Search results

Yes. I've seen this a lot from fans but the definition of simulation involves an attempt to deceive or trick the referee. Obviously, appealing can be a big part of that. But just because there isn't an appeal, it doesn't mean a player hasn't attempted to deceive the referee.

Players should have been 4m away but that’s being picky! Sounds typical really, you’ve done all you can do in terms of explaining, not your fault if they don’t get it after you’ve practically handed it to them on a plate

Some benefit? Struggling to find any VAR decision that has been both correct and wanted. No one cares about millimetres from an offside - people want things like clear penalties looked at again.

You say that like there's no happy medium. All of the controversial decisions could have been nulled had the referee gone to look at the on-field review monitor. Run over, look at a couple of replays, run back. Takes a minute, 2 at absolute most. Even if you disagree, you can at least say the...

Oh I completely agree with that, but it just baffles me how few players actually know what the correct protocol is

Sounds like a clear penalty for the first one - getting/clearing the ball doesn't give players free range to go through the opposition. Sounds good. I personally would approach the second situation slightly differently. Going over to the parent is useless as you can't caution/dismiss etc. and...

We've been taught to use the sin bin in the same way as you would do a yellow card any previous season i.e. you can still do the stepped approach or whatever you see fit, but if you would have carded them last season, you sin bin them now. On another note, had my 3rd one today, and it's the 3rd...

PGMOL came out pretty quickly and said the referee adjudicated Grealish to have dived, VAR looked at it and deemed there to be insufficient evidence to rule it a clear and obvious error

Thought both of these at the time, and people around me (normally morons when it comes to the laws) commented the same. Very very weird

No, games of 90 minutes are 10 minute sin bins. Anything under 90 minutes is 8 minutes sin bins.

Why 5? I was told anything less than a 90 min game was 8 mins

Across all ages I assume. As it's not yet 11 v 11, they spend 8 minutes in the sin bin should it be necessary.

I don't disagree, merely stating that you can't dismiss the coach as the spectator is not a team official and was not stood at the bench.

Ones named on the team sheet if team sheets are available. If not, ones in the 'technical area' (supporters will probably be on the other side of the pitch).

No, that only applies to "team officials".

Or better yet, they have underused in the right areas and overused in the wrong ones

That’s not clear and obvious? All I’m seeing is Lascelles clattering into Kane. Always a penalty. It at least warrants Dean getting a second look

Saying you’re not liable doesn’t necessarily make you not liable though, so just watch out

Not sure I necessarily agree, all technology has its flaws - LBW decisions in cricket stick with the onfield umpire's decision if the projected ball path is within half a ball's space, essentially accepting that there's a margin of error in which it would be improper to overturn an original...

Won't make much difference if, like Neil Swarbrick's appearance today, they seem to distort the facts to fit their truth. Incapable of admitting when mistakes are made.