RefSix

GAL vs GFK

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
The ref obv feeling brave with the absence of some, erm, volatile fans

We dont know, has the keeper been given 2-3 shouts earlier in the game before the incident that we dont see, in which he was penalised snd cautioned?
If so, i,e its been commonplace throughout the game, maybe he been stretching it a bit at the last few goal kicks that we dont see, maybe with Ar and ref trying to encourage him to keep going
Am puzzled though as to why, having obviously been determined enough to give the offence, why not complete the trick with a second yellow?
If your brave ( naive?) enough to give the offence, then, be strong enough to take the sanction too. Note, am aware its not a mandatory card here.

to us at the council pitch, use your savvy, the decision seems like a surprise, when you hear of refs being confronted after the game, its usually because of a decision like this, you might feel you are strong and applying the rules, but, its not really the best game management for us plebs

sometimes being right is not as preferable to being sensible

its a clear pk tho
 

Sheffields Finest

Maybe I'm foolish, maybe I'm blind!
Level 7 Referee
Harsh in the extreme but we don’t know what’s gone before. Some Prem keepers, especially Krul, would be always getting pulled up if they bothered like this chap!
 

es1

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
I feel this video doesn't even capture the most interesting incident in injury time! The disallowed goal was ludicrous
 

Big Cat

RefChat Addict
Level 6 Referee
The ref obv feeling brave with the absence of some, erm, volatile fans

We dont know, has the keeper been given 2-3 shouts earlier in the game before the incident that we dont see, in which he was penalised snd cautioned?
If so, i,e its been commonplace throughout the game, maybe he been stretching it a bit at the last few goal kicks that we dont see, maybe with Ar and ref trying to encourage him to keep going
Am puzzled though as to why, having obviously been determined enough to give the offence, why not complete the trick with a second yellow?
If your brave ( naive?) enough to give the offence, then, be strong enough to take the sanction too. Note, am aware its not a mandatory card here.

to us at the council pitch, use your savvy, the decision seems like a surprise, when you hear of refs being confronted after the game, its usually because of a decision like this, you might feel you are strong and applying the rules, but, its not really the best game management for us plebs

sometimes being right is not as preferable to being sensible

its a clear pk tho
It's not delaying the restart, so whilst correct in Law (no 2nd caution), wrong in every other respect. I also think it's cheating for the PK. Not all contact is a foul and that was trivial at best
 

JamesL

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
The ref obv feeling brave with the absence of some, erm, volatile fans

We dont know, has the keeper been given 2-3 shouts earlier in the game before the incident that we dont see, in which he was penalised snd cautioned?
If so, i,e its been commonplace throughout the game, maybe he been stretching it a bit at the last few goal kicks that we dont see, maybe with Ar and ref trying to encourage him to keep going
Am puzzled though as to why, having obviously been determined enough to give the offence, why not complete the trick with a second yellow?
If your brave ( naive?) enough to give the offence, then, be strong enough to take the sanction too. Note, am aware its not a mandatory card here.

to us at the council pitch, use your savvy, the decision seems like a surprise, when you hear of refs being confronted after the game, its usually because of a decision like this, you might feel you are strong and applying the rules, but, its not really the best game management for us plebs

sometimes being right is not as preferable to being sensible

its a clear pk tho
Not sure but you would imagine he had been. He was already on a caution for delaying the restart.
 

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
It's not delaying the restart, so whilst correct in Law (no 2nd caution), wrong in every other respect. I also think it's cheating for the PK. Not all contact is a foul and that was trivial at best

we dont know what happened before, and, he is already on a yc?
Persistent would cover it?

am giving the pk, the guy who committed it reaction also, fast feet, trip.
 

JamesL

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
we dont know what happened before, and, he is already on a yc?
Persistent would cover it?

am giving the pk, the guy who committed it reaction also, fast feet, trip.
That would be incredibly harsh to commit two offences in 103 minutes and receive two cautions, with one being persistent.
Yes I know, no specific pattern or number.... But persistent I am not sure.
Yes if he had done this 1 other time, or maybe twice but not the first time the referee chose to punish it.
 

