The Ref Stop

Bel v Svk

Real time I didn't notice anything.

Slow time it looks a handball.

Mainly in slow time it looks like the ball is out of the reach of the attacker without the use of his hand, his hand is stretched out, and he does give the ball a nice tickle in the right direction.

You like that @es1 is 'a tickle in the right direction' in the handball considerations?
 
The Ref Stop
Big Cat said:
Refs must be working to some more shoddy UEFA positional instruction cos they're all ahead of the play near the PA and getting in the way
Again, left to their own devices, I can't believe they're all that bad
I'd be jeopardizing L4 promotion with the frequency of dopped balls in bad areas
Click to expand...
You know, I was thinking this.

I have been watching games with friends/family and I am doing everything in my power to not talk about the referee (for fear of ridicule).

But they are ahead of play and constantly caught up in it.

My leading theory is they don't really know how most teams are setup to play since most teams will be tweaking their styles, so the referees are sort of winging it.
 
Big Cat said:
Dunno who the FIFA Ref is on ITV (Christina.... didn't catch the surname), but she wipes the floor with Peter Walton and Mike Dean in terms of her explanation of why HB was given. Very clear, entirely up to date knowledge of the very latest interpretation of the Law etc with the ability to communicate effectively without watering down the language into some terrible diatribe

Not that I agree with IFAB's moronic 'interpretation'. Completely accidental and just pure bad luck to meet IFAB's criteria for the 'unnatural position bollox.
But we want more Christina and she convinced me in 20 seconds that the 'decision' was entirely correct
Click to expand...
Christina Unkel. She’s a former US FIFA referee, and she still works college games in the US. She’s married to a current MLS and former FIFA referee. They met for the first time working a match together.

She’s an excellent communicator. Her day job is a trial attorney, so she comes by her communication skills naturally. She’s just really, really good at rules analysis. Can we trade her for Clattenberg? We get him on Fox in the US, and all he really can do is say the word “brutality” a lot.
 
Big Cat said:
Agreed

Unfortunately, this is not correct as far as IFAB are concerned

Every hand/arm position is natural IMO, except for when it's deliberate HB. I'd initially thought that 'natural position' was kinda an interpretation of deliberate, but it hasn't turned out that way. It's just a way of being non-subjective in determining HB
The 'natural position' thing just hasn't worked in the end. It makes it easier for us to referee, because we just need to see the hand/arm at shoulder height or above and we're done. But it has nowt to do with
Click to expand...
Well, Uefa’s interpretation is basically any arm/hand away from the body is unnatural. Check the videos.

On one hand that should make it easier to referee, but it makes a nonsense of the laws as written (natural position away from the body does not exist), moreover it’s not what football expects and is impossible to enforce at grassroots without a clearer law and communication to the football family.
 
Murri O said:
And 40m in ground covered so yeah, quite a way.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter about distance or time. It is all in the APP. I recall a man utd goal being ruled out after Luke Shaw committed a foul in his own half to win possession. This was some 70-80 yards from goal but was in the relevant APP.

Here is the requisite law from the protocol:

• For decisions/incidents relating to goals, penalty/no penalty and red cards
for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity (DOGSO), it may be
necessary to review the attacking phase of play which led directly to the
decision/incident; this may include how the attacking team gained
possession of the ball in open play

Make of the decision what you will but what can't be argued with is whether or not the incident was checkable/reviewable. Time/distance from incident to goal not a valid argument based on the above as what can't be argued is that it was in the APP that lead directly to the goal and it was exactly how the "offending" team gained possession of the ball from open play.
 
JamesL said:
It doesn't matter about distance or time. It is all in the APP. I recall a man utd goal being ruled out after Luke Shaw committed a foul in his own half to win possession. This was some 70-80 yards from goal but was in the relevant APP.

Here is the requisite law from the protocol:

• For decisions/incidents relating to goals, penalty/no penalty and red cards
for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity (DOGSO), it may be
necessary to review the attacking phase of play which led directly to the
decision/incident; this may include how the attacking team gained
possession of the ball in open play

Make of the decision what you will but what can't be argued with is whether or not the incident was checkable/reviewable. Time/distance from incident to goal not a valid argument based on the above as what can't be argued is that it was in the APP that lead directly to the goal and it was exactly how the "offending" team gained possession of the ball from open play.
Click to expand...

Look, fair enough. I was only commenting on the distance because someone brought up the time.

Cheers.
 
RefIADad said:
You must have HATED it when we shipped Piers Morgan back to you then!! :D:p
Click to expand...

We packed him off to some obscure TV station. He tried to help it launch with fanfare declaring himself “uncancelled”.

Said channel can now be described as “un-on-air” or “unbroadcasting” (it’s found a dark corner of the internet to lurk in instead)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top