|
Kwagga posted:No ref would have the balls to do this on the pitch. No ref would have the balls to make half the decisions in these strips!
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2011 09:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 19:42 |
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:No ref would have the balls to make half the decisions in these strips! Fair point. I guess the point of these is answering based on strict rule of law from the LOAF but since the LOAF is worded to be more like guidelines subject to interpretation, it seems odd that Hackett would suggest things that would end with the ref never making it out of the grounds alive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2011 10:17
|
|
|
Also that decision completely contradicts the one the other day where he said allow play to continue if a player changing his shirt gets a touch.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2011 17:52
|
|
|
Psybro posted:Also that decision completely contradicts the one the other day where he said allow play to continue if a player changing his shirt gets a touch. That's different though, isn't it? He's not changing his shirt, he's taking it off in celebration which is Unsporting Behaviour.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2011 18:09
|
|
|
What if he's just taking it off because hes hot?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2011 19:05
|
|
|
Bhyo posted:What if he's just taking it off because hes hot? Then its qatar 2022
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2011 19:07
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:That's different though, isn't it? He's not changing his shirt, he's taking it off in celebration which is Unsporting Behaviour. There's still nothing to support the idea that you should stop play in the process of a goal being scored for a celebration, just that the player should be booked for the celebration. I think there's enough of a grey area for the referee to exercise their discretion, and I really don't see any ref doing it the way Hackett has described it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2011 19:08
|
|
|
Basically, all that's established is that Hackett chats poo poo. Then again, my interpretation of the rules is essentially based on "poo poo that was au fait in 1996". With reference to the first strip, my interpretation of the "last man" rule is that it's simply an attempt at a formal definition of the pre-existing "professional foul" statute, and not a hard-and-fast rule. So yes, hacking down a man clean through on an empty net is a red, but in another situation, a goalkeeper should always have the right to make a legitimate attempt to play the ball in a one-on-one in his own box without being carded for it. Also John Terry should always be sent off. This is why I am the best ref.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2011 19:37
|
|
|
Yeah if there's one thing I've noticed in these strips it's that Hackett is really hard on keepers challenging in their own box. Also that any sign of emotion is unsporting behaviour.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
Luigi Thirty posted:Yeah if there's one thing I've noticed in these strips it's that Hackett is really hard on keepers challenging in their own box. Also that any sign of emotion is unsporting behaviour. Keith just longs, as we all do, for the days of football-playing robots
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 00:23
|
|
|
Robert Patrick posted:Keith just longs, as we all do, for the days of football-playing robots old news https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIEVo06uRcg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wMSiKHPKX4
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 02:19
|
|
|
Today's is up 1. two yellows for the defender, 1 for coming on and the other for the blatant foul 2. no, dunno why, just seems like a thing that is probably part of a law 3. the keeper made it a backpass so whatever the rule is for that when in the box pik_d fucked around with this message at 03:36 on Jan 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 03:29
|
|
|
1) Book the defender, free kick. If the defender is Gary Neville punch him in the head again 2) Yeah? As long as they're covering opposite ends of the pitch it's okay, right? 3) It's a backpass, that's a penalty right? Also Smugnaldo is great
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 03:33
|
|
|
SteadfastMeat posted:1) Book the defender, free kick. If the defender is Gary Neville punch him in the head again I reckon he gets sent off for two bookable offenses (coming back onto the pitch without permission and tripping the opponent) SteadfastMeat posted:2) Yeah? As long as they're covering opposite ends of the pitch it's okay, right? Except then the ref will have to run the opposite corner to opposite corner as well, and that risks a greater gently caress up for the desire not to be muddy. Have them run the same bits. SteadfastMeat posted:3) It's a backpass, that's a penalty right? Indirect free kick
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 03:47
|
|
|
I thought backpasses had to be intentional on the part of the player making the pass. The keeper can catch after the ball's cleared off the line for instance. So if the pass wasn't directed at the keeper, it's not a backpass.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 04:25
|
|
|
Ravel posted:I thought backpasses had to be intentional on the part of the player making the pass. The keeper can catch after the ball's cleared off the line for instance. So if the pass wasn't directed at the keeper, it's not a backpass. Shouting at the defender to leave it could be construed as deliberately bypassing the law.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 04:27
|
|
|
