The Don, maybe you remember when Van Dijk was fouled by Pickford în the exact situation you've described here. Offside first, Pickford otherwise would have been sent off for excessive force. Van Dijk was out for 9 months...
Not your fault because you are not a referee. 100% means EVERY throw in taken EXACTLY where the ball went out, any taken in the wrong place, even by say 60cm, its a throw to opposition. No more quick free kicks, EVERY one taken exactly where the foul occurred. EVERY 'careless' contact is a foul. "That's never a foul ref" - yellow card. Wave your arms about after a foul, that's a yellow card. "Oh eff off" - that's a red. EVERY 'hold', or 'pull' that's a foul. GKs can only take 6 seconds to release the ball - currently its between 10 and 20 seconds - otherwise its a fk to oppo.
That's an awful example as PGMOL/Michael Oliver both agreed he should've gone anyway.
Yeah that's explicitly an example of how it's not supposed to work. Yes, the restart could never have been a penalty due to the offside occurring first, but the failure to show a red card was accepted as a major mistake by the officials and VAR.
Player commits 3 fouls ('persistent') that's a yellow.
Suppose when the 3 are committed, but that's really my point, if you're literally taking 'persistent' then 3 is.
No. If you are taking it literally, you have to take literally the language in Law 12 that specifically says "(no specific number or pattern of offenses constitutes 'persistent)."
Agree a foul in the 1st, 46th and 94th minute is not persistent.
Very dangerous to assume. I watch all sorts including Sunday League and Youth games where the incidents I describe have occurred over the years; perhaps 'often' should have read, 'many times'. You will recall I mentioned when a player of the same team calls "leave it".
Or when you go to the highest level where the referees tend to create the myth rather than follow them
Of course 3 fouls can be persistent. But they aren't always and that was how I read your post
In addition to @PinnerPaul's post, it also occurred in a UCL game I watched either this week or last. The player received a minimal bit of contact from the back, fell forward and grabbed the ball. The ref gave a free kick against him for a handling offence.
Yes we do, I agree, its the safe option I guess - especially if its a defender that has been 'fouled'.
There is a human element to refereeing to. At my basic refereeing level I would say that if one set of players are respectful of your role and play the game in a good manner and the other team are constantly questioning your decisions and being in your face,do you think some of those smaller 50/50 type decisions might not go the way of the 'bad' team? This is just a human element doesnt detract from a referee still applying the Laws of the Game. Also if a team is constantly on your case then they distract you from those seconds needed to make a decision and they can cause their own downfall. I often point out to teams that I will always try to play advantage when possible so as to give myself a little more time to replay decisions quickly in my head before stopping play if necessary.
This human element can work both ways. Give them the 50/50 to get them off your case. Or don't give them the 50/50 to 'teach them a lesson'.
I suppose it could,but from a personal point of view I won't be bullied so your example is less likely to happen with me. It is highly feasible with younger and less experienced refs, but I see this as setting a dangerous precedent and 'Give an inch,take a mile' is more likely to occur.
