Regional Football - powered by Park Life

Awwwww Ref - Know The Laws

1104 replies · 178,403 views

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Yeah but it's a bit harsh when a player is lying on the floor clearly injured to send him off isn't it? I mean, not much human feeling shown there by the ref imo.

No disrespect, Buff, but it might be interesting to hear a neutral spectators view on it.

Anyway, I can't comment on it specifically, cos I didn't see it.

Apparently I'm apathetic, but I couldn't care less.

"Being a Partick Thistle fan sets you apart. It means youre a free thinker. It also means your team has no money." Tim Luckhurst, The Independent, 4th December 2003

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

el grapadura wrote:

I remember a Charlton player being sent-off while being carried on a stretcher a few years back.

I remember Paul Gascoigne should have been sent off while he was on a stretcher. In an FA Cup game I think.

Apparently I'm apathetic, but I couldn't care less.

"Being a Partick Thistle fan sets you apart. It means youre a free thinker. It also means your team has no money." Tim Luckhurst, The Independent, 4th December 2003

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Fair enough and i agree. If there was a neutral who was at the Birko v Lynn Avon game on Sat on here i too would like to hear their views. But you'll be hard pressed to find one. So you have to go on my word, sorry.

Three for me, and two for them.

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Buffon II wrote:

I know you're an honest chap, Buff!

Apparently I'm apathetic, but I couldn't care less.

"Being a Partick Thistle fan sets you apart. It means youre a free thinker. It also means your team has no money." Tim Luckhurst, The Independent, 4th December 2003

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Jag wrote:

Ha Ha. The old "quote the LOTG" routine.

In regard to your point 1, yes there would appear to be no requirement in the LOTG for a referee to check players equpiment. However, if you had also quoted Law 5, you will have noticed that a referee must ensure that a player's equipment meets the requirements of Law 4. It is difficult to ensure that a player is not wearing, or using, equipment which is not a danger to themselves, or other players, without checking it first. So there is a strong argument that players equipment, including boots, must be checked before they enter the field of play.

An advisory from the English FA's Head of Refereeing in 2004, to all referees, stated that "The Referee's role is to inspect footwear and jewellery before each and every match" and that "Match Officials are also to incorporate a footwear inspection in to the pre-match safety check of player's equipment".

The level of league is irrelevant.

haha..got me..well almost...

Law 5 says "ensure" not "inspect" or "check' - ensuring could be allowing teams to voluntarily comply with requirements (as we do in the tax system) supported by reminding that they need all basic equpiment and that it's not dangerous.

But help us all if we did take that approach - it is standard practice for me or AR's to check each player!

Interesting that 2010 version of LOTG and guidelines to referees do not include wording to the effect of the 2004 English FA advisory!

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

It wasn't an IFAB instruction so it wouldn't appear inthe LOTG

Apparently I'm apathetic, but I couldn't care less.

"Being a Partick Thistle fan sets you apart. It means youre a free thinker. It also means your team has no money." Tim Luckhurst, The Independent, 4th December 2003

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Buffon II wrote:

Tegal wrote:

steelo wrote:

Buffon II wrote:

ginger_eejit wrote:

By timewasting, I assume you mean delaying the restart of the game, - which is a cautionable offence.

Right. How does one determine what is timewasting and what isn't though? Yesterday we had 2 players booked and 1 sent off for alleged timewasting.

Always wondered this too. The rule seems to change the closer you get to full time. Granted there are deliberate acts but often the refs expect you to run to get the ball etc when getting near the end of the game.

Common sense.

Elaborate.

Its common sense so easily...

You cant have a concrete law or time because:

1st minute of game,scores locked at 0-0. Keeper takes 30 seconds to take a kick,clearly not timewasting.

90th minute of the game,team up 1-0,keeper takes 30 seconds to take a goal kick,more likely to be timewasting.

90th minute of the game, team A down 1-0,Team As keeper takes 30 seconds + to take a goal kick,clearly not timewasting ( this actually happened in an A league game last season,it was in injury time and the keeper whose side was losing got booked for time wasting - idiot ref,cant remember who)

If you had a concrete law,you would have stupid situations with no common sense being applied. situations 1 and 3 would be seen a card,when they are clearly not time wasting. Common sense should always apply to other laws in the game also.

