Search results

60 minutes? So was there not a conversation at half time and then an opportunity to quickly nip it on the bud at the start of half by sharing the explanation? And even still silently weathering the storm is not the approach. Ask. Tell. Warn. Report. And start having some action taken. 👍🏻

If you have aspirations of progressing I strongly recommend deleting that tweet. This won't be a good look if you get to an advanced level and people want to dig you out for something from your past, including your social media activity. There are also many referees who have found themselves on...

This You need to confirm exactly why the flag was raised and then able to accurately relay this to everyone. Also be prepared for the absolute 💩 storm that follows. Correct outcome or not people will be unhappy that an incorrect flag went up.

True, which I answered in my next paragraph 😁

Well that could be explained by wanting to keep all performance data in one place and watches tend to be very individual and not offer real time monitoring from a third party device. That said there are features of the vests that should offer better performance than wrist based gps mainly not...

They aren't allowed to wear watches but can wear a vest as per LOTG and the software offers tracking of everyone in realtime in a view of everyone. You'd expect them to be pretty accurate as well but I don't think that is the sole reason.

Not really. You can't be double rewarded so if you've been rewarded in one section you can't use the same example to reward somewhere else unless its MCS and you want to reward positioning as an example.

That can happen even with the premium watches. I have used Polar for many years being a proud owner of a v800, vantage V and currently rocking Grit X Pro. Aside from that a high end Garmin would be the best competition. Other alternatives are the vest things, catapult etc..

Same here. Never had to appeal a report before. I do know that you can only appeal individual sections (e.g. 1.1, 2.2). You can only appeal on the basis that the written text is wrong in law or the mark awarded does not match the written text iirc For example the observer wrote you should...

Apologies. It needed the context of the post i was replying to and to be honest I hadn't seen what had happened so it might not have made sense any road.

The law only applies to goalkeepers, not players and was in this season's law changes

You've nailed it. He is either a TA occupant or he isn't. That rules out a caution for the manager as we know who the offender is and he either leaves because he isn't allowed to be in the TA or he can stay because he is a TA occupant and has only been cautioned.

Sometimes you just have to be wrong in law in the spirit of the game. This is one of those incidences.

So far off topic. You'll be getting a warning ⚠️ 🤪 Still not changing it back...

https://talksport.com/football/668253/dan-gosling-urges-referee-disgrace-jon-moss-apologise-zero-respect-bournemouth/

We've also got the definition of a quick free kick. "A free kick taken (with the referee’s permission) very quickly after play was stopped" Given all that happens between play stopping I can hardly say it sounds like a quick free kick. And where there is cautioning procedure play must be...

In the section guidelines to match officials. Sub heading body language communication and whistle

It can even be no card.

What about a thank you? I think this might have come about from referees confronting observers after receiving a report with a lower mark than they think they should have gotten .

If the Handball stops a promising attack two caution able offences occur sequentially. So it would be 2 yellow cards, 1 for simulation and 1 for stopping a promising attack by handball.