Soca Warriors Online Discussion Forum
Sports => Football => Topic started by: Touches on June 04, 2008, 09:00:00 PM
-
Forumites,
Here is a change from the ole talk and banter.
It is an opportunity to test your football knowledge and learn a little more about the game we love.
I took this from BBC SPort. It is a cartoon with a football scenario and a question is asked. The answer is given later on.
It is updated every so often, here is the first installment.
Welcome to the first of our special Euro 2008 editions of the cartoon strip You Are The Ref.
If you always thought it was easy being a referee, now is your chance to prove it.
Have a look at the drawing below by You Are The Ref creator Paul Trevillion, which features English referee Howard Webb, who will be officiating at Euro 2008. Then read the question below the drawing.
Referee Howard Webb
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/webb_438x318.jpg)
Question
A player scythes down an opponent, two-footed, over the top - a definitive red card offence. However, the ball bounces kindly for the other team and they have an excellent chance of scoring. You allow play to continue, making a mental note to send the player off next time there is a break in play. The goal opportunity is denied by a miracle one-handed save by the goalkeeper. A team-mate instantly kicks the ball upfield to the player, who should have been sent off. He is played onside by the player he hacked down and he goes on to score.
Should the goal be allowed? Should the goalscorer still be sent off? What you would do in this situation?
Answer Click Here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/2008/06/you_are_the_ref_2.html)
-
You Are The Ref
You Are The Ref #2
* You Are The Ref
* 4 Jun 08, 03:23 PM
Welcome back for the second edition of a special Euro 2008 version of You Are The Ref.
After today's scenario we'll remind you of yesterday's question and give you the answer from You Are The Ref's Keith Hackett.
Today's drawing from You Are The Ref creator Paul Trevillion features Liverpool and Spain striker Fernando Torres.
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/torres_438x318.jpg)
Fernando Torres
Today's question
A defender is off the pitch receiving treatment and you have clearly told him to remain on the sideline until you signal for him to return. Spain are on the attack and Fernando Torres receives the ball outside the penalty area, runs through the defence, rounds the goalkeeper and taps the ball towards the empty net. As he turns to celebrate his goal the defender who was off the field receiving treatment sprints back on to the pitch without waiting for your signal to invite him on and performs a last-ditch goalline clearance.
How would you deal with this situation?
-
My take on the two scenarios...
One) Either stop play immediately the keeper make the save. Sending off the man who commit the foul. Giving the hacked down player treatment and giving a drop ball situation between the two teams.
If I ent do that I would allow the goal and then give the fella the red after before the resumption....wait hold on that ent making sense.....I make a error so If I allow the goal to stand I will give him a yellow. If he already had a yellow I will give him a warning and continue with the game.
Looking at it scenario 1 is the better of the two. Will consult with linesman.
Scenario 2) Torres...did not actually score it was a goal line clearance. I would stop play, give a penalty and den hit the man who coming on a Red Card. For a) coming on the field without permission, b) not coming on at the half, c) denying a goalscoring opportunity using unfair/ungentlemanly conduct....3 offenses he commit there.
-
I eh read needah answer.
Scenario 1 - If de tackle is horrendous as you described, I not playin no advantage. I stoppin play right there and then and sennin off de player. To me daz de bess course a action because aldoh de attackin team might be vex, there is no guarantee they will score. And the tackle was horrendous. If it was a normal foul, ah woulda play advantage and hand out a yellow after.
Scenario 2 - Indirect free kick at de spot where de player kick de ball (yes..on de line). Offending player red carded
-
A red card and an indirect free-kick palos?? Somehow them 2 things doh seem to go together. To me, if is a red card it have to be a direct free kick.
-
It will be an indirect to Torres team but a yellow card to the defender not a red.
-
Forumites,
Here is a change from the ole talk and banter.
It is an opportunity to test your football knowledge and learn a little more about the game we love.
I took this from BBC SPort. It is a cartoon with a football scenario and a question is asked. The answer is given later on.
It is updated every so often, here is the first installment.
Welcome to the first of our special Euro 2008 editions of the cartoon strip You Are The Ref.
If you always thought it was easy being a referee, now is your chance to prove it.
Have a look at the drawing below by You Are The Ref creator Paul Trevillion, which features English referee Howard Webb, who will be officiating at Euro 2008. Then read the question below the drawing.
Referee Howard Webb
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/webb_438x318.jpg)
Question
A player scythes down an opponent, two-footed, over the top - a definitive red card offence. However, the ball bounces kindly for the other team and they have an excellent chance of scoring. You allow play to continue, making a mental note to send the player off next time there is a break in play. The goal opportunity is denied by a miracle one-handed save by the goalkeeper. A team-mate instantly kicks the ball upfield to the player, who should have been sent off. He is played onside by the player he hacked down and he goes on to score.
Should the goal be allowed? Should the goalscorer still be sent off? What you would do in this situation?
Answer Click Here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/2008/06/you_are_the_ref_2.html)
what kinda stupid ques is that ,of course the goal should be allowed ,the ref can 't suddenly change his mind 3 mins later lol .
-
You Are The Ref
You Are The Ref #2
* You Are The Ref
* 4 Jun 08, 03:23 PM
Welcome back for the second edition of a special Euro 2008 version of You Are The Ref.
After today's scenario we'll remind you of yesterday's question and give you the answer from You Are The Ref's Keith Hackett.
Today's drawing from You Are The Ref creator Paul Trevillion features Liverpool and Spain striker Fernando Torres.
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/torres_438x318.jpg)
Fernando Torres
Today's question
A defender is off the pitch receiving treatment and you have clearly told him to remain on the sideline until you signal for him to return. Spain are on the attack and Fernando Torres receives the ball outside the penalty area, runs through the defence, rounds the goalkeeper and taps the ball towards the empty net. As he turns to celebrate his goal the defender who was off the field receiving treatment sprints back on to the pitch without waiting for your signal to invite him on and performs a last-ditch goalline clearance.
How would you deal with this situation?
red card and suspension for been ah idiot.goal counts .Me eint setting no kinda precedents where anybody could get away with that .
-
Quagmire...I disagree.
The ball did not cross the line...once that ent happen it cannot be a goal.
A penalty has to be given, but not the goal.
As for Palos...in the first instance dais why it have the advantage rule. The ref merely gave the advantage to the team and they did not make it count. After the keeper save then blow the whistle and stop the game.
-
Todays Question
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/nistelrooy_438x318.jpg)
Question
A team hanging on to a one-goal lead are desperately trying to waste time when their goalkeeper catches a long range shot from Dutch striker Ruud van Nistelrooy. The keeper runs to the edge of the penalty area and then calls for a defender, who runs up close to him and throws the ball for him to head back into his hands. He does this repeatedly, assured it would not be judged a back pass.
a) If an opposition player came and tried to break it up, would he get booked for attempting to stop the keeper taking a throw out to a teammate?
b) Is there a ruling which would allow you, the referee, to put an end to this time-wasting ploy? If so, how would you re-start the game?
How would you handle this situation?
Yesterdays Torres Answer Scroll Down (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/2008/06/you_are_the_ref_3.html)
-
Van Nistelroy ques time wasting.
a) Tricky...this kinda akin to Jack vs Bahrain in a indirect sort of way. But I would say NO...ball in play...the opposing fwd have all the right to get in there and tackle for the ball.
b) I dont think there is a rule for this ball in play...let the fwd go and clatter the man then give the keeper the foul or if the keeper foul the fwd give him the penalty or free kick. I say let them continue. If the other team so dotish as to let them continue the antics for more than 10 seconds then they supposed to lose the ref should not protect them.
-
Nice topic touches.
Referee Howard Webb
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/webb_438x318.jpg)
Question
A player scythes down an opponent, two-footed, over the top - a definitive red card offence. However, the ball bounces kindly for the other team and they have an excellent chance of scoring. You allow play to continue, making a mental note to send the player off next time there is a break in play. The goal opportunity is denied by a miracle one-handed save by the goalkeeper. A team-mate instantly kicks the ball upfield to the player, who should have been sent off. He is played onside by the player he hacked down and he goes on to score.
Should the goal be allowed? Should the goalscorer still be sent off? What you would do in this situation?
Answer Click Here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/2008/06/you_are_the_ref_2.html)
The advantage was given and its not the referee's fault that the team did not convert it into a goal. Just the fact that they were able to draw a brilliant save from the keeper should negate any complaints.
As for the other end and the player who was hacked down keeping the play onside; its unsportsmanlike (much like not returning the ball to the opposing team), but definitely not illegal and the goal has to be allowed to stand.
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/torres_438x318.jpg)
Fernando Torres
Today's question
A defender is off the pitch receiving treatment and you have clearly told him to remain on the sideline until you signal for him to return. Spain are on the attack and Fernando Torres receives the ball outside the penalty area, runs through the defence, rounds the goalkeeper and taps the ball towards the empty net. As he turns to celebrate his goal the defender who was off the field receiving treatment sprints back on to the pitch without waiting for your signal to invite him on and performs a last-ditch goalline clearance.
How would you deal with this situation?
Easy. A yellow card for the defender for returning to the field of play without awaiting instruction and then a penalty for Spain for the unlawful infringement. A red card cannot be given because the infringement was for returning to the field, and the goal line clearance was after the fact and inconsequential. In other words, if he had returned to the field and tackled in a meaningless position, would that be a red card too?
Todays Question
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/nistelrooy_438x318.jpg)
Question
A team hanging on to a one-goal lead are desperately trying to waste time when their goalkeeper catches a long range shot from Dutch striker Ruud van Nistelrooy. The keeper runs to the edge of the penalty area and then calls for a defender, who runs up close to him and throws the ball for him to head back into his hands. He does this repeatedly, assured it would not be judged a back pass.
a) If an opposition player came and tried to break it up, would he get booked for attempting to stop the keeper taking a throw out to a teammate?
b) Is there a ruling which would allow you, the referee, to put an end to this time-wasting ploy? If so, how would you re-start the game?
How would you handle this situation?
Yesterdays Torres Answer Scroll Down (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/2008/06/you_are_the_ref_3.html)
This is a hard one. I going out on a limb here and saying that some discretion is required in this situation.
I would not book the attacker, because I would chalk the antics of the goalkeeper and defender as unsportsmanlike conduct and provocation. I would give the free kick for the foul on the goalkeeper/defender. I would then have a word with the defender and goalkeeper about the ploy and let them know that I interpret it as unsportsmanlike and instruct them to discontinue. And I would sneak in a little extra time for the senseless timewasting.
This is what I like about football aside from other sports. It is not rigidly by the book and the referee has the ability to use his discretion to make rational decisions in the game.
It have no 4th quarter buzzer to go off or seconds to run down. A ref could make this time wasting ploy absolutely ineffective using his discretion.
-
Omar I like the responses but in the first one...even if the goal is allowed to stand...you sending off the player who commit the foul?...the red or yuh forget about he.
The second instance, Omar isnt it a red card offense when you deny somebody a CLEAR goalscoring opportunity. I think it had nuttin clearer than that. I say a red instead of a yellow.
The third scenario I agree with.
