A&H

Scousers V Foxes

Foul contact was made. That's a foul. Of course Mane goes over like a sack of bricks and tries to sell the call, but that doesn't change the fact.
 
The Referee Store
Looked for contact, found contact, went down like an extra on Platoon with tuck... 3 game ban in Scotland!

How? His foot is on the floor when it was tripped so couldn't look for anything, not giving a foul there would be just plain wrong, and cautioning for simulation would be way beyond wrong.
 
I suggest it doesn't. He could have been fouled and then got up and punched him in retaliation. A pen and a rc. Mane was fouled but also dived. Foul came first.
Row locks.....the scenario posted is dive and or penalty....keep up
 
Having seen it again, I decided he was impeded but he also dived. Pen and yc for Mane anyone?



If you were to give that then that would be the most ridiculous decision I would have ever seen!!

Simulation is punished by an IDFK and a caution. You CANNOT give a penalty and then caution for simulation as it is an idfk offence.

With regards to the actual pen, soft but he caught is foot. I wouldn’t complain if it was given, I wouldn’t complain if it wasn’t.
 
MD missed a card for a shirt pull but booked for the subsequent kicking the ball away in disappointment, one for both surely!
 
How? His foot is on the floor when it was tripped so couldn't look for anything, not giving a foul there would be just plain wrong, and cautioning for simulation would be way beyond wrong.
How about punishing the more serious offence. Not all contact is a foul. I don't think that the contact (if there indeed was any) impeded the player sufficiently (to do anything other than try to cheat from it). The game would be so much better without this nonsense, so a caution for simulation would've smelled right as the foul was was subjective with a capital S (but the dive was a joke)
 
Last edited:
If you were to give that then that would be the most ridiculous decision I would have ever seen!!

Simulation is punished by an IDFK and a caution. You CANNOT give a penalty and then caution for simulation as it is an idfk offence.

With regards to the actual pen, soft but he caught is foot. I wouldn’t complain if it was given, I wouldn’t complain if it wasn’t.
I've seen plenty more ridiculous decisions. Clattenberk in the MU v CPFC FA cup final in only yc Smalling for a start. The IDFK is separate to the caution for simulation in the same way a punch by Mane sees him get sent off but the penalty still given. Disappointing that the only objection on this forum to a pen and yc for Mane is that the ref would never sell it. There are a lot of laws that the players don't know about and their ignorance of them doesn't stop the appropriate action being taken. FWIW I would have given a pen for the challenge in real time and wouldn't have yc Mane but if we want to stop diving (if only to force the ref to make a call) then perhaps we seriously should consider yc Mane for his flop.
 
I've seen plenty more ridiculous decisions. Clattenberk in the MU v CPFC FA cup final in only yc Smalling for a start. The IDFK is separate to the caution for simulation in the same way a punch by Mane sees him get sent off but the penalty still given. Disappointing that the only objection on this forum to a pen and yc for Mane is that the ref would never sell it. There are a lot of laws that the players don't know about and their ignorance of them doesn't stop the appropriate action being taken. FWIW I would have given a pen for the challenge in real time and wouldn't have yc Mane but if we want to stop diving (if only to force the ref to make a call) then perhaps we seriously should consider yc Mane for his flop.
Finally.... someone with an opinion! Where have you been?
 
Whatever I decided I sure wouldn't be giving both mate.

Good luck to anybody trying to explain that one to both sets of players. :eek::D
You'd have a hard time to explain it because it is wrong in law

Screenshot_20191007-132057__01.jpg
 
Is your definition of a dive or simulation, an FA definition?
There is no such thing as an FA definition. However @one has given the official IFAB definition which makes it clear that if you give simulation, that means you are saying the foul did not occur. If you give the foul, the definition given in the Laws of the Game rules out the option of also giving simulation.

I suppose you could theoretically, caution the player for unsporting behaviour of you really, really wanted to - though I agree with others who have said they definitely wouldn't recommend it.
 
Last edited:
I've seen plenty more ridiculous decisions. Clattenberk in the MU v CPFC FA cup final in only yc Smalling for a start. The IDFK is separate to the caution for simulation in the same way a punch by Mane sees him get sent off but the penalty still given. Disappointing that the only objection on this forum to a pen and yc for Mane is that the ref would never sell it. There are a lot of laws that the players don't know about and their ignorance of them doesn't stop the appropriate action being taken. FWIW I would have given a pen for the challenge in real time and wouldn't have yc Mane but if we want to stop diving (if only to force the ref to make a call) then perhaps we seriously should consider yc Mane for his flop.




But to give what you are suggesting would completely undermine your decision. Your point about a penalty and then a RC for VC is completely different. We say that happen all the time with reds for retaliation after fouls.

It’s like saying, “yep that’s definitely a penalty, but you have dived to win the penalt”???

It’s either IDFK for sim or penalty.

As others above have said if you really wanted to a caution for USB could be applicable, however Doing that would really land you in hot water.

“What’s he off for ref”??

“Diving”

“But you gave the penalty”!!!
 
There is no such thing as an FA definition. However @one has given the official IFAB definition which makes it clear that if you give simulation, that means you are saying the foul did not occur. If you give the foul, the definition given in the Laws of the Game rules out the option of also giving simulation.

I suppose you could theoretically, caution the player for unsporting behaviour of you really, really wanted to - though I agree with others who have said they definitely wouldn't recommend it.
My angle is that the contact (if indeed there was any) was trivial, did not impede Mane, who then sought to seek an unfair advantage. Thinking about it, I guess it wouldn't be supported in Law to punish the more serious offence, because the contact and the dive didn't happen simultaneously. Either way, I'm giving an IDFK and USB and it's just a question of how I justify it to an observer that counts
 
I think the correct decision here is to give nothing. Contact does not cause the fall, is minimal, and is an expected part of the game. It is normal context, not unfair contact. Still, there is some, slight contact so not completely a dive either.
 
To add another vote to the majority - it's a foul, he's kicked on the back of the leg and it's really that straightforward. The fact that he (unfortunately, correctly) felt like he probably wouldn't get the PK unless he fell over is a problem, but it's a little unfair to blame Mane for years of referees deliberately setting a much higher bar for penalties than the laws suggest they should.
 
Back
Top