Search results

You don't agree that there should be a proportional number of BAME referees? 🤔

2021 census shows 18% of English and Welsh population is BAME. Given that Wales is 90.6% white British in that census, the percentage of BAME individuals in England is higher than that 18%. Yet as per the linked document in the above post, less than 11% of referees in England are BAME...

It's different now though, as for any standard dismissal there is no report to be written, just the name, club, and sending off code. Anything outside of that sending off offence should be reported using an extraordinary report. The OP doesn't specify whether the VC or OFFINABUS occurred first...

I reckon I've probably had as many, if not more, OFFINABUS reds for language directed towards opponents (and on at least one occasion a teammate) than I have for comments made towards me. I'm going to have to look back and work it out now... 😂 EDIT: Eight reds for OFFINABUS directed towards me...

Wouldn't be surprised if comms get passed down to L3s to use on Step 3/4 games at some point in the future, but I doubt it'll be any time soon. At least The FA would be able to provide the training to L4s when they're promoted. As for officials at lower levels being able to buy their own -...

Hmm... I'm leaning towards agreeing that you can't give a further IDFK here. Technically, the FRD offence is committed at the moment the free kick is taken and the opponent is intentionally less than 10 yards from it. The goalkeeper then deliberately preventing the free kick from reaching its...

Of course it's a choice for us. The non-offending team would benefit from allowing play to continue instead of retaking the free kick, due to the DOGSO offence committed by the goalkeeper. That's literally what the law is saying you can do.

Is it not in the non-offending team's advantage to punish the subsequent offence and the DOGSO?

Would depend entirely on how you as the referee saw the situation - if the attacker has chosen to take a quick free kick with the goalkeeper closer than 10 yards, and you think the keeper has just successfully intercepted the quick free kick, then there's no offence. If you see it as the...

No.

If the home team don't have another home game before Remembrance Sunday they may well be looking to have a minute's silence this weekend. Probably best to discuss with both sides at the teamsheet exchange.

It does not.

Oh mention that too - if it's true he's a registered referee hopefully he'll get a harsher punishment!

This is incorrect:

Non-playing red card report to cover the send off for two cautions, then an extraordinary report to cover the abusive comment after the red, and re-entering the FoP after the final whistle.

A goalkeeper is taking part in the kicks by being stood in the goal to face them - a penalty cannot be taken unless there is a goalkeeper there.

You can actually claim wrongful dismissal for OFFINABUS at Step 4 and above! 😂

I'm not a fan of Holker's statement where they are trying to absolve themselves of all blame by claiming the error is *solely* down to the referee. It's just as much their error as it is the referee's - ignorance of the laws isn't a reasonable excuse.

They had already nominated the goalkeeper to be the player excluded, and he took part. Difficult to say it hasn't impacted it! I'll be honest, anyone getting to L4 shouldn't be getting caught out on something as basic as this. Even worse, it appears both the ARs are former L4s too - how none of...

Obviously a bad decision, but let's make sure we're pointing the finger of blame in the right direction here - the cheating player. He deserves a retrospective suspension.