Spain/Croatia (Oliver)
- Thread starter cwyeary
- Start date
It might be tough as Taylor has been ranked above him within UEFA during recent seasons.
I can never get my head around that tbh. I personally think MO is a better official, but AT is right behind him so either way it would be a good appointment for England's officials. The fact that UEFA rank AT higher is why I was surprised they gave this game to MO as it will be a huge game, and possibly very tight.
Agreed
ladbroke8745
RefChat Addict
Should it have been a red for the penalty, in law?
Personally, I am questioning a penalty. He felt contact, kicked the floor and went down. I don't think rodri did enough to actually foul him.
Good call on the encroachment.
Personally, I am questioning a penalty. He felt contact, kicked the floor and went down. I don't think rodri did enough to actually foul him.
Good call on the encroachment.
If it was encroachment, the penalty should have been retaken:
Attachments
Not when the kick was saved and Croatia was the only team to offend.
Lucarelli99
New Member
I think with the rewording of the rule as of 23-24, it essentially rules out a red for any tackle in the area that isn't involving the hands or isn't completely off the ball* so I think he's made the right decision by virtue of the ball being in the vicinity of the player who was fouled. Correct me if I'm wrong though.
*And obviously red card offences like endangering the safety of an opponent, violent conduct, etc that lie outside of this realm
22-23 season or earlier and he probably has to walk for it.
Last edited:
Good point! Just misread the situation!
Per law 12 possibility to play the ball isn't the standard anymore.
DENYING A GOAL OR AN OBVIOUS GOAL-SCORING OPPORTUNITY (DOGSO)
Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball or a challenge for the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.), the offending player must be sent off.
Law 12 from lotg
Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball or a challenge for the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.), the offending player must be sent off.
Law 12 from lotg
Maybe he deserved it.
I would respectfully disagree with it being deemed as ‘challenging for the ball’.
from the defenders position has he any possibility of making contact with the ball, not even close.
I would agree with you that DOGSO might have swung too far the other way but I'm very very confident this will be supported as a yellow by Rosetti and UEFA.
bester
RefChat Addict
"
Explanation
It is not always clear whether an action was an attempt to play the ball or a
challenge for the ball (or both). The same principle should apply for challenging
for the ball as attempting to play the ball. Where the referee awards a penalty for
a DOGSO offence, the offending player is only sent off if the offence was
committed without the possibility to play the ball."
Explanation
It is not always clear whether an action was an attempt to play the ball or a
challenge for the ball (or both). The same principle should apply for challenging
for the ball as attempting to play the ball. Where the referee awards a penalty for
a DOGSO offence, the offending player is only sent off if the offence was
committed without the possibility to play the ball."