Kes

I'll Decide ...
Level 5 Referee
Maybe I'm missing something here, but surely, irrespective of what has gone on before, it's the referee's decision, so long as he's correct in law.

From what I can see, the ref has simply awarded an IDFK against the GK for holding onto the ball for more than 6 seconds. Why complicate things by trying to attach other possible scenarios and offences to it in order to suggest he should have cautioned him as well? :confused:
 

JamesL

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
Maybe I'm missing something here, but surely, irrespective of what has gone on before, it's the referee's decision, so long as he's correct in law.

From what I can see, the ref has simply awarded an IDFK against the GK for holding onto the ball for more than 6 seconds. Why complicate things by trying to attach other possible scenarios and offences to it in order to suggest he should have cautioned him as well? :confused:
Think it was the commentator that pushed the idea mostly. I don't think a caution was warranted and personally think would be incorrect in law without having to put a slant on it.
 

Kes

I'll Decide ...
Level 5 Referee
Think it was the commentator that pushed the idea mostly.
Now there's a thing! Lol. I honestly have no idea where they get these people from. You'd hope that even if they don't have an extensive knowledge of the LOTG, they might at least have a copy at hand or even a SME to explain/correct them before they open their gobs and say something like he did. "I can't imagine what the referee has given that free kick for if it wasn't time wasting." :rolleyes:
 

JamesL

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
Now there's a thing! Lol. I honestly have no idea where they get these people from. You'd hope that even if they don't have an extensive knowledge of the LOTG, they might at least have a copy at hand or even a SME to explain/correct them before they open their gobs and say something like he did. "I can't imagine what the referee has given that free kick for if it wasn't time wasting." :rolleyes:
Said the same in another group. But it shows what we are up against.
I can see why you would expect that to be a yellow, its in a similar category of offence as DRP, but it isn't DRP so you know...
 

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
What would the caution be for? Can't be delaying the restart as it wasn't stopped, and can't really be persistent infringement as you'd effectively be admitting that you had let him hold it for more than 6 seconds previously without penalising. Caution just isn't needed here and there is a very strong argument to say it would be plain incorrect.

Penalty was nailed on for me.
 

JamesL

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
What would the caution be for? Can't be delaying the restart as it wasn't stopped, and can't really be persistent infringement as you'd effectively be admitting that you had let him hold it for more than 6 seconds previously without penalising. Caution just isn't needed here and there is a very strong argument to say it would be plain incorrect.

Penalty was nailed on for me.
We're not sati g it should be a caution. I agree, it's not a caution.
But I can see how someone who does not know the laws as we do would think it should be
 

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
We're not sati g it should be a caution. I agree, it's not a caution.
But I can see how someone who does not know the laws as we do would think it should be
Ciley said he was puzzled as to why there was no caution, that was my point, as well as obviously the commentators.
 

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
Ciley said he was puzzled as to why there was no caution, that was my point, as well as obviously the commentators.

it was more my curiosity to why, according to commentators, he had already been cautioned, unless i missed it, for this offence
Only watched it once, so its possible i never heard or misheard something, so apologies if the first yc was for something else
If that makes sense!
 

Kes

I'll Decide ...
Level 5 Referee
it was more my curiosity to why, according to commentators, he had already been cautioned, unless i missed it, for this offence
Only watched it once, so its possible i never heard or misheard something, so apologies if the first yc was for something else
If that makes sense!
Commentator said he'd already been cautioned for "time wasting". Pound to a penny it was for taking too long at a goal kick (delaying the restart) but only my guess.
LOTG say if the GK holds onto the ball for longer than 6 seconds, it's an IDFK.
For me, the ref's got it spot on. :)
 

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
Commentator said he'd already been cautioned for "time wasting". Pound to a penny it was for taking too long at a goal kick (delaying the restart) but only my guess.
LOTG say if the GK holds onto the ball for longer than 6 seconds, it's an IDFK.
For me, the ref's got it spot on. :)
Ok, i only heard, seen once
If thats the case then correct no card, the commentator made it sound like he had been booked for holding ball too long, hence me confused
Maybe i should watch again without hangover

i still doubt i be giving the fk tho
 
Top