Search results

Not for me. All it would do is shift the debate to the back of the attacker, instead of the front as it currently is.

Still going (for the time being) up here. :) Hopefully it only lasts the 28 days for all of you, however I’d agree it’s likely to go on longer.

I can see where you’re coming from, however that’s the situation we’ve had up here for the last 5 weeks, with an u18 cut off. It’s frustrating for all those over 18, however most people have accepted it is better than nothing.

12 in total. I’ve been doing games since November last year, but that’s only about 5 months in reality. I’ve reffed 5 friendlies as well in the last few weeks - a couple of them have certainly been competitive in nature! 😀 (I’ve kept a spreadsheet of all the games I do so know it specifically...

Yep. I try and wear black whenever it’s suitable, but there’s times other colours make more sense. The SFA are stuck in the dark ages in some ways, but thankfully they’ve got this aspect right - IMO.

You English never learn, do you? 😂

Most frustrating I had was an u16 coach a couple of weeks ago. He was claiming for anything and everything. Most of them were “fouls” which weren’t, so I wasn’t giving anything. Every so often he’d claim for one that was a foul - cue claims from the opposition that I “just gave it cos he’s...

Then you’re correct to not caution. The opposite of that I suppose is what I had this afternoon - attacker was fouled recklessly but the ball fell to a teammate so I played advantage. I then came back and cautioned the defender at the next stop in play.

I’d say no caution. You say it’s not a reckless challenge. I presume that means it’s careless, or stopping a promising attack. Either way under 2020/21 Laws that means no caution.

Completely agree with all the above comments - I couldn’t believe it was given when I was watching it yesterday. If that’s not a natural position I don’t know what is.

Completely agree. One of them on the Crystal Palace v Everton game this afternoon claimed that “the height of the ball” meant a handball penalty claim was turned away.

Got asked to do one last Sunday. KO for the first game was then changed though so I had to decline. I did one a few months ago though but my legs were dead by the end as it was on 3G. And they were just u13 & u14. I’m only 17 as well so I dread to think what it’ll be like later in life. :)

I was just going to mention the Caballero incident - it’s a perfect high-profile example of that law. As others have said, if the player doesn’t want to leave, then play on.