-
The first two were pretty easy but that last one have meh scratchin' meh head lil" bit: If a 'keeper is (as we put it) dumping out the ball, an opponent MUST allow the transfer of the ball from his hand to his foot. That is why referees make that call against men heading the ball out the 'keepers' hands. In a case where he is just playing time-wasting by having a defender repeatedly head a ball back to him from just 2-3 yards away? I believe the forward is well within his rights to attempt to win the ball from either of them, and that's if the referee even allows them to have committed that act more than once.
-
Omar I like the responses but in the first one...even if the goal is allowed to stand...you sending off the player who commit the foul?...the red or yuh forget about he.
The second instance, Omar isnt it a red card offense when you deny somebody a CLEAR goalscoring opportunity. I think it had nuttin clearer than that. I say a red instead of a yellow.
The third scenario I agree with.
For 1st scenario, yuh right I forget about he.. He getting a red after the play finish.
In the 2nd instance is a red card if you deny someone a clear goalscoring opportunity with your hands or by fouling the attacking player. In this case, imo the defender did neither and was just in the right position at the right time. But I will admit, even though I saying that, I am now just picturing the defender running on from behind the goalpost and blocking the goal, it go be hard not to give a red in that situation in truth.
Hear nuh referees have it hard yes..
imagine having to make these calls in a Mexican Clausura cup final with 80,000 fans separated by a flimsy chain link fence.. :-[
-
Omar I like the responses but in the first one...even if the goal is allowed to stand...you sending off the player who commit the foul?...the red or yuh forget about he.
The second instance, Omar isnt it a red card offense when you deny somebody a CLEAR goalscoring opportunity. I think it had nuttin clearer than that. I say a red instead of a yellow.
The third scenario I agree with.
For 1st scenario, yuh right I forget about he.. He getting a red after the play finish.
In the 2nd instance is a red card if you deny someone a clear goalscoring opportunity with your hands or by fouling the attacking player. In this case, imo the defender did neither and was just in the right position at the right time. But I will admit, even though I saying that, I am now just picturing the defender running on from behind the goalpost and blocking the goal, it go be hard not to give a red in that situation in truth.
Hear nuh referees have it hard yes..
imagine having to make these calls in a Mexican Clausura cup final with 80,000 fans separated by a flimsy chain link fence.. :-[
Nah, "Boss". If a man commit an offence that warrants a red cyard, play stoppin" ONE TIME. If a man go up to head a ball inside the six and a defender hit 'im a double-footed Silver Fox special to he chest as he haeads the ball ove the gaol line, a referee just might use some discretion by allowing the goal and then "awarding" the red to the defender, but in a case where more of the play has to develop or other players factor into the goalscoring opportunity, the ref should be blowin' he whistle immediately.
For the second one, the ref would give a yellow to the "injured" defender and award a (edit) INdirect free-kick.
-
Nice thread Touches, i like the change of pace. On the first one, generally i doh think i wud allow advantage on a red card offence. Best to just send the offending player packing. But if the scenario played out as described, u hadda allow the goal to stand, then send off the player after. By allowing play to go on, yuh hadda live with the result.
On the second one, i think i wud give a red card for preventing the clear goal opportunity, but i'd give an indirect freekick at the spot where the defender touched the ball, rather than a penalty.
The third one tough, but i think i agree with omar's interpretation as well
-
Kev question for you Mango Chow and Palos.
This indirect free kick on the spot where the player block the ball.
It have me confused on these three areas.
1) isn't a foul in the area a penalty?
2) if the free kick is on the goalline....where would the opposing defenders and keeper stand up to defend this free kick. Dont they have to be some kinda meters away from the ball.
3) From point 2 above. So technically if the players have to be behind the ball in a free kick situation then they would be behind the line...the ball on the line and if it hit anyof them it would be deemed a goal as the whole ball woulda have to cross the line not so. But a player in the goal behind the line is not on the field so the whole scenario ent realistic.
I say is a penalty.
-
Kev question for you and Palos.
This indirect free kick on the spot where the player block the ball.
It have me confused on these three areas.
1) isn't a foul in the area a penalty?
2) if the free kick is on the goalline....where would the opposing defenders and keeper stand up to defend this free kick. Dont they have to be some kinda meters away from the ball.
3) From point 2 above. So technically if the players have to be behind the ball in a free kick situation then they would be behind the line...the ball on the line and if it hit anyof them it would be deemed a goal as the whole ball woulda have to cross the line not so. But a player in the goal behind the line is not on the field so the whole scenario ent realistic.
I say is a penalty.
Not all fouls in the area are penalties. You never see an indirect freekick in the box? Obstruction in the box is usually an indirect freekick, not a penalty. I think this foul more along those lines.
For the second question, yes, players have to be behind the ball in a freekick situation. i've seen indirect freekicks within the 6-yard box before, and in such a situation the opposing players stood on the goaline between the goalposts. So i assume it wud be the same drill in this case. I know in this situation it probably wud be easier to score from a penalty, but i just doh think a penalty is the right call here.
-
i have seen situations where an indirect free kick has been awarded in the box and the entire team has to line up on the goal line to block the goal..
with regards to the defensive team and their distance from the ball, they can only retreat as far as the boundary of the field of play will allow (the goal line).
with regards to the attacking team, if the infringement occurs on the goal line, it doesn't necessarily mean that the ball has to be spotted there.. They can spot it behind a bit to give themselves a better angle to shoot at.
-
i have seen situations where an indirect free kick has been awarded in the box and the entire team has to line up on the goal line to block the goal..
with regards to the defensive team and their distance from the ball, they can only retreat as far as the boundary of the field of play will allow (the goal line).
with regards to the attacking team, if the infringement occurs on the goal line, it doesn't necessarily mean that the ball has to be spotted there.. They can spot it behind a bit to give themselves a better angle to shoot at.
Very true, thanks for adding that
-
For the record I just looked it up and this is referee Keith Hackett's answer to the question (i blushing cause i feeling like ah brand new shilling for getting it right with the yellow card ;D):
Keith Hackett's answer
Award an indirect free-kick to the opposing team from the place where the player touched the ball. Caution him for entering the field of play without permission. If he had already been cautioned, administer a second yellow card and then a red card. As the incident took place inside the goal area, (defending players have to be at least 9.15m from the ball) the defenders must stand on the goalline and between the goalposts.
-
Kev question for you Mango Chow and Palos.
This indirect free kick on the spot where the player block the ball.
It have me confused on these three areas.
1) isn't a foul in the area a penalty?
2) if the free kick is on the goalline....where would the opposing defenders and keeper stand up to defend this free kick. Dont they have to be some kinda meters away from the ball.
3) From point 2 above. So technically if the players have to be behind the ball in a free kick situation then they would be behind the line...the ball on the line and if it hit anyof them it would be deemed a goal as the whole ball woulda have to cross the line not so. But a player in the goal behind the line is not on the field so the whole scenario ent realistic.
I say is a penalty.
Both Kev and "Meh Boss" Omar answered it before I saw your question, Touches. They are both right, IMO. I still play in my old age and I have had indirect fre-kicks awarded against my defenders inside the penalty area. Case like this, all man jack hadda stand on the goal line and sometimes the referee will allow some latitude and let me ('keeper) be the only one to be off the goal line.
-
Senario 1: My whistle blowing imediately after the save is made by the keeper and i sending off the player. That ball aint getting time to reach upfield.
However, if the play was allow to continue and the goal scored, then the goal will stand and i will send the player off after he done celebrate.
Senario 2: Direct red card for the player for denying a scoring opportunity and an indirect in de box.
Seanrio 3: Warning for the keeper for unsportsman like conduct but he getting de foul........
-
Todays Question
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/nistelrooy_438x318.jpg)
Question
A team hanging on to a one-goal lead are desperately trying to waste time when their goalkeeper catches a long range shot from Dutch striker Ruud van Nistelrooy. The keeper runs to the edge of the penalty area and then calls for a defender, who runs up close to him and throws the ball for him to head back into his hands. He does this repeatedly, assured it would not be judged a back pass.
a) If an opposition player came and tried to break it up, would he get booked for attempting to stop the keeper taking a throw out to a teammate?
b) Is there a ruling which would allow you, the referee, to put an end to this time-wasting ploy? If so, how would you re-start the game?
How would you handle this situation?
Yesterdays Torres Answer Scroll Down (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/2008/06/you_are_the_ref_3.html)
A) I would award an indirect free kick against the keeper (Law 12).
If the player blocks the GK from distributing I would give an indirect to the GK. I don't believe the law states that a referee has to give a yellow for blocking the keeper from distributing the ball.
Now if the player waits until the keeper throws the ball out and then stands in front of the keeper to stop him from receiving the back pass that is different.
B) There is a ruling (Law 12-Decision 3)......the ruling which states that a player cannot use a trick play to give the keeper the ball and the the keeper use his hands to recieve the ball. Like the defender juggling the ball and then heading it back to the keeper. Indirect to the opposing team.
-
Todays Question
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/nistelrooy_438x318.jpg)
Question
A team hanging on to a one-goal lead are desperately trying to waste time when their goalkeeper catches a long range shot from Dutch striker Ruud van Nistelrooy. The keeper runs to the edge of the penalty area and then calls for a defender, who runs up close to him and throws the ball for him to head back into his hands. He does this repeatedly, assured it would not be judged a back pass.
a) If an opposition player came and tried to break it up, would he get booked for attempting to stop the keeper taking a throw out to a teammate?
b) Is there a ruling which would allow you, the referee, to put an end to this time-wasting ploy? If so, how would you re-start the game?
How would you handle this situation?
Yesterdays Torres Answer Scroll Down (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/2008/06/you_are_the_ref_3.html)
i find this answer to be a bit lacking....
Keith Hackett's answer
Providing that the ball, when thrown out by the goalkeeper, leaves the penalty area there is nothing in the laws of the game that can stop the defender continuing to head it back to the goalkeeper. The attacker also has the right to attempt in a fair manner to gain possession of the ball once it leaves the penalty area. A good referee will shout loudly, point to his watch and inform the defending team not to continue to waste time.
-
He did not say if there was a rule or anything. So what if after the ref yell :thinking: and the keeper do it again? Then you give a yellow? This answer was shyte.
-
Look a Special Real Life One
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/nistelrooy_2_438x318.gif)
Monday's Euro 2008 game between the Netherlands and Italy prompted a huge debate about whether Ruud van Nistelrooy's goal should have counted.
Here's your chance to decide what to do...
The scenario - as described by migsthemerciless
Holland are playing Italy in the group stages. The ball is crossed into the Italian penalty area and Gianluigi Buffon parries it weakly away. In clearing the ball, Buffon clatters into Christian Panucci, knocking his own player behind the goal line, injured.
Wesley Sneijder picks up the loose ball and fires in a left footed shot. Van Nistelrooy, clearly ahead of all defenders on the pitch (except the goalkeeper Buffon), taps Sneijder's shot into the net.
Van Nistelrooy looks sheepish, convinced he should be offside, but quickly starts celebrating. What do you do?
To see the video of the incident and read the full story Click Here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/euro_2008/7445476.stm)
Keith Hacketts Answer...Scroll Down (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/2008/06/you_are_the_ref_special.html)
-
The goal stands. Panucci who is off the field is still in play since Law 5 states that the referee allows play to continue until the ball is out of play if a player, IS IN HIS OPINION, only SLIGHTLY injured.
After the goal the ref will delay restarting the game to question the player down to see if he needs medical attention.
