this thread needs a heapem more grammar and punctuation to make it a heapem more readable- 'Know the laws!!'
David Gates has been reffing for a number of years now, and as much as we dont want to bag the refs for doing their job, this sort of thing goes a bit too far. I think we will write a letter of disappointment on the way this has been handled. In all fairness, if he hadnt said anything to my teammate during the week, we wouldnt have any issue with this. Pre-meditation is the key. As i said, our track record as a team this year has been bloody good. And as captain, that is the 1st yellow card i have received for doing my job, in 2 years
Sorry Salmon07
you smell fishi ...
are you a ref ??
Hey TSMA- lucky your team mate didn't pick a higher number eh?
Smells fishy alright
Smells fishy alright
Salmon swim upstream
we are going off topic. This isn't a thread for bitching about refs, it about educating players on the laws of the game.
I think we all educate ourselfs one way or another if we say something wrong why someone doesn't come up and putus right ?? i don't think is a bashing referee .. it was an opinion ..
I am not trying to ref bash, and if thats the way it looks i am sorry. What i am trying to understand, from a players point of veiw is, what can we do about it? Maybe a letter to CF? I am also not trying to get out of the fines or cards as this has happened and we have to pay for them. Just after an opinion from maybe some other refs that maybe on this forum.
And who knows what may have happened if he choose 7? ha ha
What sort of relationship does the ref and your team mate have?
Are they friends, do they hate each other?
Are they friends, do they hate each other?
They are both employed by the same entity. The relationship between the 2 is fine. Funny enough, the player in mention was not one of those that got a card
TSMA you should be carefull what you put on here. David Gates could construe this as serious character defermation.
TSMA you should be carefull what you put on here. David Gates could construe this as serious character defermation.
First of all, it's spelled "defamation".
Second of all, I don't think David Gates is likely to sue anyone for questioning whether he had a good game, or whether he might have favoured one team or another.
Here is a good summary of defamation: http://www.howtolaw.co.nz/html/ml146.asp
However, whatsupdoc makes a reasonable point that we should all be careful about what we say in any public forum. You have to be prepared to stand by it.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
This is a know the rules thread. Not a whinge about your referee from the weekend thread. Tegal2011-07-04 16:17:29
Allegedly
Funny how you guys react at times .....
Last week in the capital one topic .. there was a "coach abusing a referee " and no one come out either on his defence or to say to be careful with what you are posting ...
today some one make a comment and have the cheek to say a few things and there you are all jumping ...
while i don't believe that bashing a referee on the net is acceptable ... I do believe that some one could ask a question ... I like referees and i believe i'm a good friend of a couple of them .... so al i'm saying is ( in case you are moderator ) be Fair and do the same in all threads where a ref get hard done by ... in your views ..
Now continue
http://www.splashesfromtheriver.com/spelling/index.htm
This free, thirty lesson spelling course has been made available courtesy of Marie Rackham, author and producer of The Basic Cozy Grammar Course, The Basic Cozy Punctuation Course, The Basic Cozy Essay Course, The Intermediate Cozy Grammar Course Level 1, The Intermediate Cozy Grammar Course Level 2, and The Cozy Classroom CD.Tegal2011-07-04 16:38:11
Allegedly
we are going off topic. This isn't a thread for bitching about refs, it about educating players on the laws of the game.
Gonna start deleting posts from now on. On topic please.
I agree that the ref should not have been named, and i am sorry for this. I am not trying to cause any disharmony amongst posters, but it would be good for some reasoning behind how we take this from another referees point of veiw. I thought this would have been the best place to get that reasoning. Obviously i was wrong. Sorry. Maybe some contact details of who we should be in contact with regarding this sort of behaviour from a referee.
I have sent a player off the very same day I was joking to my children that I was going to send him off.
Did I send him off because I said I would jokingly? no
I think one of the most important thing a ref has to have is a sense of humour, with the amount of crap they cop if they didn't have a sense of humour then no one would want to do the job.
Did I send him off because I said I would jokingly? no
I think one of the most important thing a ref has to have is a sense of humour, with the amount of crap they cop if they didn't have a sense of humour then no one would want to do the job.
TSMA the contact details for writing are on the CF website, either the RDO or the Federation Secretary.
You are probably right Shrek, but did the player know about you going to send him off. Maybe i am reading too much into it, and at the end of the day, all we can do is write a letter of disappointment about it to the powers that be. Not looking at getting cards recinded or anything like that. And thanks everyone for your opinions. They are all noted
My experience as a referee has shown me referee's can often have a pre-meditated frame of mind. I have often heard referee's get together and laugh about "how such and such is likely to be getting booked again this weekend" and the like. Although I feel it can have a negative impact on the game it is not really any different than players getting together and talking about how an upcoming opponent can't use his left and similar tactical banter. Nevertheless always upsetting to hear a referee being called out for having a perceived below average game.
The referee plays an advantage on a foul that is committed only for the ball to fall to a player in an offisde position. Does he ignore the offside or what happens?
It happened today and I have to ask if thats legit. I would have thought because there is no advantage that you go back to the foul but maybe its not the case?
