Search results

The problem, based on your explanation, is that observers are not seeking the correct things. My contention is that someone who doesn't know the Laws of the Game cannot possibly indicate whether a referee has performed up to standard. The reason for this is that (a) what they see on TV is a...

Well, you can argue it with IFAB if you want, but the interpretation is definitely that the keeper is allowed to straddle the line.

In CONCACAF's advantage education video, there is an example of a great advantage wherein the referee puts the whistle to his mouth, realizes an advantage, and plays on. It's not even a consideration to talk about putting the whistle to mouth. These are professionals playing professionally...

The new law allows him to straddle the line.

I'm not convinced that club marks are personal data. In any case, I find the concept of team ratings to be silly and ridiculous anyway so I'll show myself out.

Alright, that didn't work. Imagine Clint Eastwood spitting on the ground in disgust.

Arsenal, you say?

And, by the way, if you can commit just 30 minutes a day to reading the LotG, you can read from cover to cover every week or two. Imagine that. You'd have it easily memorized if you read the LotG 26 times a year. Hey, let's give you Christmas week off and have you read it 25 times a year. Still...

Read this part again. It is instructive.

Have you been on the field of play yet?

Shouting "maybe you should grow a pair of balls" sounds like offensive, insulting, and abusive language within this context to me. A red card and a report would not have been out of the question.

Absolutely. I determine whether or not a player has distracted an opponent. Neither the player nor the opponent has a say in that.

Pilates are great, but they are mostly for mobility and flexibility. I would recommend hitting the gym and do some weight training. It is critical for injury prevention.

Weights, calisthenics, that kind of thing.

I would recommend doing the fitness test in smaller increments and build yourself up. Also, critically, what is your strength training regime?

I wouldn't say it's the intention of distracting your opponent that matters so much as the act of distracting your opponent.

The question here is whether or not the ball has been touched and clearly moved. If it has, then it is in play. If it has not, then it is not in play and the second person would have taken the corner and then touched it a second time. It is up to you to determine whether it has clearly moved or not.

That is also my experience.

Yup. Dissent does not require the dissenter to speak directly to the one being dissented against. Actually, throughout history, the dissenter usually directs the comment somewhere else.

Sounds like a cracker!