Allegedly

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Buffon II wrote:

Yeah but it's a bit harsh when a player is lying on the floor clearly injured to send him off isn't it? I mean, not much human feeling shown there by the ref imo.

If the ref carded him for timewasting,he mustve thought he wasnt injured,so no need for human feeling if you think he wasnt actually hurt i guess.

Seems quite harsh,was the first card for diving then the 2nd for timewasting by 'feigning' injury?

Sounds like he was pretty hard done by if he was injured.

Tegal2010-08-23 13:52:04

Allegedly

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Yeah good points. Personally i think the ref in our game showed a total lack of common sense or understanding of any sort. But like Jag says no one else is here to give a neutral perspective so i guess it's hard to say.

I just posted in here to gain a ref's perspective on the matter and see what rules (if any) were in place for these scenarios/situations.

Three for me, and two for them.

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Tegal wrote:

Seems quite harsh,was the first card for diving then the 2nd for timewasting by 'feigning' injury

Pretty much, yeah. Ref was booed off the park, first time i've ever seen it happen at Birko (or at any Northern League match for that matter).

Three for me, and two for them.

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

If he was already book for acting (diving) he has already put it in the refs mind that he is a hollywood.

I don't blame the ref unless there was some sort of obvious injury

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Yeah but in was in the same act by the sounds of it. Almost seems like 2 bookings for 2 seperate offences in the same incident. Technically correct (assuming the ref was right and he wasnt injured),but pretty harsh.

Allegedly

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Q. Is the goalie you have going into a penalty shoot out (end of ET) need to be the goalie for the PKs?

Founder

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Feverish wrote:

Q. Is the goalie you have going into a penalty shoot out (end of ET) need to be the goalie for the PKs?

A. Nope. An eligible player can change places with the keeper at any time during the penalty shoot out. Eligible players are ones who are on the pitch at the end of the game.

If the keeper is injured, he can be replaced by a named subsititute, as long as the team hasn't used all it's allowed subs by then. That's the only exception to the eligible players rule.

Apparently I'm apathetic, but I couldn't care less.

"Being a Partick Thistle fan sets you apart. It means youre a free thinker. It also means your team has no money." Tim Luckhurst, The Independent, 4th December 2003

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Shrek wrote:

If he was already book for acting (diving) he has already put it in the refs mind that he is a hollywood.

I don't blame the ref unless there was some sort of obvious injury

Empathise for a second mate. If it was you this happened to, or a team mate of yours, or even let's say a Phoenix player, you would be screaming injustice.

Sure in the ref's eyes it may have been right, but that doesn't mean it necessarily was, and it also doesn't mean it wasn't very harsh.

Three for me, and two for them.

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

There is no place for empathy in the rules.

when i ref a game i don't take into consideration the fact I am in control of a relativesmates game.

their are the rules and nothing else.

during the game the ref picked the player up for diving.

the player went down with injury, the ref believed the player was time wasting so he issed a card.

the ref is not a doctor (I would imagine) so the ref had to make a call one way or another.

We all know that the majority of players end up on the ground trying to attract the refs attention to a legit foul, or trying to con the ref is going to stay laying on the ground for a bit longer than normal.

The ref has to make a decision one way or the other.

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Shrek wrote:

There is no place for empathy in the rules.

when i ref a game i don't take into consideration the fact I am in control of a relativesmates game.

their are the rules and nothing else.

during the game the ref picked the player up for diving.

the player went down with injury, the ref believed the player was time wasting so he issed a card.

the ref is not a doctor (I would imagine) so the ref had to make a call one way or another.

The ref has to make a decision one way or the other.

Again,you've missed the point that both cards were for the same incident. He didnt dive,then 10mins later go down 'injured' and get booked again for timewasting.

He booked him for diving,then while he was down booked him again for timewasting. Essentially 2 cards for the same incident.

Technically correct,but a common sense approach shouldve been taken really. Its very harsh,you can't disagree with that surely.

Allegedly

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

el grapadura wrote:

Proper ref?

No, parent, another parent from the same school let me getting kicked in the face go earlier in the season as well. Muppets.

You know we belong together...

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

A question - imagine an attacking player in possession in the opposition box near the by-line, tricking the defender in such a way that both of them leave the field of play (for example, the defender slides in and goes beyond the by-line, and the attacker jumps over the tackle and lands outside the by-line too) while the ball remains in play. The defender, realising that the attacker will get to the ball first then fouls the attcker while they're both outside of the actual field of play.

