You are the Ref

[Touches]

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





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

[Touches]

 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.





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?

[Touches]

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.

[palos]

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

[Mose]

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.

[elan]

It will be an indirect to Torres team but a yellow card to the defender not a red.

[Quags]

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





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

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 .

[Quags]

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.





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 .

[Touches]

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.

[Touches]

Todays Question





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

[Touches]

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.

[dinho]

Nice topic touches.

Referee Howard Webb





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

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.

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





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

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.

[Touches]

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.

[Mango Chow!]

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.

[dinho]

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..  

[Mango Chow!]

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. 

[trinikev]

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

[Touches]

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.

[trinikev]

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.

[dinho]

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.

[trinikev]

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

[dinho]

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  ):

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.

[Mango Chow!]

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.

[andre samuel]

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........

[elan]

Todays Question





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

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.

[dinho]

Todays Question





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

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.

[elan]

He did not say if there was a rule or anything. So what if after the ref  yell    and the keeper do it again? Then you give a yellow? This answer was shyte.

[Touches]

Look a Special Real Life One






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


Keith Hacketts Answer...Scroll Down

[elan]

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.

[DeSoWa]

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 

Big Up!