-
Player was still active...he was not carried off injured, so he did not need the ref's permission to get back on the field...he coulda jump up and run and make ah clearance to save the goal and he woulda be ah hero :D
Big Up!
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/cech438_2.jpg)
Question
A Czech Republic midfielder misjudges a pass back to his centre-half. An opposition forward, spotting his chance, races in to challenge. The quick-thinking centre-half, feints to play the ball, but without touching it, he allows it to pass through his legs to his goalkeeper, who had sensed the danger and had run to the edge of the penalty box and then picks up the ball. Because the centre-half never touched the ball, the forward immediately claims it is a backpass to the goalkeeper. He screams for a free-kick to be awarded.
Is he right? What would you do in this situation?
-
I would say its a free kick.
It is a back pass, and the keeper chupid to pick it up, he shoulda use some foot skills.
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/cech438_2.jpg)
Question
A Czech Republic midfielder misjudges a pass back to his centre-half. An opposition forward, spotting his chance, races in to challenge. The quick-thinking centre-half, feints to play the ball, but without touching it, he allows it to pass through his legs to his goalkeeper, who had sensed the danger and had run to the edge of the penalty box and then picks up the ball. Because the centre-half never touched the ball, the forward immediately claims it is a backpass to the goalkeeper. He screams for a free-kick to be awarded.
Is he right? What would you do in this situation?
PLAY ON!!
This was not an intentional back pass to the goalkeeper and as such cannot be penalized as such.
Only if it was an intentional back pass by the midfielder should the free kick be awarded.
-
I say play on. It wasn't an intentional back pass to the keeper.
-
I agree, it was not a back pass directly to the goalie....so the game should continue...
Big Up!
-
Omar...I waiting for yuh to pull out some rules and highlight the evidence to back up yuh case.
Is a pass to a team-mate....not so?.... Even if the man dummy the ball and it reach to the keeper.
Was it not passed in a backward motion?.....I ent want to get into the semantics of what is a back pass.
The Keeper is a arse and shouldnt of take the chance and hoof it away.
-
Fellas it was a deliberate dummy by the Defender....it was a back pass from a team mate.
Watch the logic from some men on BBC.
At 1:51 pm on 11 Jun 2008, Yorkshireref wrote:
Yes, indirect free-kick to the Czechs because the goalkeeper has played a back-pass with his hands. It does not matter that the orginal ball was or may not have been played to him. It is a deliberate pass from a team-mate and he should not pick it up or play it with his hands.
At 1:54 pm on 11 Jun 2008, sobmar wrote:
Well, difficult situation. Midfielder wasn't passing the ball to keeper on purpose, so from that point of view it shouldn't be a free kick. What we have to judge is the movement of centre-half. It's a little like with Panucci injury, which made van Nistelrooy goal onside. In this situation I would say that centre-half behaviour had influence on the game, he did deliberately and it should be free kick.
At 1:58 pm on 11 Jun 2008, Yorkshireref wrote:
There is nothing in law about the ball having to be played deliberately to the goalkeeper. It is all about whether the pass was a controlled movement with the foot after which the goalkeeper has to make a decision. In this case he knows the ball has been played with the foot by a team-mate, the centre-half has (because he is under pressure) allowed the ball to run through to the keeper who then picks up a deliberate pass.
Indirect free-kick from where the keeper played the ball. He has committed the offence.
-
Omar...I waiting for yuh to pull out some rules and highlight the evidence to back up yuh case.
Is a pass to a team-mate....not so?.... Even if the man dummy the ball and it reach to the keeper.
Was it not passed in a backward motion?.....I ent want to get into the semantics of what is a back pass.
The Keeper is a arse and shouldnt of take the chance and hoof it away.
I not going on no Fifa site to look it up but I know that the rule is for an intentional back pass to the keeper.
I can't see how you could penalize it if the midfielder was clearly never intending to pass it back to the goalkeeper, and it end up by him as a consequence of the defender leaving alone.
To me that is not to far off a defender sticking his foot and intercepting a pass that goes to the keeper and then he picks it up which we know is legal.
But that said, that situation leaves alot of grey area. For example, if all of this happen in the pk box, then it would be hard to deem whether it is intentional or not. But if the midfielder launch a back pass from the opposition half to the last stopper, and the last stopper dummy under pressure, then is that a back pass too?
-
Initially I was in agreement with Omar on this one. After reading Touches post, I believe that dummy situation can be exploited by cheaters, such that the rule against making the pass to the goalie be rendered ineffective.
-
Initially I was in agreement with Omar on this one. After reading Touches post I believe that dummy situation can be exploited by cheaters such that the rule against making the pass to the goalie be rendered ineffective.
Ok, so what if the defender made an attempt to clear the ball, but mis-kicked and the ball went towards the goal, but the goalie got it in time and picked it up with his hands...is that a back pass too?
Big Up!
-
Initially I was in agreement with Omar on this one. After reading Touches post I believe that dummy situation can be exploited by cheaters such that the rule against making the pass to the goalie be rendered ineffective.
Ok, so what if the defender made an attempt to clear the ball, but mis-kicked and the ball went towards the goal, but the goalie got it in time and picked it up with his hands...is that a back pass too?
Big Up!
Valid point!
A situation like that is left to the discretion of the ref, but dummying the ball is an attempt to get around the rule. :beermug:
-
a mis kick is a different story, that isnt an intentional controlled pass. Therefore the keeper can rightly pick it up.
I with touches, it was a deliberate back pass, not deliberately to the keeper but was controlled and thus keeper can't pick it up
-
Law 12 Decision 3 - Subject to the terms of Law 12, a player may pass the ball to his own goalkeeper using his head or chest or knee, etc. If, however, in the opinion of the referee, a player uses a deliberate trick while the ball is in play in order to circumvent the law, the player is guilty of unsporting behavior. He is cautioned, shown the yellow card and an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.
In this case the ref will have to look at how the play developed and determine if the centre half tried to decieved him (the ref).
I would say it's an indirect free kick to the opposing team.
-
Law 12 Decision 3 - Subject to the terms of Law 12, a player may pass the ball to his own goalkeeper using his head or chest or knee, etc. If, however, in the opinion of the referee, a player uses a deliberate trick while the ball is in play in order to circumvent the law, the player is guilty of unsporting behavior. He is cautioned, shown the yellow card and an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.
In this case the ref will have to look at how the play developed and determine if the centre half tried to decieved him (the ref).
I would say it's an indirect free kick to the opposing team.
Elan, now yuh tiefin man...
hear what, from now on lewwe agree not to consult the official FIFA rules before giving an answer nuh. dat is killing it..
-
If a man intentionally dummies a pass and it moves on to his team-mate who scores... does he get recorded with an assist/set-up?
If so, even a dummy can be construed as a pass of sorts.
I think the play in question can then be seen to be deliberate... therefore indirect freekick...
if de man had swing and miss completely... then the keeper could very well pick up the ball... with no foul.
just ah next angle to watch it from...
-
Law 12 Decision 3 - Subject to the terms of Law 12, a player may pass the ball to his own goalkeeper using his head or chest or knee, etc. If, however, in the opinion of the referee, a player uses a deliberate trick while the ball is in play in order to circumvent the law, the player is guilty of unsporting behavior. He is cautioned, shown the yellow card and an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team from the place where the infringement occurred.
In this case the ref will have to look at how the play developed and determine if the centre half tried to decieved him (the ref).
I would say it's an indirect free kick to the opposing team.
Elan, now yuh tiefin man...
hear what, from now on lewwe agree not to consult the official FIFA rules before giving an answer nuh. dat is killing it..
Oh gawd Omar.....sorry. I was going to explain it in my words cause I know this rule, then I read where you said you did not feel like searching for the rule. So I wrote it in.
I not trying to cheat. Cross my heart and hope to die. True, true
-
I laughing at the tricky scenarios they coming up for these things but I eh calling that one against the 'keeper. The pass back to him HAS to be intentional for it to be a foul.
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/ballack_438x318.jpg)
Question
A defender commits a bad foul. Although not with the excessive force that endangered the safety of the forward, nevertheless it is deserving of a yellow card. But with an excellent goalscoring opportunity for the attacking side you play an advantage and will caution the defender later.
But before the ball goes dead the same defender immediately commits another bad foul. Again it is not with excessive force that it endangers the safety of an opponent, but again deserving of a yellow card.
What would you do in this situation?
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/ballack_438x318.jpg)
Question
A defender commits a bad foul. Although not with the excessive force that endangered the safety of the forward, nevertheless it is deserving of a yellow card. But with an excellent goalscoring opportunity for the attacking side you play an advantage and will caution the defender later.
But before the ball goes dead the same defender immediately commits another bad foul. Again it is not with excessive force that it endangers the safety of an opponent, but again deserving of a yellow card.
What would you do in this situation?
He getting a yellow card for the first foul, then he getting another yellow card for the second..
and a swift dismissal for ah early shower.
they come up with the answer for yesterday yet?
-
Once again, I wit
meh boss (cough, cough) Omar in dis one. If a ref has the discretion to allow play to go on, but give a card later, the defender has to know he might be playing wit fire. sennim off!
-
once again dinho hits the nail on the head. methinks a career in refereeing beckons..
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/cech438_2.jpg)
Question
A Czech Republic midfielder misjudges a pass back to his centre-half. An opposition forward, spotting his chance, races in to challenge. The quick-thinking centre-half, feints to play the ball, but without touching it, he allows it to pass through his legs to his goalkeeper, who had sensed the danger and had run to the edge of the penalty box and then picks up the ball. Because the centre-half never touched the ball, the forward immediately claims it is a backpass to the goalkeeper. He screams for a free-kick to be awarded.
Is he right? What would you do in this situation?
Keith Hackett's answer
The referee can only penalise a DELIBERATE pass back to the goalkeeper. In this instance the ball was passed back to the centre-half and it is perfectly permissable for the centre-half to dummy an opponent without touching the ball and for the goalkeeper to become involved and collect as clearly shown in the drawing, inside his penalty area. Therefore the game would continue with Cech allowed to clear his lines. Be aware also that on the backpass law if the player uses his head, chest or knee to pass the ball back, then this is perfectly OK.
It is only the DELIBERATE pass back to the goalkeeper by the FOOT that is penalised. This law change was introduced to reduce negative play and it has, in my opinion, been a huge success.
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/henry_438_318.jpg)
Question number six
France play Italy. Only the winner will progress from the group. The following situation happens in a penalty shoot-out.
With the score 10-10, France's 11th penalty taker fails to score. Italy's 11th penalty taker is the next to step up. If he scores his team win 11-10. The kicker runs up but stops in his run-up, the French goalkeeper dives to his left but too soon. The kicker then takes another step and blasts the ball off the post and in.
You blow your whistle for the kick to be retaken and you caution (yellow card) him for his unsporting behaviour - stopping in his run-up. He then completely loses it and appears to be pulling you onto a head butt, when a French player reacts instinctively and comes to your assistance with a right-hand punch that knocks the enraged player to the ground.
The Italian captain runs up, bends over his unconscious team-mate and agrees he must be red-carded and sent off, but insists the French player who threw the punch must also be sent off. Then he further informs you, as all 11 players have taken a kick, his number one kicker will now take the re-taken penalty.
