Recent content by Russell Jones

You're right. For simplicity, I find it easier to consider 'Challenging for the Ball' along with 'Playing the Ball' but it is the easiest clause in Opponent Interference. I'm totally with you that hindsight makes everything far easier! Getting decisions correct on ANY field is tricky...

Understand your POV .. but completely disagree :) . On field, this is not an either / or decision, you need to make both. And the Fernandez one happens first. In the 'non VAR' world that we inhabit, immediately deciding that Fernandez has committed an offence takes away all the pressure from...

There’s understandably and rightly a great deal of focus on the VAR side of the offside decision. Understandably because a system that was introduced to correct glaring howlers, has, in this instance, in fact created one! In that context, no surprise to see VAR and AVAR have been stood down...

Generally speaking, the biggest physical challenge to achieving this outcome is passing the sprint portion of the fitness test. 30m sprints in 4.7 seconds is increasingly difficult as time passes. Whereas passing the 75/25 run at 15s/20s remains ok if you are in good physical shape.

I think he could reasonably expect it to hit him in the face not the chest … and I’m not sure any player at any level should be expected to just run the risk of that occurring …..

I think the biggest benefit of the overall Law change will be the ability in Youth Football to sometimes allow play to continue from the multitude of genuinely foul throws ….

No, there is nothing in Law that says this. As for lack of respect ITOTR, this could literally be used to justify a caution for ANY player action .. Yellow Card for picking your nose anyone?! :) More seriously, players incorrectly appealing for restarts, falling over under minimal contact...

We have not established that this could be USB in any meaningful way. We just have the opinions of a variety of posters, many / all of whom have never worked at this level of football. I believe it is ok for the player to do this because it is not clearly outlawed anywhere within the LOTG...

'Hiding' on the pitch but behind the GK would be equally "sneaky and unsporting". But we wouldn't even be having this discussion if that's what the attacker had done. The reason we are discussing it, is because he was off the FOP. But the reality is,he left the FOP in a legitimate manner and...

No this is not allowed. If, post game, the referee genuinely believes he has made an error in law, he should submit the cards as usual but then send a note to the relevant County FA with his reflections.

My opinion is 100% no ... on 2 counts. Firstly, I don't see it as a penalisable handball offence. Secondly, even if you choose to give a handball, unless you believe it has stopped the ball going directly into the goal, then there is no Goal Scoring Opportunity as the striker is never going to...

Very fair. Certainly if they've gained a significant advantage and you're unsure about the 'deliberateness' then safe refereeing would be to give the FK! But if you're sure it was accidental, then to give a FK for an 'easy life' is weak refereeing IMO.

I think many football stakeholders would agree with you .. it's fair to question whether a player should gain an advantage from the ball hitting their hand / arm. However, how I justify the current approach is to say that (ignoring the OP 'goal' exception) it is completely fair that we only...

That's fair. Happy to say it's the player's choice to put his hands there to protect himself. If he did this AFTER the ball was kicked, you could make a case for a deliberate handball (though still harsh IMO). But given it was done before, we're then only considering whether that choice made...

I think we see it the same :). I totally agree that he has put his arms there because he knows / fears that the ball is about to be blasted straight at him. Which is why I can see the argument for the arms being seen as in an unnatural position ... though, personally, I instead see it as a...