Are they not online somewhere for everyone to have a look at? Would make more sense for accessibility that way I'd have thought?
United v Burnley
- Thread starter RobOda
- Start date
Are they not online somewhere for everyone to have a look at? Would make more sense for accessibility that way I'd have thought?
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
I dont know about other areas/countries, I can only speak for what was instructed here, first rolled out on 10/9/15 according to my library.
The clips are available for referee's here to view, you will need to ask locally for the mirroring clips in your area i think
Again, I can only go on the instructions laid down to me by my superiors
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
Now that I've seen it, I'm happy with a red card. First I only saw the 2nd head contact, that's only a yellow in isolation. But the first one...there's definitely an 'impact' - the player walked straight into him, forehead first. That's not negligible force, it's a clear red card. You'd send off for less force if it was a slap to the face.
Usually the forehead-to-forehead thing is 2 players already chest-to-chest, then one leans foreward. Not this one - he walks straight into him and makes contact at walking pace.
https://www.foxsports.com.au/video/football/epl/red-card-or-soft!697089
If anybody is able to get past geoblocking and see that aussie clip. It shows more than the clip above.
and while I haven't seen the same stuff @Ciley Myrus is referring to, I suspect the instruction didn't cover a case quite like this one. I agree that forehead-to-forehead isn't an automatic red card....but usually it's done with 2 standing players with no impact. This wasn't that.
Usually the forehead-to-forehead thing is 2 players already chest-to-chest, then one leans foreward. Not this one - he walks straight into him and makes contact at walking pace.
https://www.foxsports.com.au/video/football/epl/red-card-or-soft!697089
If anybody is able to get past geoblocking and see that aussie clip. It shows more than the clip above.
and while I haven't seen the same stuff @Ciley Myrus is referring to, I suspect the instruction didn't cover a case quite like this one. I agree that forehead-to-forehead isn't an automatic red card....but usually it's done with 2 standing players with no impact. This wasn't that.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
My material is carbon copy. When I work out how to put the clip on here, I will
The clip in question also has impact.
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
I look forward to it 
sounds like the current IFAB DHB guidance, in that it sounds like 'guidance' that directly contravenes the LOTG.
Under the LOTG, any deliberate contact to the head/face, off-the-ball, is a red card unless the force is negligible. The force here is not negligible. You'd definitely be feeling it if somebody walked into you, forehead first.
Heck, credit to his opposing player for not taking a dive. At least giving the red card here shows you don't need to dive for an opponent to be sent.
sounds like the current IFAB DHB guidance, in that it sounds like 'guidance' that directly contravenes the LOTG.
Under the LOTG, any deliberate contact to the head/face, off-the-ball, is a red card unless the force is negligible. The force here is not negligible. You'd definitely be feeling it if somebody walked into you, forehead first.
Heck, credit to his opposing player for not taking a dive. At least giving the red card here shows you don't need to dive for an opponent to be sent.
Download the clips, upload them to a Google Drive folder or a Dropbox folder, and share that folder link.
I'd suggest putting a text file with the advice (or an image/screenshot) with each video to make it clear what belongs to what.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Not "digital by default", eh? Me neither.
It sounds like this is internal SFA guidance (endorsed by UEFA?) but not necessarily binding on other associations/leagues.
It's unfortunate if some bodies (inc FIFA in the world cup) are issuing "expectations" for their competitions that actually have no basis in the laws themselves.
It sounds like this is internal SFA guidance (endorsed by UEFA?) but not necessarily binding on other associations/leagues.
It's unfortunate if some bodies (inc FIFA in the world cup) are issuing "expectations" for their competitions that actually have no basis in the laws themselves.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Strange as this may seem, I was unable to adhere to the directives handed down by the boss of the Iran Referee Association or the equals in Uganda, Greenland and Peru
I was only able to follow the instructions and indeed in this case , orders, of the boss of my countries referee department.
And based on the orders laid down, the Rashford clip is a yellow card. For me to show red, I would expect to be hauled in front of said boss, shown directives and instructions that I have already been programmed to follow, and asked why I went against them and issued a red instead of yellow
There is more basis to the change, (in the country which I officiate) and it involved legal action, so, kinda important that being an official in that country, I follow the guidelines set down by the body who control officiating in this country
if wherever you are, your instructions on an incident like this are different, then, all you can also do is do as you have been taught.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Its probably unwise to pass comment about a situation that had a legal cloud over it where I am.
Said far too much already, in the interests of education and sharing knowledge with a view to referee development.
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
That makes no sense. Unless the court case is still ongoing or there's a 'super injunction' in place, or it involves revealing details of a minor, there's no reason you can't talk about it.
You don't have to pass comment on it but there's no restriction on giving details of a matter that was already concluded in court.
As far as I'm aware, according to Scottish law and in the words of Lord President Inglis: