The Ref Stop

What action would you take ?!

What course of action would you take ?

  • Penalty

  • Penalty, caution defender

  • Simulation W11, caution, IDFK restart

  • Play continues

Results are only viewable after voting.
The Ref Stop
What a call imo, purple player lunges to whites left and white goes right and runs into his standing leg. There is minimal movement as purple tries to shift back to the right but not enough to cause the contact for me. Great call.
 
I think it's difficult not to be emotive when saying 'what you would have given' because of the ensuing behaviour
But the reality being, award a PK here and it's a non-event. Otherwise it's simulation IMO. I'm personally not keen on just playing on as I'd rather a positive decision being made one way or another
 
This is the situation we have allowed ourselves to get to (and by we I mean the game and not referees), players are conditioned to initiate contact to draw fouls. I've been in and around professional academies, it is absolutely coached into them from the age of 8 or 9.

I'm not giving a foul there. but I doubt I would have a good enough view to be sure enough to caution for simulation. What happened with W14 is ultimately irrelevant as there is no way the referee would have seen it. Even if he heard the words used he has zero chance of knowing who it came from.
 
I think it's a penalty. I don't love it, it's clearly what the attacker is looking for, but there's a dangling leg and he runs into it, which is usually considered enough nowadays.
 
First thought at real time was a penalty so I'm probably giving that. Keeper looks straight at ref so I think he's thinking it's a pen too.
 
It's interesting that the defender goes down seemingly injured. Some have elected to caution him as well as award penalty .....
 
It's easier to give a penalty here than not so well done to the ref, very brave. There looks to be contact but the attacker is clearly looking for it. I'm 50/50 on it but I would probably have given it.
 
Using the fact that the attacker was looking for a foul as justification for not giving it doesn't quite sit right with me. No I don't like to give the attacker the satisfaction but for me there was a foul there and has to be given.
 
Big Cat said:
I think it's difficult not to be emotive when saying 'what you would have given' because of the ensuing behaviour
But the reality being, award a PK here and it's a non-event. Otherwise it's simulation IMO. I'm personally not keen on just playing on as I'd rather a positive decision being made one way or another
Click to expand...
Context - 3-3 93rd minute. You decide the match here.

No way am I giving that in this context. And I’d like to think I’d recognize the attacker initiating contact in any context!
 
Without intending to be argumentative, there is a difference between initiating contact and not avoiding it. The defender's leg is dangled out, yes the attacker likey could have avoided contact but he is under no obligation to change his path of following the ball to avoid contact. Obviously if there was a 3m gap and 2 seconds between defender dangling the leg out and contact them it would be a different story.

Another common scenario is a slide tackle on the ground coming across at a right angle in front of a running attacker and the tackle mises the ball. Most attackers jump over the defender and we keep going. But if they don't jump and they go to ground after contact/trip, I'd still likely give that as a careless tackle (YHTBT).
 
There are two types of simulation: one where there is no contact, and one where the attacker initiates the contact and goes down screaming for a pen. This is the latter. A caution to W11 for simulation is required. In that case, quick and strong body language, showing urgency is needed. That may possibly avoid the need for a caution to the other white player who is clearly engaging in dissent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top