The French captain laughs and points out the Italian player who had taken the penalty had failed to score and had been sent off, and so the kick must stand as a MISS.
What action do you take?
-
That one is a real tief head right dey boy Touches lol...
I have been secretly enjoying this thread... but this one going and make me take lunch and come back yes...
-
You is not the only one secretly enjoying this thread.
Whappen is plenty posters ent know so instead of typing, the reading answer quiet quiet in the background.
This one though is a real hard sums.
If you get some smelling salts and get the man back on he feet, it is up to you to give him the red. The kick has to be retaken. Let him do so.
If you hit him the red, then you let the number one kicker take the next penalty as that is what would have happened if you were playing with 10 men.
No way should the kick be recorded as a miss, if you blow for it to be retaken.
You also have to give the French player a yellow...even though he save yuh arse from a blow out. He must not leave his ranks and strike an opponent.
After the game done the player who rough you up hadda get at least a 3 match ban.
-
I woulda give the french player a red... that is violent conduct..
The italian woulda also get a red if his actions was deemed violent... however if he had get he arse knock out before it get too heated.. he woulda get a yellow... retake the kick
I agree with you... you done blow to retake... so it must be re-taken... it ent no miss....
wha tiefing my head is picturing the scenario... french man run from half line to hit de italian ah knock out punch... that is de heights of kawnt-holery... :rotfl: :rotfl:
-
Both players getting red cards.........in no way should one player strike another player. What can happen after the French player get his red is for the French FA to appeal the red card which most likely will get overturn (since he was defending the ref).
With regards to the goal, it does not count.You cannot "substitute" for the player sent off. The only way the #1 PK taker can kick first is for the coach to submit a new kicking line up. Kicks start again in rotation but the kick and score - kick and miss still applies.
-
Both of them gettin' sent off, but, I think once the ref made the decision for the kick to be re-taken, somebody else has to step up and take it though. This one is the hardest one to soert out so far. I wouldn't mind being wrong on this one at all.
-
OH GAAD boy allyuh stepping up a notch..
This like Mario Brothers when yuh get to level 9 and de goombas and dem start flying and holding machine gun and is ten fireball to kill them all of a sudden..
Well boy...
Well firstly I would give both players red cards for violent conduct.. The Italian for threatening me and the French player for striking an opponent.
Then, the kick has to be retaken, since in my opinion as the first was null and void, it is still Italy 11 penalties taken - France 10 penalties taken. I would treat the situation just like if the player was sent off during the course of the game and as if it was 10 v 11 going into penalty kicks.
So I would have the first player step in to take the place of the player that was sent off.
The player did not 'miss' as suggested because the penalty was nullified so it is not a miss. It is still a BLANK SLOT to be filled but just cannot be filled by that player because he was sent off.
Come Keith Hackett, lemme see wha yuh have for meh!
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/henry_438_318.jpg)
Question number six
France play Italy. Only the winner will progress from the group. The following situation happens in a penalty shoot-out.
With the score 10-10, France's 11th penalty taker fails to score. Italy's 11th penalty taker is the next to step up. If he scores his team win 11-10. The kicker runs up but stops in his run-up, the French goalkeeper dives to his left but too soon. The kicker then takes another step and blasts the ball off the post and in.
You blow your whistle for the kick to be retaken and you caution (yellow card) him for his unsporting behaviour - stopping in his run-up. He then completely loses it and appears to be pulling you onto a head butt, when a French player reacts instinctively and comes to your assistance with a right-hand punch that knocks the enraged player to the ground.
The Italian captain runs up, bends over his unconscious team-mate and agrees he must be red-carded and sent off, but insists the French player who threw the punch must also be sent off. Then he further informs you, as all 11 players have taken a kick, his number one kicker will now take the re-taken penalty.
The French captain laughs and points out the Italian player who had taken the penalty had failed to score and had been sent off, and so the kick must stand as a MISS.
What action do you take?
Keith Hackett's answer
The referee was correct in cautioning the kicker for unsporting behaviour when he stopped during his run up to kick the ball because this is deemed trickery to deceive the goalkeeper, who committed and had dived to his left.
It is different to a player who may attempt to deceive the goalkeeper as to his intentions when taking the kick, but fails to commit him. Then it is allowed in law. A subtle difference often missed or understood by the spectator.
The Italian kicker who grabbed hold of you in an attempt to headbutt will now receive a straight red card and be reported to the authorities.
No player, whatever the circumstances, has the right to strike or attempt to strike an opponent. So you now issue a red card to the French player, even though he may insist it was to protect you (the referee). He has to go and your report will indicate this act of violent conduct.
Having calmed things down you now have to restore order to ensure that the Italians have the opportunity of concluding their 11th penalty kick. In law they can chose from any of their players remaining on the field of play.
-
Aside from the main incidents featured, here are some more interesting scenarios that have been submitted and have been answered by Keith Hackett.
Scenario from knecht
A player is about to be substituted. As he walks off the pitch he punches one of the opposition. Can he be sent off? In which case would the substitution be permitted?
Keith Hackett's answer
Great question. The player would be issued with a red card and the team reduced to 10 players. Therefore the substitute can only be used to replace one of the remaining players.
Scenario from Shedsheaven
During the Turkey v Switzerland game a mass punch-up erupts and you witness at least five players from each side committing serious violent conduct, noting each player's number. Knowing that a team forfeits a match 3-0 if they end up with fewer than seven players on the pitch, can you send them all off for violent conduct? If so, how is the match awarded?
Keith Hackett's answer
Yes, if a player commits a violent conduct offence then this is a red card and dismissal. If any of the teams are reduced to less than seven players then the game is abandoned. The determination on the outcome of the game would then rest with the disciplinary panel. It is likely that if both teams are reduced to less than seven players then they could be thrown out of the tournament.
Scenario from MontyPanesar
What would happen if, for example, Jens Lehmann of Germany was being attacked by five pigeons while he was in goal and Phillipe Senderos decides to shoot from 50 yards for Switzerland and scores? Would this goal stand?
Keith Hackett's answer
If it is a serious distraction then frankly I would apply common sense and rule the goal out. In fact I would be blowing the whistle before the ball hit the back of the net.
Scenario from gareth2020
My question is: can a player catch the ball between his chin and chest and then run over the goal line?
Keith Hackett's answer
I would class this as a trick and a clear attempt to circumvent the laws of the game. I would therefore not allow this goal.
Scenario from Jordo81
At the end of 90 minutes the fourth official holds up the board saying there is 12 minutes of extra-time to be played, but you think the proper amount of time is nearer four minutes. What do you do?
Keith Hackett's answer
Wow, a really great question and I am glad that it did not happen whilst I was officiating. Law 5 states quite clearly that the sole timekeeper is the referee. So, whilst in a game the fourth official puts up the board, the reality is that the referee has instructed him on how many minutes to add.
One of the problems in the modern game is the failure of officials to play the appropriate amount of added time. For example, if there is a substitution or stoppage in added time then the amount lost should also be added on. This is often overlooked. Look out for this in Euro 2008.
Scenario from EmmanuelEboue
What does the referee decide to do if a player runs up to take a penalty, taps the ball slightly to the side and his teammate runs from behind him to smash the ball into the net? Is it a goal or not?
Keith Hackett's answer
This is allowed providing the player's teammate was outside the penalty when the kick/pass was made. If the above has been fulfilled then the goal would be allowed.
Scenario from royston_X
A goalkeeper holding the ball hears a whistle from the crowd replicating the final whistle. In celebration (or fury), assuming the game is over, he turns and blasts the ball into his own net. Does it stand?
Keith Hackett's answer
Yes the goal would stand. That is why all referees also use a hand signal to close the game.
Scenario from royston_X
An unlikely side are guaranteed to finish either first or second in the group, depending on whether they win their last group match. If they win they will go on to face a much better team than if they finish second. They spend the entire game scoring deliberate own goals and go on to reach the final of the competition even though their tactic was blatant cheating.
Keith Hackett
I would report this to the organization, who I am sure would then look at the video evidence and determine a course of action to be taken. I do think frankly that this type of incident would not happen.
Scenario from themilkybarkidfromliverpool
It's the final of Euro 2008. It's 2-2 and it's been a cracking game that looks set for extra-time. But with just seconds remaining the referee awards a corner. The corner looks overhit and likely to swing past the far post out of play and out of everyone's reach. But wait, never seen before in a game, two players hoist their team-mate high in the air, then hold him steady in the air like a towering statue. The ball floats towards him and he meets the ball perfectly and heads it into the back of the net. You're the ref: can this goal be allowed?
Keith Hackett's answer
No this goal would not be allowed as this is a clear act of unsporting behaviour. Frankly I would issue all three players with a yellow card and then report the incident to the authorities.
So it is important that a referee has a great understanding of the laws of the game to be able to react if this incident took place.
Scenario from BlueStarIT
OK, how about this one: A side are defending a one-goal lead when they are awarded a direct free-kick just outside their own penalty area. In an attempt to retain possession, the defender takes the free-kick, passing the ball back to his goalkeeper. To his horror, the keeper is not paying attention and the ball goes straight into the goal.
The opposition celebrate an equaliser. The defender is berated by his team-mates. What is the referee's decision and how does the match restart?
Keith Hackett's answer
I am glad to say that the defender can breathe a sigh of relief as this is not a goal.
The referee would re-start the game with a corner kick.
Scenario from Richard Lasowski
The stadium's roof is closed to prevent rain from ruining the pitch. Edwin van der Sar takes a goal-kick which hits the closed roof and bounces back into his own net. Does the ref award the goal?
Keith Hackett's answer
The referee would not award a goal. The game would be restarted with a drop ball below the point at which the ball hit the roof.
Scenario from Richard Lasowski
A striker takes a shot which is on target and has beaten the goalkeeper, but the mascot of the opposing team comes on to prevent the shot from crossing the line. What action does the ref take?
Keith Hackett's answer
The referee would stop play, order the team mascot from the field of play and report him to the appropriate authorities. The game would be re-started with a drop ball. If the mascot was standing in the goal area then the ball would be dropped at the six-yard goalline nearest to the point at which the mascot was standing.
Scenario from BigTonyWhite wrote
In the event of an indirect free-kick, the player taking it strikes the ball and it hits the referee and deflects in. Does the goal stand? I know the referee counts as part of the field of play but I don't know if the obstacle's touch of the ball could make an indirect free-kick shot legitimate. I'd be very interested to know the answer.
Keith Hackett's answer
No - I would not allow the goal as the indirect free-kick law states that it MUST be touched by another player. The referee is not another player.
Tony - both Paul and I really enjoy the challenge of You Are The Ref and the excellent questions that we are asked. So keep them coming.
-
really enjoying this thread...some of the scenarios pple put up really interesting to say the least
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/ronaldo_438x318.jpg)
Question number 7
It's Portugal and Germany in the quarter-final of Euro 2008. Ronaldo waltzes past five German defenders, rounds the goalkeeper and is just about to sidefoot the ball into the empty net for the goal of the tournament. But, from the crowd, someone throws a different ball onto the pitch which knocks the matchball way off to the side. Ronaldo puts the second ball in the back of the net.
Is it the goal of the tournament? What do you do?
-
I ent go lie...
