Search results

Well if you feel offended by it, then you know what to do.

No, hold on. It could definitely have not been right. In fact, I'd argue that "No, no, no, come on!" fails to meet the threshold of public, provocative, and personal that has been a standard for dissent for a very long time. YHTBT, but I doubt if this is something that warrants a caution based...

For argument's sake, let's say it did go out. What would the referee give?

The real key, if you ask me, is being able to accelerate quickly. Be at "race pace" from the first step. This minimizes the speed you have to get yourself to in the last half of the running section.

So, corner or goal kick then?

I don't disagree with you in general, Macca; my point was only that HIIT and strength training are going to be more impactful relative to time spent doing them for the particular activity of refereeing than long, slow runs will be. This sort of is in response to @Big Cat as well. We are not...

Really looks great. Very nice that the tournament provided officials with kits. I'll recommend it to the powers that be in my area ;)

Strength training and HIIT is your friend. Long, slow runs will do you some good, but not very efficient or helpful.

Absolutely. The advantage must materialize within the few seconds. Saying that there might be an advantage which could materialize if you allow play to go on is simply not enough. To distill it down to one simple question: does the team who has been fouled have a promising attack potential? If...

And this is a great point. Advantage is not, principally, about letting the game flow; it is about not punishing a team because something unfair was done to them. Allowing the game to flow is a positive by-product of playing an advantage, but it is not a sufficient reason to play advantage in...

My yellow is in my right short pocket, my red is in my back short pocket. A marker is in my right shirt pocket. That's it.

PIADM doesn't require disadvantaging anyone. Punishing PIADM is not about restoring balance, it is strictly about disallowing certain behaviour.

Well, confront was the exact word used in the OP to describe what the remaining coach did after he had entered the field of play so there you go.

That does not mean that ball in and out of play is the priority focus for assistant referees. If an offside offense occurs, then nothing else matters either. The game is dead when an offside offense occurs.

So you're telling me the average football fan has ridiculous black-and-white solutions to complex questions which they vociferously push on anyone who will listen, while speaking ill of anyone who urges caution in the face of the radical things they are proposing, and then complain when it is...

I disagree completely. For neutral Assistant Referees, their first priority is offside and they should prioritize accordingly. @GrantFrosty see the resource here for a great pre-game discussion led by ex-Prem referee Bobby Madley: https://refchat.co.uk/resources/pre-match-instructions.59/

I understand what you're both saying, but I'm not sure that it's germane to the question. The issue is not whether their behavior exceeded a certain standard of acceptability; the issue is whether they were (a) on the field of play and (b) remonstrating with an official. This is not an area...

I think you're missing the point. The sheer act of entering the field of play and questioning or remonstrating with an official is worthy of a red card. They don't have to use foul or abusive language, they don't have to be vocal and public. They just have to enter the field of play and...

By the same token, are you not rewarding the defending player who pulled his opponent's shirt and, thereby, cheated?