Wolves vs Arsenal
- Thread starter bester
- Start date
People keep referencing that you don't go back and caution spa after advantage but he wasn't cautioned for spa. The first one is failure to respect the distance on a throw in or you can probably just call it in general and sporting behavior.
Dino Ref
Well-Known Member
The general public / spectators are scarily bad when it comes to knowledge of the laws. All of this has built up due to ignorant commentators, pundits, players and managers.
We need to start educating because I'm sure even if any of us do this in 24/48 hours we will still get called every name under the sun.
I just love when people dive into the laws of the game which they've probably never looked at before and think they find something that allows them to feign outrage.
bester
RefChat Addict
Does failure to respect the required distance apply on a quickly taken throw-in? Other thing is did the offence occur before the throw-in was completed, so can you play advantage for unfairly distracting or impeding the thrower?
Dino Ref
Well-Known Member
I think it's hard to justify him not delaying the restart when he moves to the ball not away from it.
It's an interesting question on going back to caution an offense that occurred during a dead ball. I suppose in spirit it matches up with the change of cautioning after a restart if it's taken quickly.
This crossed my mind. Can the game be restarted with the throw-in and then have the card issued for an offence that occurred before that restart?
Also, if you're going to go to make a brave call, I think you need to be confident that other aspects of the phase were legit. EDIT- can't seem to upload a still of the foul throw that followed the offence View attachment 5439
Because 'unfairly distracting the thrower or impeding the throw' is specified as a caution for USB (albeit out of place under Law 15.2) and because there's provision for still cautioning without necessitating a retake of the throw in, I think it's supportable to come back to the caution as the offence is specified as something other than SPA (for which a caution would be ruled out) or FTRTRD (which implies ball was never in play)
Maybe MO fluked this correct AOL or maybe he didn't, but about time a player gets just deserts for cheating (even if it's in an unusual guise)
Maybe MO fluked this correct AOL or maybe he didn't, but about time a player gets just deserts for cheating (even if it's in an unusual guise)
I think your point is summed up well here. Awful.
i know Walton gets some stick (often justifiably so) but fair play to him on this one.
And yet pundits are wanting "common sence" instead of the laws being applied. I thought Oliver got both bookings spot on and fair play for him signalling why he decided to show 2 yellow cards there.
I do wonder if a non FIFA referee would just show the 1 caution there despite two offenses taking place. I think Olivers experience and being on the FIFA/UEFA list helped him to the correct decision there.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
I don't know you need to be a FIFA to get that right, but it certainly takes courage to go yellow-yellow-red, especially in an era that has been putting more pressure to keep games at 11.
(FWIW, my impression was the first caution was for USB with the push after the ball was in play, which makes it not much to talk about under the Laws.)
(FWIW, my impression was the first caution was for USB with the push after the ball was in play, which makes it not much to talk about under the Laws.)
Mooseybaby
Retired big bad baldy in all black!
It's only the second time I think I have seen a referee double card like this, the other being a Northern Ireland player a few years ago.
I do wonder, whilst absolutely correct, would the outcome have been the same had the offender been the likes of Ronaldo?
I do wonder, whilst absolutely correct, would the outcome have been the same had the offender been the likes of Ronaldo?
3 offences happen at the same time here.
Interfering with promising attack
Push
Moving within 2m and unfairly distracting/impeding the player.
The push for me is careless. If it wasn't at a throw in it wouldn't get a 2nd look.
Promising attack is void by the advantage.
Which leavesaw 15 offence as the more serious and what I believe the caution is for.
That said its still USB, not FTRTR as theaw specifically states the player is cautioned for unsporting behaviour
LancsReferee
New Member
Michael Oliver very clear why it was two yellows - well done that man. Maybe if players stopped doing things which they know are infringements and kept their hands down on an opposition throw-in after their own miscontrol of the ball, then they wouldn't get themselves in these positions.