Vanishing spray

[mike mcgill]

But they have threatened to charge any referees who use it......so i would be curious to know under what regulation they would bring the charge?

again cant argue but..................
we know

 

[ASM]

@Padfoot I suspect you'll find it under section 7 of the FA Referee Regulations so it is written. It would either fall into section 7a (ii) committed a technical irregularity or 7a (vii) has not acted in the best interests of the game.

 

[mike mcgill]

vg
ASM

 

[Padfoot]

@Padfoot I suspect you'll find it under section 7 of the FA Referee Regulations so it is written. It would either fall into section 7a (ii) committed a technical irregularity or 7a (vii) has not acted in the best interests of the game.

Define "technical irregularity"?

Also, how is making it clear for players where the FK is to be taken from, and where they have to stand to avoid committing an offence, not "in the best interests of the game"?

 

[mike mcgill]

why don't we just do what we have always done ? pace the ten (don't be picky) tell them if you encroach you will be cautioned free kick retaken if required
simple """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

 

[ASM]

Define "technical irregularity"?

I'll leave you to read the regulations where it is defined - I've spoon-fed you enough already.

Granted however that the "best interest of the game" is not clearly defined, however I would suggest being cavalier in your approach to anything and anybody wishing to progress and better themselves whilst simultaneous sounding like a broken record may make the grade.

 

[mike mcgill]

I'll leave you to read the regulations where it is defined - I've spoon-fed you enough already.

Granted however that the "best interest of the game" is not clearly defined.

don't encourage him

 

[Padfoot]

why don't we just do what we have always done ? pace the ten (don't be picky) tell them if you encroach you will be cautioned free kick retaken if required
simple """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Don't have any issue with that approach.

It's the ridiculous attitude from CFA's that feel that they have to threaten referees with "sanctions" and wield a big stick when it isn't necessary.

 

[mike mcgill]

Don't have any issue with that approach.

It's the ridiculous attitude from CFA's that feel that they have to threaten referees with "sanctions" and wield a big stick when it isn't necessary.

its what they do if they didn't we would all be doing or wearing what we wanted to

 

[Padfoot]

I'll leave you to read the regulations where it is defined - I've spoon-fed you enough already.

Granted however that the "best interest of the game" is not clearly defined, however I would suggest being cavalier in your approach to anything and anybody wishing to progress and better themselves whilst simultaneous sounding like a broken record may make the grade.

Over promoting referees cannot be in the best interests of the game....nor can having assessors who are still working from the LOAF! But no one says much about that.....they just call it "part of the game" or "how the system works"......

 

[mike mcgill]

then anarchy

 

[MGatiss]

I can't look anywhere without mention of over promoting referees!!!!

 

[MGatiss]

And what's the difference between LOAF and LOTG? Isn't it just the name of the book? :S

 

[SM]

@Padfoot you are one seriously bitter man! Not even the topic of vanishing spray fails to provide you with a chance to rant about the fa or cfa's. Or over promoting referees. Somehow.

 

[Padfoot]

@Padfoot you are one seriously bitter man! Not even the topic of vanishing spray fails to provide you with a chance to rant about the fa or cfa's. Or over promoting referees. Somehow.

Actually not bitter in the slightest. Happy with my refereeing career past, present and future.

Just realistic enough to see what is happening, why and how we could improve things.

 

[matty639]

I'll continue to do what I always do, walk the ten then add a little bit more knowing full well that when they creep forward they'll hit the ten mark.

 

[mike mcgill]

don't we just love a debate