Penalty or indirect free kick? Or something completely different?el grapadura2010-12-07 12:30:45

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Dropped ball or an IFK, and very probably a yellow crd for the defender!

From the 'good book':

If the ball is in play and the offence occurred outside the field of play:

ï¿½ if the player is already off the field of play and commits the offence, play is restarted with a dropped ball from the position in which the ball was located when play was stopped, unless play was stopped inside the goal area, in which case the referee drops the ball on the goal area line parallel to the goal line at the point nearest to where the ball was located when play was stopped

ï¿½ if the player leaves the field of play to commit the offence, play is restarted with an indirect free kick from the position in which the ball was located when play was stopped.

Apparently I'm apathetic, but I couldn't care less.

"Being a Partick Thistle fan sets you apart. It means youre a free thinker. It also means your team has no money." Tim Luckhurst, The Independent, 4th December 2003

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

el grapadura wrote:

indirect free kick from 6 yard box closest to where the foul was comitted, card the defender yellow for unsporting beaviour

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Seems like it wouldve been way easier for you just to quote Jag.

Allegedly

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Tegal wrote:

Seems like it wouldve been way easier for you just to quote Jag.

In the scenario described, the player didn't leave the park just to commit the foul, and was already off it, so the Laws state the restart is with a dropped ball.

I don't know why I bother sometimes

Jag2010-12-11 19:58:04

Apparently I'm apathetic, but I couldn't care less.

"Being a Partick Thistle fan sets you apart. It means youre a free thinker. It also means your team has no money." Tim Luckhurst, The Independent, 4th December 2003

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

This almost happen v GCU in the weekend (Manny or Lia on someone I think). Player has the ball and gets a mare of a touch and the ball is going out. Just after the ball goes out the player is fouled by another player. Ref gives a free kick. Shouldn't it be a throw in as the ball went out first (effectively the first "offence")? Especially interetsing if the foul is not worthy of a booking.

Its no longer a problem.

about 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Ok refs, here's one. If i played after a big night out on the piss and at a real dodgy curry that hadn't passed through my system yet, then proceeded to chunder said curry all over the opposition striker, what would happen?

Three for me, and two for them.

about 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I sure hope this is a theoretical scenario.

I'd imagine the ref wouldn't deem you fit to continue playing,you could probably get subbed.

The striker,would go for a shower...

Allegedly

about 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

One of my main gripes about football is hand ball. Can someone please explain. It was once told to me by a ref that if your hand is in a 'natural position' beside you and the ball is kicked into it, then that is not hand ball. However you do see appeals and penalties given for all sorts of things. What do you guys reckon?

I let my guitar speak for me

about 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I went off the pitch to have a burge and then came back on just when an oppo player had made a break - so I tackled him. Ref almost booked me for not announcing my return to the field - got away with it cos everyone was pissing themselves laughing.

Founder

about 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I always thought it would only get let go if it was unintentional and didn't affect the direction of the ball. Or it played into an advantagous position for the opposition.

about 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Tegal wrote:

ï¿½I sure hope this is a theoretical scenario.

ï¿½

I'd imagine the ref wouldn't deem you fit to continue playing,you could probably get subbed.

ï¿½

The striker,would go for a shower...

I was considering trialling it this season. On someone i dislike. Paul Seaman perhaps.

Three for me, and two for them.

about 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

And that handball in the phoenix match by Vargas is a good example altho slightly more dodgey. I'd def call that one a handball but what if his hand was right at his side?

I let my guitar speak for me

about 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I agree that should have been a handball. It does make you think though, I guess if your body is behind your hand and it would've taken a natural deflection without your hand there anyway then it shouldn't be too.

Another question in regards to WPhx game.. At one point both Ward and Petkovic went for the ball, but clearly Ward was in the air and commited before Petkovic even left the floor, but Ward conceeded a free kick. I know the keeper is protected but if he jumps into someone should he still win a free kick?

about 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Perennial strugglers Liverpool striker Ryan Babel has been fined 10,000 pounds and warned about his future conduct over a posting on Twitter which criticised referee Howard Webb.

Will our football association take similar steps against any member player or coaches or managers? Probably not 'cos our game is amatuer only. Wonder whether cops ask speedsters first whether they can afford the fines beore they hand out infringment notices or not.

Food for thought.