A&H

Nor Vs Che

zarathustra said:
Did it, or was he told, after the goal was scored that there was a review taking place?

What is the correct signal in the laws of the game for a referee to award a goal?
Click to expand...
No review can take place without the referee's permission. There is an automatic check after every goal, the referee knows that and doesn't need to be told.

Q answered in post #29
 
The Referee Store
one said:
No review can take place without the referee's permission. There is an automatic check after every goal, the referee knows that and doesn't need to be told.

Q answered in post #29
Click to expand...

So, it is a fact that there is no official signal that a goal has been scored.

As the referee did not indicate that goal had not been scored, he made a decision.

Glad we sorted that out then.
 
zarathustra said:
So, it is a fact that there is no official signal that a goal has been scored.

As the referee did not indicate that goal had not been scored, he made a decision.

Glad we sorted that out then.
Click to expand...
So I know it is impossible that a very experienced and respected referee to make a mistake, but lets say hypothetical he did not commit to a decision and asked the VAR what happened, would you be able to tell if he did that when hasn't signalled for a goal or for a foul (indicate no goal)?
 
one said:
So I know it is impossible that a very experienced and respected referee to make a mistake, but lets say hypothetical he did not commit to a decision and asked the VAR what happened, would you be able to tell if he did that when hasn't signalled for a goal or for a foul (indicate no goal)?
Click to expand...

Not signalling for a foul is the referee making a decision that a foul has not been committed.

Not signalling that the goal does not stand, because of a foul or offside etc, and just getting on with the restart is the referee making his decision that goal is good.

Obviously without being able to listen to the conversation between the referee and VAR we will never know whether he was undecided and asked them what happened.

But you can't accuse him of that because you have not one shred of evidence, other than he didn't use an unofficial signal to indicate he was happy with the goal.
 
zarathustra said:
Not signalling for a foul is the referee making a decision that a foul has not been committed.

Not signalling that the goal does not stand, because of a foul or offside etc, and just getting on with the restart is the referee making his decision that goal is good.

Obviously without being able to listen to the conversation between the referee and VAR we will never know whether he was undecided and asked them what happened.

But you can't accuse him of that because you have not one shred of evidence, other than he didn't use an unofficial signal to indicate he was happy with the goal.
Click to expand...
You did not answer the question. Lets say 'hypothetically' he did not commit to a decision. Would you be able to tell?
 
one said:
You did not answer the question. Lets say 'hypothetically' he did not commit to a decision. Would you be able to tell?
Click to expand...
Hypothetically, what would be the goalkeeper's heart rate if a dragon entered the field and ate the ball?

Some hypothetical situations are impossible and in this case, it is impossible for the referee to not make a decision; he either continues play (no whistle and no foul) or stops play for the foul (whistle).
 
Last edited:
zarathustra said:
Of course not, as there is no official signal for a goal, or that a foul hasn't been committed.
Click to expand...
So if if he had not made a decision, you won't be able to tell. Yet you are adamant he did make a decision. And you are saying I am wrong because I say it looks like he has not made a decision.

I am going to leave it there. :)
 
one said:
So if if he had not made a decision, you won't be able to tell. Yet you are adamant he did make a decision. And you are saying I am wrong because I say it looks like he has not made a decision.

I am going to leave it there. :)
Click to expand...
How does it look like he hasn't made a decision?

How should he have indicated his decision when there are no official signals that enable him to do so?
 
socal lurker said:
So what does he normally do when a goal is scored? That would be the best indicator of whether he gave the goal at the time of the incident.
Click to expand...
Referees indicating a goal by the unofficial signal of pointing to the center circle/halfway line is a bit hit and miss.

Some do, some don't, and of those that do don't do it all the time.

I've seen plenty of referees in the professional game in England not even signal a throw in
 
zarathustra said:
Referees indicating a goal by the unofficial signal of pointing to the center circle/halfway line is a bit hit and miss.

Some do, some don't, and of those that do don't do it all the time.

I've seen plenty of referees in the professional game in England not even signal a throw in
Click to expand...

That's why I asked what he usually does.

(Not really relevant, but in the US the now-defunct Guide to Procedures instructed referees to point up field to signal a goal.)
 
zarathustra said:
How does it look like he hasn't made a decision?

How should he have indicated his decision when there are no official signals that enable him to do so?
Click to expand...
If you read post #29 in full (and not just the first paragraph) it also answers this question. In the case of the OP its about context and communication.
 
The referee clearly made his decision about the goal, and communicated it to everyone by not ruling the goal out and awarding the foul.
 
I think that Atkinson initially gave the goal based on the fact he didn't blow for the foul and he seemed to be the pointing to the centre circle when talking to the players, as shown on one of the replays.

I think it was a bit of an unusual situation in that no players or supporters really seemed to celebrate. It felt like everyone was expecting it to be disallowed and when it wasn't initially they were all waiting for VAR to come in which led to an unusual atmosphere for a bit. I think Atkinson probably realised pretty quickly that he'd missed something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top