People does make up some real unbelievable chupidness yes....Ronaldo waltzing past 5 German defenders... :rotfl:
But anyways. Honestly the ref does stop play when more than one ball on the field. However in this instance Ronaldo ent kick the MATCH BALL OVER THE LINE.
NO GOAL
Stop play and award a drop ball....let them hack one another shins for it right there in the penalty spot.
-
This one is too much now...
Well i would say stop play and award an indirect to the Portuguese at the point where the ball was intercepted.
I revert to the incident that happen right in our pro league when a man rounds the keeper and hit a shot goalward only for a pothound to run across the field and take the bang.
how did they deal with that one?
-
Who was dat player ???
Man have real skill....you know how hard it is to hit a moving dustbin terrier...especially with they sleek, aerodynamic frame.
That fella need to get call up for the Bermuda match forthwith.
-
Touches correct that is a drop ball... cyah be a free kick to anybody...
Germany might want to let portugal score out of fair play but that is up to them...
This one was easy... Omar dat really happen in Trinidad ? .... :rotfl: I ent go doubt it nah...
We should start to make up we own situations...
-
Who was dat player ???
Man have real skill....you know how hard it is to hit a moving dustbin terrier...especially with they sleek, aerodynamic frame.
That fella need to get call up for the Bermuda match forthwith.
:rotfl: :rotfl:
you a damn fool yes...
-
Who was dat player ???
Man have real skill....you know how hard it is to hit a moving dustbin terrier...especially with they sleek, aerodynamic frame.
That fella need to get call up for the Bermuda match forthwith.
Yeah, i distinctly remember seeing that on TTT sports report many years ago and if I am not mistaken it happen at PSA grounds..
funniest thing I ever see..
Also, I could swear i saw some discussion about that on this forum at some point in time.
where tallman?
-
YOU IS DE REF - Trinbago styling
You reffing ah game in de velodrome... Kerwyn "Hardest" Jemmot consecutively caps, spanners and sexes three opposing players in midfield and sets up to send clear Denzil "Doubles Paper" Theobald with ah best through ball. At de same time Jumbo now pelt ah salt nuts to ah patron who requested a fresh.... in vexation de patron pelt back the pack of nuts at Jumbo who see it coming and duck.... the nuts hit de groundsman who is actually running a lines with ah jersey and he is knocked out cold.
Theobald collects de through ball, mis-kick and the ball bobble past de goalkeeper and scores... the opposing defence is appealing for offside...
While it appears to be offside you are unsure and the groundsman/linesman is out cold....
What is de call?
-
YOU IS DE REF - Trinbago styling
You reffing ah game in de velodrome... Kerwyn "Hardest" Jemmot consecutively caps, spanners and sexes three opposing players in midfield and sets up to send clear Denzil "Doubles Paper" Theobald with ah best through ball. At de same time Jumbo now pelt ah salt nuts to ah patron who requested a fresh.... in vexation de patron pelt back the pack of nuts at Jumbo who see it coming and duck.... the nuts hit de groundsman who is actually running a lines with ah jersey and he is knocked out cold.
Theobald collects de through ball, mis-kick and the ball bobble past de goalkeeper and scores... the opposing defence is appealing for offside...
While it appears to be offside you are unsure and the groundsman/linesman is out cold....
What is de call?
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
but the goal stands....
-
YOU IS DE REF - Trinbago styling
You reffing ah game in de velodrome... Kerwyn "Hardest" Jemmot consecutively caps, spanners and sexes three opposing players in midfield and sets up to send clear Denzil "Doubles Paper" Theobald with ah best through ball. At de same time Jumbo now pelt ah salt nuts to ah patron who requested a fresh.... in vexation de patron pelt back the pack of nuts at Jumbo who see it coming and duck.... the nuts hit de groundsman who is actually running a lines with ah jersey and he is knocked out cold.
Theobald collects de through ball, mis-kick and the ball bobble past de goalkeeper and scores... the opposing defence is appealing for offside...
While it appears to be offside you are unsure and the groundsman/linesman is out cold....
What is de call?
Run quick and pick up the pack of nuts that hit the lino before anyone else does so ;D ;D
I say the Goal stand...too bad
-
goal stands refereee decision is final and check the nuts bag becuase yuh know yuh does only get about 10 nuts in a bag these days, I figure it was some press weed from Vincy ;D
-
YOU IS DE REF - Trinbago styling
You reffing ah game in de velodrome... Kerwyn "Hardest" Jemmot consecutively caps, spanners and sexes three opposing players in midfield and sets up to send clear Denzil "Doubles Paper" Theobald with ah best through ball. At de same time Jumbo now pelt ah salt nuts to ah patron who requested a fresh.... in vexation de patron pelt back the pack of nuts at Jumbo who see it coming and duck.... the nuts hit de groundsman who is actually running a lines with ah jersey and he is knocked out cold.
Theobald collects de through ball, mis-kick and the ball bobble past de goalkeeper and scores... the opposing defence is appealing for offside...
While it appears to be offside you are unsure and the groundsman/linesman is out cold....
What is de call?
LMAO! The call is you have to much time on yuh hand and yuh is ah kicks man/woman! LOL!
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/vandersar438.jpg)
Question number 8
It's the quarter-final of Euro 2008. The Netherlands are a goal down with just seconds remaining of added-on time. The referee awards a corner kick to the Dutch.
The Netherlands keeper leaves his goal and races into the opposition penalty area, but the corner is hit too high and is likely to swing past the far post out of play, well out of everyone's reach.
Two Dutch players hoist the keeper high in the air, rugby-style. They do not block, impede or interfere with any opponents as they hold the keeper steady in the air like a towering statue.
The ball flies towards him and he meets it perfectly to head it into the back of the net.
What would you do in this situation?
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/fabregas_438x318.jpg)
Question number 9
Spain are playing in a quarter-final at Euro 2008 when one of the opposition players is substituted. The player is not pleased. He walks to the touchline and swaps places with a teammate, who is substituting him. Then, out of frustration, he throws his shirt to the ground, walks over and punches the fourth official.
He is presumably sent to the stands, or to the dressing room. But the question is, will his team be reduced to 10 players or have they got away with it, because the substitution had been completed by that point? And what would be his punishment?
-
Number 8...No Goal...bringing the game into desrepute, ungentlemanly conduct and circumventing the laws of the game.
Free Kick going the other way.
Number 9....The player gets a red card and is banned from the touchline/bench and sent to take a fresh early. To receive an additional 3 match ban and fine. As the substitution already happened no penalty for the team and 11 men remain intact.
P.S. If I was d 4th official I woulda follow him into the dressing room and hit him a fackin bellers. If i cyar do it I would tell security to escort him to the dressin room and give him a ultimate sorfenin.
Also he could be charged for assault by the police.
-
Number 8...No Goal...bringing the game into desrepute, ungentlemanly conduct and circumventing the laws of the game.
Free Kick going the other way.
Number 9....The player gets a red card and is banned from the touchline/bench and sent to take a fresh early. To receive an additional 3 match ban and fine. As the substitution already happened no penalty for the team and 11 men remain intact.
P.S. If I was d 4th official I woulda follow him into the dressing room and hit him a fackin bellers. If i cyar do it I would tell security to escort him to the dressin room and give him a ultimate sorfenin.
Also he could be charged for assault by the police.
i fully concur
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/lehmann438.jpg)
Here is a special bonus question from You Are The Ref creator Paul Trevillion:
Question
A goalkeeper is having a nightmare game. He has let in two very soft goals, but his team are hanging on to a 3-2 lead with five minutes remaining.
They concede a penalty. If the spot-kick is scored it is likely to mean extra-time.
It's a poor penalty, fired straight at the goalkeeper. But the keeper then spills it and the penalty taker runs on to it in an attempt to put the rebound in the net. The goalkeeper also goes for the ball and dives, but makes contact with the opponent before touching the ball.
Here is the situation:
A: The penalty taker claims another penalty
B: The penalty taker's captain insists the goalkeeper has denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity so it should be another penalty and the goalkeeper must be sent off
C: The goalkeeper's manager runs on to the field and says it is not a sending off as the goalscoring opportunity is still valid as it is another penalty
D: The manager then insists he will substitute his goalkeeper before the second penalty is taken
E: The penalty taker's captain insists the manager should be sent to the stands the moment he ran onto the pitch, therefore you must disregard all of his comments
You are the ref - what do you do?
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/lehmann438.jpg)
Here is a special bonus question from You Are The Ref creator Paul Trevillion:
Question
A goalkeeper is having a nightmare game. He has let in two very soft goals, but his team are hanging on to a 3-2 lead with five minutes remaining.
They concede a penalty. If the spot-kick is scored it is likely to mean extra-time.
It's a poor penalty, fired straight at the goalkeeper. But the keeper then spills it and the penalty taker runs on to it in an attempt to put the rebound in the net. The goalkeeper also goes for the ball and dives, but makes contact with the opponent before touching the ball.
Here is the situation:
A: The penalty taker claims another penalty
B: The penalty taker's captain insists the goalkeeper has denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity so it should be another penalty and the goalkeeper must be sent off
C: The goalkeeper's manager runs on to the field and says it is not a sending off as the goalscoring opportunity is still valid as it is another penalty
D: The manager then insists he will substitute his goalkeeper before the second penalty is taken
E: The penalty taker's captain insists the manager should be sent to the stands the moment he ran onto the pitch, therefore you must disregard all of his comments
You are the ref - what do you do?
Another penalty and red card for the goalkeeper. Then allow the team to sub in the reserve keeper for an outfield player b4 the next penalty is taken.
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/lehmann438.jpg)
Here is a special bonus question from You Are The Ref creator Paul Trevillion:
Question
A goalkeeper is having a nightmare game. He has let in two very soft goals, but his team are hanging on to a 3-2 lead with five minutes remaining.
They concede a penalty. If the spot-kick is scored it is likely to mean extra-time.
It's a poor penalty, fired straight at the goalkeeper. But the keeper then spills it and the penalty taker runs on to it in an attempt to put the rebound in the net. The goalkeeper also goes for the ball and dives, but makes contact with the opponent before touching the ball.
Here is the situation:
A: The penalty taker claims another penalty
B: The penalty taker's captain insists the goalkeeper has denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity so it should be another penalty and the goalkeeper must be sent off
C: The goalkeeper's manager runs on to the field and says it is not a sending off as the goalscoring opportunity is still valid as it is another penalty
D: The manager then insists he will substitute his goalkeeper before the second penalty is taken
E: The penalty taker's captain insists the manager should be sent to the stands the moment he ran onto the pitch, therefore you must disregard all of his comments
You are the ref - what do you do?
Another penalty awarded and a red card to the goalkeeper for denying a goalscoring opportunity as the last defender.
Then I will also issue a red card to the manager for entering the field of play and alert the authorities.
The team may sub an outfield player for a goalkeeper or if all subs are used, a player may assume goalkeeping duties.
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/hiddink.jpg)
Here's a double-headed You Are The Ref question:
Question number 11
Part A: A player sees a goalscoring opportunity, but you - the referee - are unfortunately in the way. He deliberately pushes you out of the way to get to the ball and knocks you to the ground in the process.
He puts the ball in the net but the defence claim they stopped when they saw you on the floor. You didn't see the goal as you were on your backside and your linesman is unsighted and not in a position to rule.
What would you do in this siuation?
