Search results

The attacker is challenging the GK for the ball, GK gets to it first and has the ball under control in their hands at the end of the challenge. It is a fairly textbook scenario one of the most common where an attacker will be penalised for this.

Don't think the attacker really knows what has happened as she was facing away from the keeper, so wouldn't read too much from her reaction.

I'm happy with the intervention as punching another player's head is nearly always going to be (at least) a careless foul. It can look softer when slowed down which it is the majority of the time in this footage. It clearly lands on the back of Williamson's skull not just the pony tail.

Hi Théo. Be wary of any visa restrictions because as far as I know you cannot accept payment for refereeing without a right to work in the UK. You may need to consult with a regulated immigration adviser about your plans.

We have had 3 (including yours) saying it is a caution and not SFP but none have explained why it is not SFP.

VAR should have intervened, it is a lunge that endangers the safety of the opponent.

There has to be excessive force or brutality (meaning savage, ruthless or deliberately violent). So you can justify it as a deliberately violent act for the GK to have kicked the attacker in these circumstances. The Laws say: Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive...

The relevant clause in law is 'unless the goalkeeper has clearly kicked or attempted to kick the ball to release it into play' which was clearly not the case.

Yeah they are Level 3 and 4 referees respectively. We always have to bear in mind the FA rule that 'Registered Referees shall not officiate in any Competition, which is not sanctioned, or match in which unaffiliated clubs compete.' So one hopes that either this is sanctioned, or perhaps not...

From my perspective this has never been a DOGSO because it used to be perfectly legal for a GK to handle a back-pass and when changing the law IFAB only wanted possession to be turned over and did not deem it a serious enough offence to warrant sending off the GK. A good way for this to be...

And the standard kit for non-PGMOL is still supposed to be the current Nike for next season. So really this Puma is a 1 season kit unless imitating PGMOL.

What the heck is 'Pro DNA' Vs 'Grassroots'?

Please let the socks be better than the current :poop:

When the ball has entered the goal it is incorrect in Law to not award the goal for an injury. As @santa sangria says, the main thing here is to make a decision immediately and be clear about whether play is being stopped or not. If in doubt it is usually better to err on the side of player...

Congratulations to all who have been appointed to finals. I was rather surprised yet delighted to receive an appointment to my first ever County final this season after not being appointed to any earlier round fixtures at all, I thought I might have been forgotten about! Not sure what to put the...

Well done buddy!

Great point, it is definitely a DOGSO.

This is a trick. The only way I can imagine a player being able to play a ball along the ground without using their foot and it not be a trick is when the player has fallen to the ground for some other reason. For those saying not a trick, would that still be the case if the player...

Yes as we could just as easily say that within the spirit of the law an incorrect throw-in can be considered not an offence. But their post is far more definitively worded than their explanation!

That's really funny because it used to be Law that the ball had to be played forwards at kick-off, which is why there were always two players standing over it so one could tap it slightly 'forward' to the other.