A&H

WHU vs Man City

I'm going to choose to take that as a compliment! ;)

I'm an industrial chemist. But actually, within that, a huge amount of what I do for a living is digest tedious documents (data sheets's) and explain complicated concepts to people who might not have the same level of technical background as me. This kind of discussion and the need to be precise about fiddly details/distinctions is very much in my wheelhouse, albeit slightly more related to what I did at my previous job where I was sales-adjacent, rather than currently where I'm not.
Then expect a call from Donald J Trump soon🤗
 
The Referee Store
@one , @GraemeS. I've followed your debate with a lot of interest .. thanks for making it both thought provoking and civil :) .

On reflection, I think this is yet one more of the examples where 'continental 'refereeing differs from English. I've spent a lot of time in Denmark over the last few years and it's noticeable that obvious, cynical, careless shirt pulls, whether stopping a promising attack or not, are routinely cautioned in Denmark where they would likely not be so in England. The reasoning, as One describes, is that this type of behaviour is just felt to be outside the spirit of the game. This is why it would seem obvious to eg Danish referees, that you would still caution for such offences even after the recent SPA/advantage law change. The idea that you would caution for such an act in the defensive half but then not do so further up the pitch would seem counter intuitive at best. Whereas, in England, there would be no expectation of a caution for such an offence .... we only (historically) did so when it was SPA.

In summary, you're both right ... just starting from a different historical perspective :)
 
@one , @GraemeS. I've followed your debate with a lot of interest .. thanks for making it both thought provoking and civil :) .

On reflection, I think this is yet one more of the examples where 'continental 'refereeing differs from English. I've spent a lot of time in Denmark over the last few years and it's noticeable that obvious, cynical, careless shirt pulls, whether stopping a promising attack or not, are routinely cautioned in Denmark where they would likely not be so in England. The reasoning, as One describes, is that this type of behaviour is just felt to be outside the spirit of the game. This is why it would seem obvious to eg Danish referees, that you would still caution for such offences even after the recent SPA/advantage law change. The idea that you would caution for such an act in the defensive half but then not do so further up the pitch would seem counter intuitive at best. Whereas, in England, there would be no expectation of a caution for such an offence .... we only (historically) did so when it was SPA.

In summary, you're both right ... just starting from a different historical perspective :)
Can't all be right. Stop being so uncontroversial. Start taking sides and top sitting on the fence :mad:
FWIW, I'm cautioning all day long in the world I inhabit. Rules are rules.... Laws are just a framework of rules ;)
 
Can't all be right. Stop being so uncontroversial. Start taking sides and top sitting on the fence :mad:
FWIW, I'm cautioning all day long in the world I inhabit. Rules are rules.... Laws are just a framework of rules ;)
My personal preference is to fully enforce those laws which exist to keep the game flowing and a better spectacle ... so eg, I'm quicker to penalise things like delaying restarts than others might be. Unsurprisingly therefore, on this topic I instinctively side more with @one (and it appears yourself). That said, because the logic only works if you're also prepared to sanction such shirt pulls in unthreatening areas, I don't believe I could credibly do this in England.

See, no splinters from the fence at all ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
@socal lurker I don't believe your assessment is correct. Because they agree that non-reckless foul can be considered USB under lack of respect or unspecified USB (cynical or not) if it happens when not SPA. The disagreement is that it can not be cautioned if its also SPA.
I don't think anyone is saying that. I think @GraemeS , for example, is saying that you're making up a caution that doesn't really exist to evade the restriction on cautioning after applying advantage to SPAA.

It's pretty black and white that the "can't caution after playing advantage" only applies to SPAA so if there is a legitimate alternative reason to caution, of course you can caution even though it was also SPAA. Reckless is the most common real world example. The extent of other USB possibilities is the disagreement.
 
Back
Top