This question was inspired by a suggestion from fearlessJon_Taylor. Here is his original submission:
Hi Mr Hackett
Thanks for answering all of the questions asked, the answers have been very helpful. Here's my conundrum:
Part B:
It's 1-0 to Spain against Russia in the last few minutes, with the game swinging end-to-end. Russia have a corner which is cleared but passed back to Arshavin who looks certain to score, unfortunately the referee accidentally elbows him in the face knocking him off balance. The Russia players surround you, complaining that you have denied them a goal.
What do you do?
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/hiddink.jpg)
Here's a double-headed You Are The Ref question:
Question number 11
Part A: A player sees a goalscoring opportunity, but you - the referee - are unfortunately in the way. He deliberately pushes you out of the way to get to the ball and knocks you to the ground in the process.
He puts the ball in the net but the defence claim they stopped when they saw you on the floor. You didn't see the goal as you were on your backside and your linesman is unsighted and not in a position to rule.
What would you do in this siuation?
This question was inspired by a suggestion from fearlessJon_Taylor. Here is his original submission:
Hi Mr Hackett
Thanks for answering all of the questions asked, the answers have been very helpful. Here's my conundrum:
Part B:
It's 1-0 to Spain against Russia in the last few minutes, with the game swinging end-to-end. Russia have a corner which is cleared but passed back to Arshavin who looks certain to score, unfortunately the referee accidentally elbows him in the face knocking him off balance. The Russia players surround you, complaining that you have denied them a goal.
What do you do?
Part A: Play to the whistle. GOAL!
Part B: Unfortunate and incidental contact with the referee is part of the game. It wasn't intentional and these things happen. I would issue a couple of yellow cards if players confront me too excessively, but the game must go on. Hard luck mates!
-
He SHOVE the ref out the way?!?! Nah!! De ref hadda call dat one back! the second one is a hard luck.
-
He SHOVE the ref out the way?!?! Nah!! De ref hadda call dat one back! the second one is a hard luck.
Both of dem is hard luck.... but de first one is no goal too...
The referee is a part of de field so you cyah shove de ref outta de way.. dat is violent conduct to de ref... you coulda hurt him and you would get a red card in your ass too...
The second one is de same deal... the referee is part of de field... so dais like ah man run into de post and knock heself out... hard luck... no goal
-
He SHOVE the ref out the way?!?! Nah!! De ref hadda call dat one back! the second one is a hard luck.
He SHOVE the ref out the way?!?! Nah!! De ref hadda call dat one back! the second one is a hard luck.
Both of dem is hard luck.... but de first one is no goal too...
The referee is a part of de field so you cyah shove de ref outta de way.. dat is violent conduct to de ref... you coulda hurt him and you would get a red card in your ass too...
The second one is de same deal... the referee is part of de field... so dais like ah man run into de post and knock heself out... hard luck... no goal
but in the first play after the ref get shove and on de ground, the goal done score already and no whistle eh blow..
how can the ref then call back the play and disallow the goal after the fact?
-
but in the first play after the ref get shove and on de ground, the goal done score already and no whistle eh blow..
how can the ref then call back the play and disallow the goal after the fact?
hmm dais good talk...
but then ah man could snatch out de whistle out de referee hand and do all what he want...
I think I remember ah case where ah referee false teeth fall out... right when he was going and blow off ah game... and ah goal score...
However mister man went back and disallow de goal because he say he was going and blow it off anyway...
So I say no goal...
EDIT: Look it here Omar
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/apr/30/1
"A friend of mine was telling me the other day about an Icelandic referee who disallowed a goal because his teeth had fallen out," says Jon Bennett. "Am I right to assume he was talking bobbins?"
Technically you would be right to assume that, Jon, but only because the referee in question was actually Danish. Henning Erikstrup had been preparing to whistle for full-time on Noerager's 4-3 win over Ebeltoft when his false teeth fell out of his mouth and on to the pitch. Ebeltoft equalised moments later, only for Erikstrup, who had not even seen the goal, to immediately rule it out on the grounds that he would have whistled before it went in. "I had to get my teeth back before some player put his big foot on them," parped the official afterwards when asked why he didn't just whistle without his teeth in.
-
but in the first play after the ref get shove and on de ground, the goal done score already and no whistle eh blow..
how can the ref then call back the play and disallow the goal after the fact?
hmm dais good talk...
but then ah man could snatch out de whistle out de referee hand and do all what he want...
I think I remember ah case where ah referee false teeth fall out... right when he was going and blow off ah game... and ah goal score...
However mister man went back and disallow de goal because he say he was going and blow it off anyway...
So I say no goal...
:rotfl: FF is a geriatric league yuh was sweating in or wha...fete match ting?
For a man to have a full plate fall out he mouth and cyar suck the whistle...he either like fight and was on the receiving end of many a cutarse or he past 60 and a sever case of pyorrhea festering in he gums.... Ent proper ref in league hadda be less than 40 yrs old.
But arghm, I say Goal in the first instance....no goal in the second...hard luck and any of the players who opposin me go get a card in they arse. Step away and relax alyuh self.
Ent if ball hit the referee and go in goal does stand. Same way he does bawl play on when it hit him and he make a one-two with a player. He obstructing play...good goal in part A. No goal in part B the ball ent cross the line.
-
:rotfl: FF is a geriatric league yuh was sweating in or wha...fete match ting?
nah Touches :rotfl: check meh edit above... this happen in de danish league...
no goal in both counts
-
I think it's a goal in the first case. Yuh cud look at it as the ref being at fault for placing himself in harm's way. And like touches say, if the ball deflects off the ref and goes in, it's a goal, so i think this should count as well.
The second scenario is a hard luck. Suck it up and play ball.
-
Part A - no goal, card for the player pushing the referee to the ground.
Part B - Play on
The referee is part of the game that players have to learn to navigate.
-
I think it's a goal in the first case. Yuh cud look at it as the ref being at fault for placing himself in harm's way. And like touches say, if the ball deflects off the ref and goes in, it's a goal, so i think this should count as well.
The second scenario is a hard luck. Suck it up and play ball.
Yuh say is de ref fault, eh? :rotfl:..... yuh rel heartless, dred. Is not like de player jes' run een to de ref. De man actually shove 'im to de grong. Dat cyah be right. I sorry fuh dem referee when you playin' sah. :rotfl:
-
I think it's a goal in the first case. Yuh cud look at it as the ref being at fault for placing himself in harm's way. And like touches say, if the ball deflects off the ref and goes in, it's a goal, so i think this should count as well.
The second scenario is a hard luck. Suck it up and play ball.
Yuh say is de ref fault, eh? :rotfl:..... yuh rel heartless, dred. Is not like de player jes' run een to de ref. De man actually shove 'im to de grong. Dat cyah be right. I sorry fuh dem referee when you playin' sah. :rotfl:
Hahaha i hear wha yuh sayin.......i just didn't read it as the player deliberately holding the ref and flinging him down like a rag doll.....if that's the case, then i see ur point. I just interpreted it more as the player kinda run thru him trying to get to the ball
-
After reading it again, i agree, no goal. "He deliberately pushes you out of the way to get to the ball and knocks you to the groundin the process" I now notice the "deliberately" in there. Thaht would constitute violent conduct against an official, so is no goal PLUS a red card to the offending player. He could possibly get a 3 match ban for that too.
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/hiddink.jpg)
Here's a double-headed You Are The Ref question:
Question number 11
Part A: A player sees a goalscoring opportunity, but you - the referee - are unfortunately in the way. He deliberately pushes you out of the way to get to the ball and knocks you to the ground in the process.
He puts the ball in the net but the defence claim they stopped when they saw you on the floor. You didn't see the goal as you were on your backside and your linesman is unsighted and not in a position to rule.
What would you do in this siuation?
This question was inspired by a suggestion from fearlessJon_Taylor. Here is his original submission:
Hi Mr Hackett
Thanks for answering all of the questions asked, the answers have been very helpful. Here's my conundrum:
Part B:
It's 1-0 to Spain against Russia in the last few minutes, with the game swinging end-to-end. Russia have a corner which is cleared but passed back to Arshavin who looks certain to score, unfortunately the referee accidentally elbows him in the face knocking him off balance. The Russia players surround you, complaining that you have denied them a goal.
What do you do?
Keith's Hackett's answer
Part A: In normal circumstances, if a referee has not seen whether a goal has been scored or not he will ask his assistants, especially the one nearest the goal.
If they are unable to confirm a goal has been scored, the referee cannot award a goal.
In this question, the player has deliberately pushed the referee out of the way. Players must not put their hands on any of the officials. They must show respect.
A deliberate push on the referee would be taken as an assault. The player is shown a red card and sent off. The game is restarted with an indirect free-kick from where he pushed the referee to the ground.
Part B: This is a difficult predicament for the referee and fortunately you do not have to show a red card to yourself.
You are protected in law by effectively being part of the field of play and this incident is an accident, in the same way that if a shot on goal was clearly going wide strikes the referee and enters the goal.
This would count as a goal.
I can remember some years ago Rotherham referee John Key giving a clear and firm signal to indicate a throw in and in doing so struck a player on the face and knocked him to the ground. The player, whilst receiving treatment, received an apology from John and both ended up smiling.
-
Thanks omar :beermug:
-
I find Hackett give we two bullshit answers dey
Esp the second...so is a goal or not?
Maybe I illiterate.
But when giving answers using two examples without a definite conclusion especially subjective topics like this ent good enough.
Must be my comprehension bad yes...but wha he really saying here
You are protected in law by effectively being part of the field of play and this incident is an accident, in the same way that if a shot on goal was clearly going wide strikes the referee and enters the goal.
This would count as a goal....So this short sentence confirming the shot on goal story above not so? At least this is what I gathered, so by extension if the ball ent go in the goal is no goal...correct is right.
I can remember some years ago Rotherham referee John Key giving a clear and firm signal to indicate a throw in and in doing so struck a player on the face and knocked him to the ground. The player, whilst receiving treatment, received an apology from John and both ended up smiling.
-
I didn't see anything wrong with the first answer........he said a goal cannot be awarded, and the player deliberately pushing the ref will get a red card.
Yuh right about the 2nd question tho, he never explicitly gave an answer. I think the implication is that it was an accident, so hard luck and just play on
-
Part B: This is a difficult predicament for the referee and fortunately you do not have to show a red card to yourself.
You are protected in law by effectively being part of the field of play and this incident is an accident, in the same way that if a shot on goal was clearly going wide strikes the referee and enters the goal.
This would count as a goal.
I can remember some years ago Rotherham referee John Key giving a clear and firm signal to indicate a throw in and in doing so struck a player on the face and knocked him to the ground. The player, whilst receiving treatment, received an apology from John and both ended up smiling.
Just like I said, players have to learn to navigate the referee as part of training.
-
I find Hackett give we two bullshit answers dey
Esp the second...so is a goal or not?
Maybe I illiterate.
But when giving answers using two examples without a definite conclusion especially subjective topics like this ent good enough.
Must be my comprehension bad yes...but wha he really saying here
You are protected in law by effectively being part of the field of play and this incident is an accident, in the same way that if a shot on goal was clearly going wide strikes the referee and enters the goal.
This would count as a goal....So this short sentence confirming the shot on goal story above not so? At least this is what I gathered, so by extension if the ball ent go in the goal is no goal...correct is right.
