A&H

Crystal Palace v Liverpool

bester said:
Irrelevant whether it's a foul or not once he's signaled. He's played advantage on a DOGSO leading to a goal and not cautioned the player.

Might get away with showboating in the EPL but making errors in law to look good will hold him back on the international stage.
Click to expand...

Can't see the logic. It can never be a DOGSO if a goal is scored.

It can't be a SPA for the same reason. The only way a YC can be justified is for interfering with a promising attack. In either case the "except" clause would exempt it for even a lesser result of a penalty for the opponents when it was an attempt to play the ball. A goal would certainly downgrade a YC to no card.
 
The Referee Store
"If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution / send off would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution / send off must be issued when the ball is next out of play, except for the denial of an obvious goal-scoring opportunity when the player is cautioned for unsporting behaviour. "

" If the referee plays advantage for a DOGSO the offender is cautioned (YC) whether or not a goal is scored "
 
bester said:
" If the referee plays advantage for a DOGSO the offender is cautioned (YC) whether or not a goal is scored "
Click to expand...
This is only in the summary section and can easily be misinterpreted in not read with the full description. It will not remain in the LOTG.

bester said:
"If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution / send off would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution / send off must be issued when the ball is next out of play, except for the denial of an obvious goal-scoring opportunity when the player is cautioned for unsporting behaviour. "
Click to expand...
This can be interpreted two ways. The explanation rather suggests your interpretation is correct.

However it could also mean if the offence would have been a "denial of an obvious goal-scoring opportunity when the player is cautioned for unsporting behaviour", it is an exception to what the earlier part of the quote requires you to do (caution/send off). Therefore no sanction is required. That is, if you play advantage on a DOGSO-YC then the opportunity still remains and the YC is no longer required.

I am seeking clarification on this. But I have a feeling I may have to give in on this one.
 
'Spirit of the law' i.e. not what the law actually says. Doesn't say anything downgrading DOGSO-Red to no card, the Mane incident was outside the box, no?

If you were extend this spirit to SPA how far back do you go? Blatant pull back on halfway, you play an advantage that leads to a goal....
 
Last edited:
Although if you'd believe twitter Oliver got every decision wrong. Can't personally think of anything that can be seen as a mistake. Football fans seem to know very little about the game :)
 
cwyeary said:
He wasn't playing advantage. He was just holding his arms out for recovery after a long sprint. :)
Click to expand...
I haven't seen it, but is it normal to recover from a long sprint by holding arms outstretched!? I normally find a bit of breathing does the trick. Sounds like MO was getting out of bed haha
 
bester said:
'Spirit of the law' i.e. not what the law actually says. Doesn't say anything downgrading DOGSO-Red to no card, the Mane incident was outside the box, no?
.
If you were extend this spirit to SPA how far back do you go? Blatant pull back on halfway, you play an advantage that leads to a goal....
Click to expand...

I'm sure the spirit referred to only applies when a foul is an intent to play the ball. A bit of a grey/complex area when it is a DOGSO is an attempt to play the ball but its outside the PA and a goal is scored. Hopefully the said clarification eventuates for next season.
 
one said:
I'm sure the spirit referred to only applies when a foul is an intent to play the ball. A bit of a grey/complex area when it is a DOGSO is an attempt to play the ball but its outside the PA and a goal is scored. Hopefully the said clarification eventuates for next season.
Click to expand...
Hasn't every Elleray reply referenced 'spirit of the game' or 'football expects'?
Probably fair enough as i believe it's the best response when we're debating issues on the fringe of what's covered by Law
 
All credit to Michael Oliver, had three big decisions to make in the game and got all three spot on including one in injury time where he was five yards behind play, fitness levels superb.
 
Big Cat said:
Hasn't every Elleray reply referenced 'spirit of the game' or 'football expects'?
Probably fair enough as i believe it's the best response when we're debating issues on the fringe of what's covered by Law
Click to expand...
Well he would do on several counts.
1) this is his baby. And this his basis for all of the law changes he implementing/implementes.
2) Seeing as many of the law enquiries we send are not specifically covered, the spirit of the game/what football expects is becomes applicable and possibly his way of getting people to think that way.
 
JamesL said:
Well he would do on several counts.
1) this is his baby. And this his basis for all of the law changes he implementing/implementes.
2) Seeing as many of the law enquiries we send are not specifically covered, the spirit of the game/what football expects is becomes applicable and possibly his way of getting people to think that way.
Click to expand...
Much as like a bit of Law dissection, common sense in games [i'm sure] is better than paralysis by analysis
 
Refereeing has needed this for years, give referees the opportunity to use a bit of common sense. Why go back and caution if a goal has been scored following an advantage? He hasn't denied an OGSO as a goal was scored, and he hasn't denied a promising attack as there is no more promising attack than one that ends in a goal. If it was a reckless challenge then fine, go back and caution, but if not just tell him he has dodged a bullet.

Some referees won't like it, but it appears that the authorities have now worked out that football is about the players and supporters rather than the referee. We saw that at the world cup and I think we'll start to see it elsewhere going forward.
 
...on a related note to the downgrade topic, I nearly gave a persistent YC at a pen decision that was a SPA downgrade the other day... but it fried my brain so much I didn't and gave a final warning instead - it was the third careless foul plus one other clip...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top