear foul, another example of the questionable officiating for holding offences and VAR Paul Tierney did not proceed to a review for this 1:42 - goal correctly disallowed for offside after VAR review but should have been flagged on field 2:00 - penalty...

I had a similar situation a couple of weeks ago, in terms of the timing of events, though it was not an OGSO / open goal. Attacker fouled outside the box, ball immediately went to a team mate close by who struck it first time wildly high and wide. I had not signalled advantage and decided to...