SM
The avuncular one
@Russell Jones was being sarcastic that make a point - I had to read his post more than once to get itYou can have part of both feet on the fop, as long as both feet are on or behind the line.
@Russell Jones was being sarcastic that make a point - I had to read his post more than once to get itYou can have part of both feet on the fop, as long as both feet are on or behind the line.
No, the decision is, is it in or out, clearly in so penalty !Both sets of players think its out though. One wants a GK and the other a corner. That's the decision which needs to be made.
Personally I just can't get my head round the idea that someone would knowingly give an incorrect decision on a KMI. . What gives us a god given right to choose how a match is decided?! ANY doubt in your mind then for sure, go with the easier, more sellable decision. But zero doubt? Only one call to make in my opinion ...0-0 in a cup tie with a minute remaining? Do I really want the game decided like that
If the thing you're talking about when you say you have more to lose is integrity, then yes, you're right.
In/out is a black and white decision. If you're standing there thinking 'well, I know the ball is in therefore a blatant foul has occurred, but I just cant be bothered / don't have the courage / don't want to deal with making the right decision so I'll just lie and say it was out', then that's not showing integrity at all. Acting in a prejudiced manner isn't the only way an official loses integrity.
'Seeing too much'? That's one of the most ridiculous things I've read on this forum. This isn't about going out of your way to make up an offence when one hasn't really occurred, which is what 'seeing too much' would actually refer to.
by that logic, I shudder to think of what other blatant offences you've let go because you could get away with it. Very, very dangerous path, and not what refereeing is supposed to be about.
Personally I just can't get my head round the idea that someone would knowingly give an incorrect decision on a KMI. . What gives us a god given right to choose how a match is decided?! ANY doubt in your mind then for sure, go with the easier, more sellable decision. But zero doubt? Only one call to make in my opinion ...
Ball in and out of play that directly impacts on a penalty decision = KMI . C'mon @Jacko, do keep upIt's ball in and out of play, not a KMI.
Key Match Incident. They have supposedly ben renamed to KMD, Key Match Decision this season.Well we all do it our own way, and what can you say? Agree to disagree.
I had one the other day where a player was down injured, somebody shouted put it out, his team mate with the ball stopped to look around, and the other team went on the attack. They may well have scored. But I stopped play. Then smilingly apologised to the captain. "Sorry captain, I thought it was a head injury." Wink wink.
Wrong decision?
What's KMI mean, by the way? Haven't come across that before.
[pedant mode on] Not quite. The referee came into play when the two partisan umpires could not agree on a call made by a player or players for a possible infringement. Initially, the issue was brought before a committee, which could therefore affect a match result after the match had been played. That's why a referee was introduced. When the umpires disagreed, they referred to the referee for an ultimate decision. The word arbiter used in many languages comes from Latin and means 'someone who observes', which later took on the meaning of 'judge'. [pedant mode off]Goes back to the role of the referee when it was first introduced, to arbitrate on game incidents, hence the name arbitro used in Spain and Portugal.
Double like![pedant mode on] Not quite. The referee came into play when the two partisan umpires could not agree on a call made by a player or players for a possible infringement. Initially, the issue was brought before a committee, which could therefore affect a match result after the match had been played. That's why a referee was introduced. When the umpires disagreed, they referred to the referee for an ultimate decision. The word arbiter used in many languages comes from Latin and means 'someone who observes', which later took on the meaning of 'judge'. [pedant mode off]
It's the one thing I'm expert at: the history of the laws and of refereeing. Got a ton of books on the stuff. Most interesting!Double like!