I can remember some years ago Rotherham referee John Key giving a clear and firm signal to indicate a throw in and in doing so struck a player on the face and knocked him to the ground. The player, whilst receiving treatment, received an apology from John and both ended up smiling.
yes i agree, it was a shitty answer for the second one.. i had to read it like 3 times before posting.
to make it worse, in the original link they bold the "This would count as a goal" part which has nothing to do with the actual scenario the way i read it.
Well i got the first one wrong and the second one right..
de streak had to end at some point.
-
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/finalb438.jpg)
Question
It is the final of Euro 2008. You are the ref and your assistant referee is having a TERRIBLE game.
Every time the ball is played forward in his half he flags for offside. He makes two or three decisions that you can clearly see are wrong and you overrule him, allowing play to continue.
At half-time you are fortunate enough to see footage of several clear goalscoring opportunities that were ruled out by your assistant. You have a word with him and he assures you he is fit and well and, from where he was standing, the players appeared to be clearly offside.
In the second half the scenario is reversed - the assistant's flag stays down for 20 minutes and a goal is scored when the player looked offside to you, but you couldn't be sure.
After overruling the assistant for the second time on a CLEAR decision, you are faced with the possibility he may be getting these decisions wrong, not by accident but on purpose.
You have stopped play for offside. The managers and the players of both teams are understandably angry, but not doing anything that warrants action from you.
One team is asking for the assistant to be removed, the other is berating you for constantly overruling him.
What would you do?
(http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/euro2008/rooney438.jpg)
Question
It is the dying seconds of a game and the away team are desperately hanging on to a 1-0 lead when they concede a corner.
A defender is standing on the goalline inside the post. From the corner a forward blasts the ball at goal and it hits the defender full in the chest and knocks him backwards off his feet.
The rebound goes straight back to the forward who volleys it back in, but the defender on the goalline stops his fall by grabbing on to the post. By holding on to the woodwork he is able to prevent his fall and put out his leg to make another goalline clearance, preventing a certain goal.
The forward insists the defender has gained an unfair advantage by using the post to stop him falling on his back and preventing the ball from going in the net.
The captain confronts the referee and says: "Sort it out ref. It you swing on the crossbar and head the ball out it's a card - give him a yellow!"
The manager is even more furious and argues that he has denied an obvious goalscoring chance. He calls for the referee to punish the player with a red card and give a penalty for an infringement in the box.
What would you do?
-
Papayo!!!
They save de best for last!
Here goes:
1. The linesman is called the referee's assistant for a reason. The referee always have the final say and can overrule the linesman at anytime... continue to call it at your discretion... and if the linesman in your opinion cannot reasonably perform his job... then replace him with the 4th official.
2. It seem that the player make a reflex action to stay up... it was not a pre-meditated move to gain an advantage therefore that play is an acceptable one.
... but I never even think bout that swinging on the post one to butt out a ball up in the vees... so i eh sure nah...
-
Papayo!!!
They save de best for last!
Here goes:
1. The linesman is called the referee's assistant for a reason. The referee always have the final say and can overrule the linesman at anytime... continue to call it at your discretion... and if the linesman in your opinion cannot reasonably perform his job... then replace him with the 4th official.
2. It seem that the player make a reflex action to stay up... it was not a pre-meditated move to gain an advantage therefore that play is an acceptable one.
... but I never even think bout that swinging on the post one to butt out a ball up in the vees... so i eh sure nah...
For 1. I would say the ref have no choice but to battle on for the rest of the game with the assistant and then report him to the referrees committee.
For 2. As you say is self preservation , so is like ah man taking a bang and it heading straight for yuh face , you will reflexively use yuh hand for protection.
Again is the ref call but I would say no foul or no card offence.
-
Answers...
Keith Hackett's answer
This is another good question but not possible in the Premier League because the officials do not have access to replayed television footage of the first half in their dressing rooms.
However, if this was the case and the referee believes his assistant referee was affecting his overall performance and the result of the game, then he would dispense with his services.
The referee would not abandon the game. At Euro 2008 each game has a fifth official and it is likely he would take over running the line.
In this scenario in the Premier League the fourth official would probably replace the assistant referee, with the problem then being who would take over the fourth official's duties.
It would be unwise to ask the assistant to assume the fourth official role because then he could attract unnecessary comments and/or abuse from the dug-outs.
The referee would have created another problem which could have been avoided. So it would be wiser if he dispenses with the assistant completely.
There's often a qualified referee in the crowd who could take over the fourth official's duties, or the assessor if present, or even a willing volunteer.
I can remember a First Division game in September 1972 between Arsenal and Liverpool that ended in a goalless draw when there was no fourth official and TV pundit Jimmy Hill ran the line.
After the game the referee would write a report and let the governing body controlling the game (Uefa in the case of Euro 2008) decide what action to take depending on what was in the report.
The governing body would decide whether to allow the result to stand or order the game to be replayed. There might also be other measures which they may wish to take.
The assistant would be immediately withdrawn from any further appointments until the investigation is complete. If there was any suspicion of corruption then the matter would be investigated by the police.
If found guilty the official's career would be over.
If the referee had the problem with a club assistant referee on a park pitch - some club assistants are too biased - then he would dispense with his services and ask the club for another assistant.
If there wasn't one available, the referee would officiate from a position that would keep him close enough to that particular touchline to see if the ball goes out of play.
Also, the referee would have to be in a position to be able to judge offside when required. He would need to do a lot of running!
Answer for #13
Keith Hackett's answer
There is no offence here. The defender has done nothing wrong in using the goal post to regain his balance. No law has been broken, no offence has been committed. The decision is PLAY ON.
It would be the same decision if the player held on to a team-mate to prevent falling - it is not a free-kick.
If, however, the defender had used the crossbar to get off the ground, thus gaining extra height in clearing the ball, then this is considered to be unsporting behaviour for which he would be given a yellow card and you would restart play with an indirect free-kick.
It would be the same decision if the defender had used a team-mate to get off the ground, gaining extra height in order to clear the ball: a yellow card and an indirect free-kick.
In this particular scenario I would not dismiss for the Denial of an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity because the criteria of DOGSO has not been fulfilled.
Interestingly, if the defender standing on the goalline inside the posts, had used an opponent to get off the ground, he would be holding the opponent down. The decision would be a penalty kick for the holding offence, and a yellow card. He can only be given a red card in such a situation if he had deliberately handled the ball to prevent the opposing team a goal. Maybe the law needs changing in this respect.
I would completely ignore the shouts of the manager from off the field and concentrate solely on continuing to referee the game.
This was the final one in our special edition of You Are The Ref. Thank you very much for all your contributions over the past few weeks. We hope you have enjoyed playing You Are The Ref on the BBC.
-
Thanks Touches :beermug:
-
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Sport/Pix/site%20furniture/2009/3/5/1236278010590/onlinerefsavageBIG.jpg)
-
Hmm...number #2 i will say is handball cause the keeper hands will cross the line in order to get the ball back in.
The next two real hard tho. My guesses are:
1) The team remains as 11 v 11 and the player alone is punished with a ban for the next game
2) Is a hard luck, but the ball didn't go over the line so the goal hadda stand. Is the same as if the ball hit the corner flag and come back in.
My guesses...
-
1. The player is sanctioned
2. no hand ball
3. no goal
-
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Sport/Pix/site%20furniture/2009/3/5/1236278010590/onlinerefsavageBIG.jpg)
1. Substituted player gets sent off and down the tunnel but the team remain with 11 men. Similiar to sending a coach or a substitute off who are not in the game.
2. No handball. The whole ball didnt cross the line in the first place.
3. Hmmm hard one. I would say if the injured player was struck by the ball unintentionally then that is goal because it would be the same as if the ball hit the corner flag or linesman and didnt go out of play. However if it was intentionally redirected then it should be a free kick and a caution for the injured player.
-
1) Substituted player is sent off...11 men remain on the field
2) Play On...the whole ball has to cross the line. ( as ref you could play chupid and say you ent see it)
3) Goal stands...if the play was not stopped immediately as the ball hit the player standing outside. The linesman woulda say if it went out or not and flagged. Further, ball does hit corner flag and stay in...is a good goal. (plus the ref could say he ent see that it went out)
I real interested in answer #3
-
1- 11v11 - player was subsitituted. That's the point of subbing a player on a card- preventing yourself from being reduced to 10.
2- No hand ball
3- Goal can't stand. A player off the field waiting to come back in is can't be considered part of the play. The ball should be called dead if it strikes him.
-
1- 11v11 - player was subsitituted. That's the point of subbing a player on a card- preventing yourself from being reduced to 10.
2- No hand ball (ball has to be completly over the line)
3- Goal can't stand. A player off the field waiting to come back in is can't be considered part of the play. The ball should be called dead if it strikes him. (In fact geh he ah yellow for illegaly being back on the field :D )
Totally concur
-
Answers
Keith Hackett's official answers:
1) You would not reduce the team to 10 men. The referee would request the substituted player to leave the technical area and report him to the authorities. Mark O'Boyle wins the shirt for this question.
2) The goalkeeper has made contact with the ball outside the penalty area, so you would award a direct free-kick. Keith Hackett: This is similar to a defender inside the penalty area tripping an opponent outside the area. The point of contact, and hence the free-kick, is outside the area. The referee also has to ensure that in committing this offence the goalkeeper has not denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity. If he has, then a red card would also be given. If the referee deemed it an act of unsporting behaviour, a yellow card would be shown. Thanks to Mark McGill for the question.
3) No, you do not give the goal. If you judged that this was an accident and not a deliberate act, restart play with a drop ball from where the contact occurred on the touchline. Keith Hackett: If however the player had stepped on to the field before a signal and the ball had struck him, he would be cautioned; and you would restart the game with an indirect free-kick Thanks to Sid Ward for the question.
-
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Sport/Pix/site%20furniture/2009/3/12/1236883475381/onlinerefmodricBIG.jpg)
-
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/2/26/1235650096105/ONLINEREF18TOPBIG.jpg)
-
Forumites a new You are the ref comes out on tues and fri...it is on guardian.co.uk. Cut and paste it nah if I sticking.
1) Yes why not
2)Yellow card for the keeper ungentlemanly/unsporting conduct
3) Cards for both players...yellow /red for attacker...red for goalkeeper
a) Talk to him, drop ball restart
b) a corner or goalkick depending on who boot the ball.
c) Goal stands
-
1.
a- No
b- Yellow
c- Yellow for Attacker? Red for the GK and restart with the free kick for the defending team.
2.
a- Book him, send him off to remove the shirt and restart from where the ball is. If it was in play at the time drop ball.
b- No goal. Yellow for improper use of equipment.
c- Goal. Get medic to administer smelling salt.
-
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/2/26/1235651647271/ONLINEREF19TOPBIG.jpg)
Keith Hackett's official answers:
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Sport/Pix/site%20furniture/2009/3/12/1236883475381/onlinerefmodricBIG.jpg)
1) No. Only the referee can officiate and apply the laws of the game. The captain does not decide how you referee the game and therefore his request would be denied. Keith Hackett: I would also suggest that he gets on with playing the game and leaves the business of officiating to you. Thanks to Russell Berrisford for the question.
