Search results

I can't really think of any way it is possible to run any VAR system (current, challenge-based or other) that judges offside and doesn't incorporate some element of "delay on close decisions". We can do delays, or we can get factual offside wrong sometimes. That's the choice.

Or the AR makes an incorrect decision, allows play to continue and the player hits the post anyway. The real scandal here is actually that he was forced to keep playing after impacting the post, despite being almost unable to run. Seconds matter in applying emergency medical treatment, but...

Even if that is true and a reasonable thing to expect officials to be able to decide in that fraction of a second, it still doesn't remotely invalidate the possibility of the whistle going and the player choosing to continue the action regardless. Referees at "that level" are still bound by...

As we've previously discussed, the moment when the whistle is physically blown is (inexplicably) what defines the decisions that can be made. If the whistle is blown and the player continues with his action of launching himself into an opponent regardless, there are a limited number of "correct"...

I think even that is untrue to be honest. The incidents are close enough together that had the referee correctly seen it as a foul, he could still have started his lunge by the time the referee looks to see where the ball goes for an advantage, determines there is no advantage and then starts...

I'll admit to having performed a "drop ball" by gently rolling the ball back towards the keeper from 10-15 yards outside the area, in order to give myself that headstart. Having checked for no possible attackers lurking nearby of course! But it did occur to me after the game that this becomes...

Frustrating as it can be, we can't control the professional game, we can to some extent control the game we're refereeing. This isn't one of those weird bits of law that no one knows - everyone knows the throw in should be taken from the position the ball goes out of play. All they need is some...

That is exactly the basis. Referee "stops" player taking a throw from the wrong place, but they are already in motion and the ball slips out - retake. Referee allows or fails to react to player taking a throw from the wrong place - foul throw and it gets turned over. If you're going to do...

Agree, this is absolutely the striker initiating the contact and should have been overturned.

Considering it I suppose, but the direction is across the corner of the PA rather than driving directly towards goal. He'd have a free-ish shot, but from a tight angle and with pressure coming from covering defenders - I'd argue it doesn't quite reach the level of "obvious" GSO. But wouldn't...

For me, there's enough for a foul outside the box. However the attacker works hard to stay on his feet and force his way into the box, at which point he happily goes down despite the fact the contact has now developed into mutual holding at most, maybe arguably an attacking foul. Best result...

Yup, have also only seen it once (albeit knowing there was a 3rd RC still to come in the highlights) and also immediately assumed we were about to see a straight red.

Play the obvious advantage that would have made it a live incident in the first place? Booked Pickford for booting Nunez? Point out to Nunez he can either roll back off the pitch to be treated or take a yellow? It was a messy incident all round, we do match officials no favours by ignoring...

To drag the thread back on topic - this is the framework I use. "I'm starting to notice a pattern of fouls player, try and avoid giving me a decision to make".

I'm fully on board with the overturn. Anderson unnaturally adjusts where his foot is landing in order to initiate contact. Great intervention and something that would be very tricky to spot live.

Agree, hands are up because of the push by the attacker, defensive FK is the best decisio n IMO.

It's always a given whereever I've been that subs can't use a ball to warm up during the game, due to exactly the risk of it going onto the pitch at a key moment. If given the choice, I always prefer both sets of subs to warm up behind the senior AR. There's a risk of conflict between them of...

You need a reason to get involved in something like this IMO. Valid reasons include 1. The ref has explicitly told you to proactively get involved in prematch if you see him making any wrong KMI decision 2. The ref is staring at you looking for your input 3. It's such an obviously wrong...

Cool.