Even the ref spiced it up at the end.I’m surprised people were still watching by the end. That was dreadful
The handball looked questionable to me, and I’m not sure Gomez was doing much that hadn’t happened 30 times unpenalised.Even the ref spiced it up at the end.
Think I am happy with both pens and associated cautions for promising attacks.
Was the second yellow for the Iceland player correct by law?
This is obviously things I'll learn. I assumed a promising attack would be things such as running through towards goal etc. I wouldn't have thought a shot on goal would be classed as this (potentially because its classed as GSO)Once it is penalised, I would argue that it is nigh on impossible to say handling a shot that was definitely on target, and arguably going in, didn't prevent a promising attack.
Exactly this. Feels like a dodgy yellow because the initial decision was so borderline, but the two have to be taken as isolated decisions. Once you've decided it as a penalty, that existance of an offence is a fact - so the question then becomes "Does that offence need a further sanction?". In this case, the answer is a definite yes.Once it is penalised, I would argue that it is nigh on impossible to say handling a shot that was definitely on target, and arguably going in, didn't prevent a promising attack.
What's the situation with the first yellow card to the Iceland player? Referee played advantage so should this have still been a yellow card under the new laws?
Referee was awful.
Literally Local Sunday League level.
Hopefully won't see Euros
Intelligent question - and the answer is yes. Play wasn’t stopped so it’s appropriate and correct to caution. Had he stopped play and England taken a quick free kick before he could caution then it would be waived.
This. The tackle was still reckless IMHO (lunged in and completely upended Ward-Prowse).Huh? The language on quick free kick an playing advantage are the same.
In either case, if th caution is for SPAA it should not be given, but if it was for a reckless challenge it can still be given.
No he wasn't. He has to take the blame for the incorrectly disallowed goal, but aside from that I can't think of much he got wrong.
Haven't seen this specific incident. A third option is if it is a garden variety USB. I had a blatant and prolonged shirt pull last week. It was also SPA but it was not reckless. I played advantage and cautioned later for USB. We are still under 19-20 but I would have done the same for 20-21. My rationale, even if it was not SPA I would have cautioned it.Huh? The language on quick free kick an playing advantage are the same.
In either case, if th caution is for SPAA it should not be given, but if it was for a reckless challenge it can still be given.
Question on this - should we see this in one of our games, what's the best course of action? YC for unsporting conduct?View attachment 4524
Ward Prowse with a bit of gardening!
Haven't seen this specific incident. A third option is if it is a garden variety USB. I had a blatant and prolonged shirt pull last week. It was also SPA but it was not reckless. I played advantage and cautioned later for USB. We are still under 19-20 but I would have done the same for 20-21. My rationale, even if it was not SPA I would have cautioned it.
I think we had discussed this before for Muller's 90th minute caution in the UCL final.