2) Dismiss the goalkeeper. He has clearly committed a serious offence from which his team have benefited and, given the circumstances, his actions have denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity, so he must be shown the red card. Have the defending team choose someone to take over in goal and re-start play with an indirect free kick at the point inside the penalty area where he dropped his shorts. Mathew Page wins the shirt for this question.
3) Again you must dismiss the goalkeeper. However, as with the previous circumstances a team must have a goalkeeper and so, before restarting play, another player needs to go in goal and put on a distinguishing coloured jersey. Otherwise the game would have to be abandoned. Having blown for the initial offence on the goalkeeper you would restart play with a direct free kick to the defending team. Thanks to Phil Reid for the question.
-
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/2/26/1235651647271/ONLINEREF19TOPBIG.jpg)
1) give the shooter a red card if he does not shoot when you blow your whistle.
2) do nothing
3) again, do nothing
-
1) Book the striker for time wasting and talk to the keeper. If he still refuses to kick and they both continue dancing, book him again and send him off. Penalty can be taken by someone else at this point.
2)He can't prove the opposing keeper did it in the first half. If the keeper is doing it in the second half and it is pointed out by the ref, he is booked.
3)Once he is allowed on the field with the headgear in the first place, the goal is legal.
-
1) Book the striker for time wasting and talk to the keeper. If he still refuses to kick and they both continue dancing, book him again and send him off. Penalty can be taken by someone else at this point.
2)He can't prove the opposing keeper did it in the first half. If the keeper is doing it in the second half and it is pointed out by the ref, he is booked.
3)Once he is allowed on the field with the headgear in the first place, the goal is legal.
2) But ent keepers doing that for years... I and all used to do that in all kinda jokey sweat
-
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/2/26/1235651647271/ONLINEREF19TOPBIG.jpg)
1) Yellow card to the Shooter
2) When you notice the keeper marking the field on the other end you give a yellow. No other marks are to be made on the field.
3) The ref inspects the head gear prior to starting the second 1/2 therfore goal stands.
-
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/2/26/1235651647271/ONLINEREF19TOPBIG.jpg)
1. The keeper eh breaking no rules once he eh cross the goal line. Yellow card to the kicker for time wasting and if he still refuse to kick his penalty, then it should be adjudged a missed penalty for not kicking within the stipulated time. he effectively forfeit.
2. Halt play, get Ralphie to come and fix the scuffed up spot and book the away keeper for scuffing the line in the second half. But I done miss what happen in the first half so play on. Wha yuh wha meh do?? And if the home keeper doh stop complaining like a lil imps he could get a yellow for dissent too.
3. He was allowed to play with the helmet so the goal stood. If it was a problem he would not have been let on the field with it.
-
these things ridiculous but entertaining!
check the website for the official answers they give
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/you-are-the-ref
-
Here's some ref questions I found that probably aren't as complex as 'you are the ref' but here goes:
1. What should the referee do, and how is play restarted if...
A direct free kick (DFK) is awarded to the red team just outside their penalty area. The red team player #7, who is not the goalkeeper, takes the DFK and miss-kicks the ball, sending it in the direction of his own goal. The red team player #7 realizes that the ball is headed for his own net and runs to the ball in an attempt to stop it before it enters the goal. While inside his penalty area, red team player #7 dives and deflects the ball with his hand over the goal line, preventing it from going into his goal.
2. What should the referee do, and how is play restarted if...
An attacking red team player, who is adjusting his shirt, grabs the bottom of it with both hands as the ball is played to him. He "catches" the ball with the bottom of his shirt (as a basket), without touching the ball with his hands, then he releases the ball from the shirt to his feet and kicks it into the goal?
3. What should the referee do and how is play restarted if...
A blue defender just outside the blue team's penalty area starts holding a red attacker who is dribbling toward the blue team's goal. However, while still being held by the blue defender, the red attacker manages to get into the blue team's penalty area before losing control of the ball to the blue team defender?
-
Here's some ref questions I found that probably aren't as complex as 'you are the ref' but here goes:
1. What should the referee do, and how is play restarted if...
A direct free kick (DFK) is awarded to the red team just outside their penalty area. The red team player #7, who is not the goalkeeper, takes the DFK and miss-kicks the ball, sending it in the direction of his own goal. The red team player #7 realizes that the ball is headed for his own net and runs to the ball in an attempt to stop it before it enters the goal. While inside his penalty area, red team player #7 dives and deflects the ball with his hand over the goal line, preventing it from going into his goal.
2. What should the referee do, and how is play restarted if...
An attacking red team player, who is adjusting his shirt, grabs the bottom of it with both hands as the ball is played to him. He "catches" the ball with the bottom of his shirt (as a basket), without touching the ball with his hands, then he releases the ball from the shirt to his feet and kicks it into the goal?
3. What should the referee do and how is play restarted if...
A blue defender just outside the blue team's penalty area starts holding a red attacker who is dribbling toward the blue team's goal. However, while still being held by the blue defender, the red attacker manages to get into the blue team's penalty area before losing control of the ball to the blue team defender?
1. Red card to the #7 and a penalty kick to the other team
2. Yellow card to the offending player for unsportsmanlike conduct, and a freekick is awarded to the other team.
3. Free kick awarded to the red team just outside the penalty area, as that was where the holding began.
-
Here's some ref questions I found that probably aren't as complex as 'you are the ref' but here goes:
1. What should the referee do, and how is play restarted if...
A direct free kick (DFK) is awarded to the red team just outside their penalty area. The red team player #7, who is not the goalkeeper, takes the DFK and miss-kicks the ball, sending it in the direction of his own goal. The red team player #7 realizes that the ball is headed for his own net and runs to the ball in an attempt to stop it before it enters the goal. While inside his penalty area, red team player #7 dives and deflects the ball with his hand over the goal line, preventing it from going into his goal.
2. What should the referee do, and how is play restarted if...
An attacking red team player, who is adjusting his shirt, grabs the bottom of it with both hands as the ball is played to him. He "catches" the ball with the bottom of his shirt (as a basket), without touching the ball with his hands, then he releases the ball from the shirt to his feet and kicks it into the goal?
3. What should the referee do and how is play restarted if...
A blue defender just outside the blue team's penalty area starts holding a red attacker who is dribbling toward the blue team's goal. However, while still being held by the blue defender, the red attacker manages to get into the blue team's penalty area before losing control of the ball to the blue team defender?
1. Red card to the #7 and a penalty kick to the other team
2. Yellow card to the offending player for unsportsmanlike conduct, and a freekick is awarded to the other team.
3. Free kick awarded to the red team just outside the penalty area, as that was where the holding began.
The official answers:
1. The red team player #7 did not deny an obvious goal scoring opportunity as a team cannot score a goal, from a DFK into its own goal. If the ball would have gone into the goal, without anybody touching it, a corner kick would have been awarded to the opposing team. However, the red team player #7 who originally takes the DFK, deliberately handles the ball inside his penalty area before it touched another player. In this case, the player who handled the ball is not the goalkeeper; therefore, the referee should stop the game and restart it with a penalty kick for the opposing team. If the red team's goalkeeper would have taken the original DFK and then handled the ball inside his own penalty area, before it was touched by another player, an indirect free kick would have been awarded to the opposing team to be taken from the place where the infringement occurred. In addition, depending on the age of the players, the referee may decide that the red team player #7 is guilty of unsporting behavior and therefore caution the player.
2. The bottom of his shirt became an extension of the hands as the red team player was holding it with his hands and made a "basket." Therefore, the red team player is guilty of handling the ball. The referee should stop the game and restart it with a direct free kick for the blue team from the place where the offense occurred. In this case, if the infraction (handling the ball deliberately) occurred inside the blue team's penalty area, then all opponents must be at least 10 yards from the ball and remain outside the penalty area until the ball is in play, which requires for it to be kicked directly out of the penalty area.
In addition, depending on the age of the players and if, in the opinion of the referee, the red team player intentionally used the "basket," that is deliberately handled the ball, to prevent an opponent from gaining possession, then before restarting the game the referee should caution the red team player for unsporting behavior.
3. Stop play and restart with a penalty kick for the red team.
-
What should the referee do, and how is play restarted if...
Red player #8 is ready to put the ball back into play with a throw in. Her teammate, red player #12, is standing inside the penalty area with just the blue team goalkeeper between her and the opponent's goal line. Red player #8 sees this and makes the throw-in in her teammate's direction. The ball deflects off a defending blue player and goes to red player #12 who controls it and scores.
-
What should the referee do, and how is play restarted if...
Red player #8 is ready to put the ball back into play with a throw in. Her teammate, red player #12, is standing inside the penalty area with just the blue team goalkeeper between her and the opponent's goal line. Red player #8 sees this and makes the throw-in in her teammate's direction. The ball deflects off a defending blue player and goes to red player #12 who controls it and scores.
GOAL... restart from de centre spot.
cyah be offside from a throw... if it had deflect off a red player first... then offside
-
Should this goal stand?
Is it as legal as it is hilarious?
Talk bout pressure... endless breeze plus sun in yuh eye...
http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/g0DtoxBo9sg&
-
:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
-
Should this goal stand?
Is it as legal as it is hilarious?
Talk bout pressure... endless breeze plus sun in yuh eye...
hahahaha ;D...no goal.
Yuh can't kick the ball into your own goal from a goal kick. It must make contact with another player- the wind is not a player lol ...
Aye boy jeez :D
-
Forumites,
Ah having a debate with a partner of mine, and the argument is that if play is stopped for a substitution, and the player walking off receives a second yellow (let's say for wasting time by passing an armband, etc), that the substitution does not continue, and the team plays a man short.
I reading my 2006 lawbook (page 17 and 19) but I not seeing anything definite.
Any of the forumites have the answer? And an example of a match where it happened?
I won't tell allyuh which is my argument yet...
Thanks...
-
I would think that the team plays a man short because according to de laws, de substitution is only completed when de substituted player is off de pitch and de substitute is on de pitch.
Substitution Procedure
To replace a player with a substitute, the following conditions must be
observed:
- the referee must be informed before any proposed substitution is made
- the substitute only enters the field of play after the player being replaced
has left and after receiving a signal from the referee - the substitute only enters the field of play at the halfway line and during a
stoppage in the match - the substitution is completed when a substitute enters the field of play
- from that moment, the substitute becomes a player and the player he has
replaced becomes a substituted player - the substituted player takes no further part in the match
- all substitutes are subject to the authority and jurisdiction of the referee,
whether called upon to play or not
Delaying the restart of play
Referees must caution players who delay the restart of play by tactics such as:
- taking a free kick from the wrong position with the sole intention of forcing
the referee to order a retake - appearing to take a throw-in but suddenly leaving it to one of his teammates
to take - kicking the ball away or carrying it away with the hands after the referee
has stopped play - excessively delaying the taking of a throw-in or free kick
- delaying leaving the field of play when being substituted
- provoking a confrontation by deliberately touching the ball after the referee
has stopped play
-
Thanks. That makes sense.
Anybody ever see that happen?
-
check a similar situation in this post in the thread "You are the Ref"
http://www.socawarriors.net/forum/index.php?topic=36465.msg443880#msg443880
-
man does get red and yellow cards on the bench right through.
-
we haven't done one of these in a while
(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/SPORT/Pix/pictures/2010/9/2/1283437636120/You-are-the-Ref-Scholes-003.jpg)