Jeff Vader2011-07-24 21:09:23
It happened today and I have to ask if thats legit. I would have thought because there is no advantage that you go back to the foul but maybe its not the case?
Jeff Vader2011-07-24 21:09:23
Grumpy old bastard alert
Can't ignore the offside.
So either a) ref believed the team didn't received advantage, thus bring back the foul.
or b) ref believes advantage has been gained, thus offside is called.
So either a) ref believed the team didn't received advantage, thus bring back the foul.
or b) ref believes advantage has been gained, thus offside is called.
I would have thought because there is no advantage that you go back to the foul but maybe its not the case?
That's what I'd do - no advantage for the attacking team, so bring the play back for the foul and award the attacking team the free kick.
I would have thought because there is no advantage that you go back to the foul but maybe its not the case?
That's what I'd do - no advantage for the attacking team, so bring the play back for the foul and award the attacking team the free kick.
I concur.
Its important to get the timing of advantage right. It can pay to wait a second or two sometimes for an advantage to show before you call it.
If a team makes a sub on the half way line, does the ref need to wait for the player to get somewhat into position or is that just a politeness thing?
Ask because it happened today during a defensive corner and the ref gave the go ahead as soon as the player entered field of play meaning the guys at the back were a player short for the corner. Not having a go at the ref at all, just interested in what the rules suggest
There is nothing in the LotG stating that the referee has to wait for the player to get into his position before restarting play. But obviously a degree of common sense has to enter into the equation at times (especially with goalkeepers coming on).
There is nothing in the LotG stating that the referee has to wait for the player to get into his position before restarting play. But obviously a degree of common sense has to enter into the equation at times (especially with goalkeepers coming on).
And this is where I think the whole Little sending off episode started. The player being subbed off (Batty) was on the far post at the time. He ran all the way to halfway for the sub to happen, Little asked the ref to allow the substitute enough time to take his position, the ref looked at Little, and blew for play to carry on immediatly. Pretty disappointing, but consistant with showing no card following the awarding of a penalty, when the last defender bundled Terry over 10 yards inside the box. Head scratching all round.
Football is working class ballet - Alf Garnet
Didn't have to make a sub at that time though.
10 yards inside the box would have been close to the 6 yard box, which clearly it wasn't.
Like El gap says, there is nothing in the rules about last man. It's about stopping a clear goal scoring opportunity. Way I saw it was that the ball was going away from goal, hence no red. Deserved a yellow though.
10 yards inside the box would have been close to the 6 yard box, which clearly it wasn't.
Like El gap says, there is nothing in the rules about last man. It's about stopping a clear goal scoring opportunity. Way I saw it was that the ball was going away from goal, hence no red. Deserved a yellow though.
If a player is offside, can he put himself back onside to then make him 'in play'?
We had an incident yesterday where a player was offside (and the ref admitted it), but he didn't play at the ball straight away. He stopped for a second before defending our player who had received the ball. Our player then kicked the ball out as he was under pressure.
I thought that because the offside player had 'affected play' we should have got the offside call but the ref ruled he 'didn't get the ball, and he put himself back onside so play on'.
What's the deal?
We had an incident yesterday where a player was offside (and the ref admitted it), but he didn't play at the ball straight away. He stopped for a second before defending our player who had received the ball. Our player then kicked the ball out as he was under pressure.
I thought that because the offside player had 'affected play' we should have got the offside call but the ref ruled he 'didn't get the ball, and he put himself back onside so play on'.
What's the deal?
Did the ball make it passed your defender first or did he stop it from going through? If the ball had made it through then yes he would have been affecting play but if your defender stopped the ball and the attacker runs back onside before challenging then the ref got it right.
The defender had to run back to get it. The attacker still ran back onside though, before engaging. So is that sweet?
Tough one, I'd probably have called it but I'm not a trained ref. He's affected play because the pass was at his direction.
The defender had to run back to get it. The attacker still ran back onside though, before engaging. So is that sweet?
Yes.
Do you not think it should be called back for the original offside though? It sounds like the ball was played through for the offside player which brings him into play, making him offside.
If he didn't play or touch the ball, or distracted the opponent from playing the ball, or gained advantage from being in an offside position (and from how I understand the situation, none of this happened), there was no offside offence.
Yeah not sure if I've explained it perfectly, but the way I saw it was he only came back on side so that he could get goal side to defend our defender.
My issue is the whole "coming back onside". For me it shouldn't matter. If you were offside and you affect the immediate play then it should be called, regardless of whether or not you curved your run back onside first.
The issue then becomes what is the 'immediate play' and I guess I'm expecting a reasonable advantage, just like with any advantage played.
But as I said, that's how I think it should be. No idea if that is how the law works.
Cheers for the answers though.
My issue is the whole "coming back onside". For me it shouldn't matter. If you were offside and you affect the immediate play then it should be called, regardless of whether or not you curved your run back onside first.
The issue then becomes what is the 'immediate play' and I guess I'm expecting a reasonable advantage, just like with any advantage played.
But as I said, that's how I think it should be. No idea if that is how the law works.
Cheers for the answers though.