Flamengo V Cricuimia - Second ball on pitch
- Thread starter bester
- Start date
one
RefChat Addict
Excellent decision and correct sanction. I'd like to think it wasn't just luck that he got it right and he knows the lotg well.
Should he have stopped the game? I wouldn't have. For me, the extra ball would have only interfered if a player deliberately made it so.
The only thing I would changed is a caution for mobbing. But this is South America and a caution for it would be unheard of
Should he have stopped the game? I wouldn't have. For me, the extra ball would have only interfered if a player deliberately made it so.
The only thing I would changed is a caution for mobbing. But this is South America and a caution for it would be unheard of
Someone on Twitter thinks it should be a direct free kick and the defenders allowed a wall. This is what we're up against folks!
On a Facebook forum a lot of referees are saying they would be giving a dropped ball, on the basis the second ball impacted the defender's ability to kick the actual ball. Not for me, dropping the ball to the keeper would in effect be rewarding a blatant act of cheating.
Remember that Atlanta(?) v Toronto goal from a couple of weeks ago where the attacker hangs back when the keeper has it in his hands, then runs round to nick it off him and score when the keeper rolls it out to lump upfield..? The overwhelming “football twitter”* comments said offside.
* worst social media subset ever.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
What is the DFK offense? The ball was not thrown . . .
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Thanks. At times I really hate the hodge podge structure of some of the Laws. That’s what I thought the Law was, but when I went to DFK offenses, it only says thrown, so I figured I misremembered.
Number of and Location of defenders means this isn't a DOGSO for me. Caution correct sanction.
Great thanks thought the same.