A&H

Something I found interesting

Ciley Myrus

RefChat Addict
Two things in this, 2 min into the clip....something I don't see a lot, a pk awarded for a foul outside the pitch.
More interesting though is the kick off to the 2nd half, starting on 4 mins 20 on the clip....

constructive discussion point maybe.

 
The Referee Store
Penalty is correct. Kick off looks odd but I think the player with his foot on the ball does roll it ever so slightly, players were happy, play on.


Thats the thing, the players seemed ok, there was an opponent who looked very close to the ball at the kick off, maybe it was simply a pre arranged tactic that just went wrong, cant recall seeing something like that before.
Had the red team then complained that they had not taken the kick off, the ref might have some questions to answer, but nobody seems bothered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JH
PK is correct for me, I'm assuming the below reference in the LOTG is the reasoning:

"play is restarted with a free kick on the boundary line nearest to where the offence/interference occurred; a penalty kick is awarded if this is a direct free kick offence within the offender’s penalty area."

As for the kick off, as JH mentioned it does look as though it ever so slightly moves forward
 
Can I just state, I also am aware the pk is correct, I merely referenced it as , something I find quite rare

The post though was more aimed at the, strange kick off. I was kinda interested to see if anyone would dispute it fits the "clearly moved" criteria. Which if we are saying, it does look like it moves ever so slightly, is, that, clearly?

very technical I confess but i felt a reasonable topic for discussion.
 
Can I just state, I also am aware the pk is correct, I merely referenced it as , something I find quite rare

The post though was more aimed at the, strange kick off. I was kinda interested to see if anyone would dispute it fits the "clearly moved" criteria. Which if we are saying, it does look like it moves ever so slightly, is, that, clearly?

very technical I confess but i felt a reasonable topic for discussion.
If the opponent didn't get the ball, I'd have insisted on a restart. I don't like shenanigans
 
I loved the little goal mouth scramble just at the end of the first half ~ 4 mins. Striker fails to make any decent contact then keeper unable to gather the ball.
 
Ref had a good game in my humble opinion - yellows all looked correct to me.

Loved the black 10 moaning about HIS YC. Held on to the ball dispite oppo trying to get ball off him about 3 times, ref asks him and then he throws the ball away. Seems surprised he's cautioned 'What, delaying the restart, me ref?'

4-3 to blacks I made it - is that correct - wasn't fully paying attention!
 
Gee, our boy is real patient with that black #4. My fingers would have been itching for a dissent 2nd YC. Just constant!
 
What a brilliant game. And what a brilliant refereeing performance.

The kick off, on first view it hadn’t clearly moved so I’d be thinking retake to stop the consequent grief.

Can you play advantage if you think it’s an illegal kick off with 3-4 players in the wrong half? Hmm I don’t think you can, at least there’s no mention of it in the kick off part of the book.

While I’m happy the game continued after the kick off went to the opponent it’s a mess. If the ref says it clearly moved it’s all good.

Interesting foul throw moment that lead to handbags, it wasn’t clear what the offence was, perhaps taking from the wrong place after being warned.

One advantage for black after 11 mins, in a very good place, that lead to goal for red!

But overall. Amazing. Had everything. And excellent performance.
 
Retake of the kick off for me regardless who gets the ball. The ball didn't clearly move. 'ever so slightly' is basically not clearly. You can't play advantage on an incorrect restart (e.g 'foul throw').

I don't allow players to restart with their foot on the ball when it's on the whistle. Mostly for IFK disputes but this is another good example.
 
You can't play advantage on an incorrect restart (e.g 'foul throw').

Correct. This distinction was emphasized heavily in the US when we finally admitted advantage can apply to violations other than Law 12. (That doesn't, however, mean that trifling violations of Law 12 cannot be ignored--but that's a different thought process.)

I don't allow players to restart with their foot on the ball when it's on the whistle. Mostly for IFK disputes but this is another good example.

I don't think there is clear support in the Law for that--the foot on top is permitted by more than who don't (I'd like to see IFAB put yea or nay on this in the magic book)--certainly not for a different standard on quick kicks and ceremonial kicks. I agree this play is an interesting one. And it would be easier to rule on in a real context than watching a video. But the ball moved and it appears that the players on both teams accepted the action as putting the ball in play--and from the referee's movement you can see that he decided it was in play as soon as it happened. Since the whole point of "clearly moved" is that there not be ambiguity on whether or not the ball is in play, I see no reason for a referee to say "it moved but not enough" when all of the players recognized it as having been kicked. I see no reason for the referee to intervene here. (Of course, a referee who decided the motion was not "clear" would not be wrong in the LOTG.)
 
Can I just state, I also am aware the pk is correct, I merely referenced it as , something I find quite rare

The post though was more aimed at the, strange kick off. I was kinda interested to see if anyone would dispute it fits the "clearly moved" criteria. Which if we are saying, it does look like it moves ever so slightly, is, that, clearly?

very technical I confess but i felt a reasonable topic for discussion.

OK so has Mr Hackett got this one totally wrong - reference You Are The Ref 2018 book

A defender and striker sprint into the area. Although the ball remains in play, both players end up sliding over the goal line where the defender fouls the attacker. The attacker isn't hurt but defender can get up quicker and clears the ball. What now?

Abridged answer but this IS a direct quote 'The LOTG make it clear that you can NOT award a penalty in these circumstances. Restart the game with a drop ball':meh:
 
OK so has Mr Hackett got this one totally wrong - reference You Are The Ref 2018 book

A defender and striker sprint into the area. Although the ball remains in play, both players end up sliding over the goal line where the defender fouls the attacker. The attacker isn't hurt but defender can get up quicker and clears the ball. What now?

Abridged answer but this IS a direct quote 'The LOTG make it clear that you can NOT award a penalty in these circumstances. Restart the game with a drop ball':meh:

I guess he missed that in the LOTG 2018... (Or was it introduced in 2017?)
 
OK so has Mr Hackett got this one totally wrong - reference You Are The Ref 2018 book

A defender and striker sprint into the area. Although the ball remains in play, both players end up sliding over the goal line where the defender fouls the attacker. The attacker isn't hurt but defender can get up quicker and clears the ball. What now?

Abridged answer but this IS a direct quote 'The LOTG make it clear that you can NOT award a penalty in these circumstances. Restart the game with a drop ball':meh:
Ex referees seem to get a lot wrong. I suspect they do not keep up to date with laws and try to pass by with their previous knowledge.
 
If I'm being observed then that kick off is being retaken. Whilst you can debate whether it clearly moves from the referee's view, there's no way those in the stand could be sure .... and I'm not taking the chance of a grumpy observer using that as an excuse to mark me down in AOL :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Is the book just reprinting his columns from the paper? If so, it may have been correct when initially printed. But if not, it wouldn't be the first thing he got flat out wrong.

No idea, there are many other examples - didn't want to bore everyone. It was very late when I was reading it, but I'm sure there are two identical penalty scenarios with different 'answers'!
 
Back
Top