Recent content by Peter Grove

This scenario is covered in the laws of the game. In the section entitled, "Guidelines for Match Officials," you will find the following illustration and explanatory text. I'm not sure what you mean by, "The law just says offside is then called." I don't see anything to that effect, either...

In this case, the referee was neither on the floor nor tangled up and unable to make a decision. There was no valid reason to stop play, as far as I can tell.

The referee just collided with a Southampton player and stopped play when the ball was running through for a promising Middlesbrough attack. Surely that's against the laws of the game. It's only a dropped ball if the referee makes contact with the ball - not a player?

Pretty sure that's referring to the time in the past when that was true. Up till 1979, any touch by a defender meant a player in an offside position was "played on" by that touch and not penalised for offside. The wording of the law in the years up to that point stated:

Quite. The following would seem applicable.

You're not going wrong, they are. The wording of Law 13 (which you have correctly quoted) is clear and unambiguous on this.

No, it's not. As the glossary entry posted by @one states, playing the ball means making contact with it. There's also this from the "Guidelines for Match Officials" section.

I don't think that meets the criteria for this law amendment. As I read it, a goal can only be scored at a penalty kick after a subsequent, accidental touch, if:

The more I hear about inverse proportion, the less I like it.

Based on what's on the IFAB website, it sounds like it's whenever the referee comes to the conclusion that the player is taking too long. Unlike with the goalkeeper 8 second count down, there is apparently no defined start point other than when the referee decides to initiate the count

Yes, as @Tealeaf also alludes to, it's the non-deliberate handling denial of a goal/goal scoring opportunity clause that was recently introduced.

OK, but this player didn't feint to kick the ball after completing the run-up. He feinted during the run-up, then resumed the run-up, then kicked the ball immediately after completing the run-up without any further feint taking place.

Except that the wording of the law was changed in 2017, specifically to say that it doesn't matter if the player is heading diagonally away from goal at the time of the foul, so long as the overall direction of travel is towards the goal. Or, as the explanatory note to the change put it:

Fair enough, but there is a difference between something said in a jokey way in private to a close personal friend and something shouted in a public and provocative manner at a complete stranger. Not saying that it's necessarily enough to stop a game for, but you're comparing apples and oranges.

Madness at the petrol station today.