Open Goal and The Bird

[micky2001]

Bit of a hypothetical question here.

Say in a match, an attacker gets beats the offside trap perfectly from a long ball and is one on one with the keeper. Attacker takes the ball round keeper and makes his way into the penalty area with no one near him and open goal. He turns to the keeper and gives him a two fingered salute before then putting the ball in the net.

OFFINABUS (gestures) or Goal? What would you do?

 

[Beezer]

Mickey ....if the player was a pain in the rear who had given me grief at any point in the game I would stop him scoring and give him a yellow if he was a half decent lad I would let him score then book him you could sell it either way I suppose even a red if he was a proper bad egg

 

[Monotone Whistle]

Someone needs to make sure this question appears in the LOTG exam for promo candidates. Genius.

 

[Russell Jones]

Clear OFFINABUS for me .. and try to whistle REALLY quickly before he kicks the ball

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

1) It's clear OFFINABUS
2)According to the LOTG, a goal can only be scored if the team hasn't committed an offence. So allowing the goal but booking the misconduct is against the LOTG. Given the match-changing significance, it would actually be a serious error in law.

No goal. Even if he kicks it before you have the chance to blow, goes back to the offence.

 

[HertsFinest]

Red all day. No goal.

 

[Declan]

It is a clear red card and goal not given in the eyes of the good book. BUT how would this affect your match control? I can imagine all hell breaking loose if I was to do this on a parks pitch!

 

[haywain]

Declan, just don't bother turning up.....it'll solve a lot of problems, not only for you but for next week's ref who has integrity

Nothing personal, honest, just that 'fear of losing match control leading to refereeing inadequacy' is one of my pet hates

 

[HarryD]

Be careful Haywain. A comment like that could see the mods become unhappy and you could receive a red card for offinabus yourself

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

It is a clear red card and goal not given in the eyes of the good book. BUT how would this affect your match control? I can imagine all hell breaking loose if I was to do this on a parks pitch!

Who cares how it would affect your match control? Are you there to referee the LOTG or do you want to take up knitting??????
Don't have the guts to make a tough call? Hang up your whistle!!
If you award the goal, you absolutely CANNOT card the attacker. So if the attacker has done this and you do absolutely nothing about it, how is THAT going to affect your match control?
ESPECIALLY when the keeper decides to take matters into his own hands later in the match!!
These 'match control' 'arguments' are invariably self-defeating; they seem to operate under the mistaken premise that doing the wrong thing wouldn't upset the other team.

 

[SM]

Ok @CapnBloodbeard, I sure you can make your point without all the overly dramatic punctuation and CAPITAL LETTER EMPHASISING.

While Declan would appear to have brought this on himself a little, let's keep it civil please.

Thanks.

This reminds me of Robin Friday, although he did it after he had scored and was running back to the half way.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

FAIR POINT SM!!! ;-)

Should probably refrain from responding to anything that starts with 'for match control' before I've had my morning coffee

No offence intended to Declan. I'm sure he was just raising the question, after all Apologies all, it was a bit aggressive.

 

[HertsFinest]

One of these days I'm going to get round to writing a paradoxical "match control" version of the LOTG. Just to included segments here when the need oh so often arrives.

I can see why declan has said what he has said but come on... The LOTG is our bible.

And plot twist... If the goalie happened to be French that he had two fingered? Would you then red for OFFINABUS declan? Just out of interest.

 

[Declan]

The reason I raise my point was because invariably there is always 'banter' between players. I dismissed a player several seasons ago for calling a opposing player a w*&#*r and the player it was called was asking me not to dismiss. It turned out they worked together and were taking the mickey out of each other all game.

And to Capn Bloodbeard- given how passionate you are about the rules I fully expect that any use of foul language, even if it's industrial, you are dismissing the player- AFTER ALL USE OF ANY FOUL LANGUAGE IS AGAINST THE LONG!

 

[McTavish]

AFTER ALL USE OF ANY FOUL LANGUAGE IS AGAINST THE LOTG!

No it's not! The laws were changed specifically to take out "foul and abusive" language and replace it with "offensive, insulting or abusive" language.

 

[Declan]

No it's not! The laws were changed specifically to take out "foul and abusive" language and replace it with "offensive, insulting or abusive" language.

All foul language can be deemed to be 'offensive'. The wording was changed to include ALL types of racist, homophobic and sexist language.

 

[jack.prescott]

I disagree with you there declan, OFFINABUS was a topic we discussed at length at our last RA meeting. We were of the belief that the law change was due to society moving on. In places, the use of foul language is much more acceptable than it was 20/30 years ago. Football cannot keep living in the past, so on a subject such as this laws should reflect the attitudes of society.

 

[micky2001]

Bit of rationale behind this question. I seen it happen in american football (rugby) and the player was penalised for "unsportsmanlike conduct" though I'm not sure what sanction that brings.

During a junior game a goalkeepers team was given a FK against them and the keeper was cautioned for dissent. When the ref turned his back, the keeper made the w****r motion with his hand. It was caught in camera but not at the time and therefore the keeper was retrospectively given a red for OFFINABUS.

Personally here, it's a red and IDFK.

 

[McTavish]

All foul language can be deemed to be 'offensive'. The wording was changed to include ALL types of racist, homophobic and sexist language.

It can be deemed offensive but it is not necessarily offensive which is what you said.

 

[Declan]

It can be deemed offensive but it is not necessarily offensive which is what you said.

Given there are 22+ players, spectators and in all likelihood members of the public using the facilities the chances of it being 'offensive to someone' is very high. In my local area there is a ' faith' league and referees are instructed to dismiss for ALL foul language. This may not be deemed offensive by some but the county FA support this stance so it does suggest that 'most or all' foul language is deemed offensive.