MrL_JaKiri posted:Except then the ref will have to run the opposite corner to opposite corner as well, and that risks a greater gently caress up for the desire not to be muddy. Have them run the same bits. It's only in the last ten years that the directive "thou shalt run left backs" has descended. Originally, the referee would swap diagonals at half-time (for just this reason, to prevent any one touchline from becoming too churned). Then about 30 years ago they stopped that and said "run whichever diagonal you prefer", and it was standard advice that you should practice running the opposite diagonal a couple of times a year so you could use it if something like this happened. Then about 15 years ago FIFA had one of its ridiculous moments and mandated that everyone should run left backs, for absolutely no good reason. Some people are just more comfortable going the other way round - Alan Wiley always used to run right backs until they threatened to give him failing assessments on every game and demote him (no, seriously). Diagonals are apparently serious business. (I'd always switch in that situation because assistants have to be able to plant their foot at high speed and be able to trust that it'll stick so they can go the other way. Running an unfamiliar diagonal is a tiny price compared to the shitstorm that'd happen if someone scored a goal when he was three yards offside and got away with it cos the assistant fell over.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 05:07
|
|
|
Psybro posted:Shouting at the defender to leave it could be construed as deliberately bypassing the law. The first defender intentionally kicked it to the second defender, not the keeper. The keeper didn't shout for it until after the ball was already on its way and the second defender never made contact with the ball. I'm no expert on the Laws, but I don't think he can intentionally pass a ball to the keeper that he never makes contact with. Luigi Thirty fucked around with this message at 07:01 on Jan 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 06:59
|
|
|
I think I'm with the crowd here. 1 - 2 yellows for the 2 identified offences, send him off, free kick from the spot the trip took place. The two things Hackett might bitch about is having the free kick from the spot of the first offence and/or not giving the trip because he wasn't officially in play at that point so it's not an offence. Both arguements would of course be retarded. 2 - Indirect free kick, the keeper has called for a back pass and picked it up. 3 - Let them, don't even begin to see a problem, if it's a law that they can't, it's a stupid one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 09:15
|
|
|
1. Agree with the majority, two yellows. 2. indirect free kick, but for the 'keeper shouting 'leave it' rather than 'keepers!' 3. Feck knows why not, but apparently they can't change.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 10:03
|
|
|
In #1 if he's clear of the defense it's a yellow for coming on and a red for denying a goalscoring opportunity isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 10:51
|
|
|
Dear Sergio posted:In #1 if he's clear of the defense it's a yellow for coming on and a red for denying a goalscoring opportunity isn't it? It's not a clear cut opportunity, he's tripped the player after going two yards on the pitch, so it's pretty much on his usual position on the wing. 1) Book him for going on the pitch without permit, another yellow for tactical foul. 2) Keep position, punch Blatter in the face. 3) Voluntary pass to a teammember, clear backpass, indirect freekick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 11:09
|
|
|
Dear Sergio posted:In #1 if he's clear of the defense it's a yellow for coming on and a red for denying a goalscoring opportunity isn't it? Doesn't specify where on the pitch the foul was committed though, and apparently that's important. Edit: except yes it does and I can't read. stickyfngrdboy fucked around with this message at 11:13 on Jan 21, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 11:10
|
|
|
I'd give #1 a straight red. If a sub or manager had stepped on the pitch and done it you wouldn't just give him a yellow card, and since you haven't allowed the guy back on yet he should be treated the same. File a report and get the guy banned for more games if you're feeling particularly cuntish. #2 Allow it. It's a safety thing. #3 Backpass. Spirit of the rules, if maybe not letter of them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 11:32
|
|
|
1. Red Card for being a stupid oval office, also report him so he misses more games. 2. Allow it. gently caress if they can't run what good are they? 3. Allow it. It's not an intentional backpass. The intention has to be there otherwise you could book people for hitting the ball at the wrong angle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 13:33
|
|
|
#2. Allow it. As mentioned, the shitstorm arising from doing that pales in comparison to a linesman falling over when he needs to be calling offside on a goal.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 13:52
|
|
|
Affi posted:3. Allow it. It's not an intentional backpass. The intention has to be there otherwise you could book people for hitting the ball at the wrong angle. But it's the goalkeeper that gets punished for picking up a backpass, not the defender. The goalkeeper makes it a backpass by calling for it - especially as the effect of him picking it up is to deny an attacker a goalscoring opportunity he might otherwise have had.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 13:53
|
|
|
What strip did the punch Gary Neville in the face come from? Also #1 Yellow. Two seems excessive #2 Allow it #3 Indirect fk TwoDogs1Cup fucked around with this message at 14:27 on Jan 21, 2011 |
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 14:23
|
|
|
TwoDogs1Cup posted:What strip did the punch Gary Neville in the face come from? No. 132, Petr Cech: 
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 14:26
|
|
|
Loads of people got all butt hurt as well about it
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 14:27
|
|
|
SteadfastMeat posted:No. 132, Petr Cech: The contributors in the comments section had been punching Gary Neville in the face for several weeks before that strip went up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 14:44
|
|
|
1. Yellow Card. I've never seen someone get two yellows for the same incident. I know it's two different infractions, but I just don't see a ref giving two yellows for it. Maybe a red if it's a goalscoring opportunity as it does say he's racing clear of the defense although as last week's pointed out, that's not that important. 2. Allow them to once the side really is too muddy to run and include in match report. 3. Not a backpass as it wasn't intentional.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 14:55
|
|
|
1. Red card as it's such an rear end in a top hat thing to do. I don't think you can give two yellows. 2. I can't imagine this happening without the whole pitch being so crap that the match is abandoned, but I don't think it's allowed anyway. 3. Clear backpass in the spirit of the law. Indirect free kick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 15:11
|
|
|
#3 isn't a backpass, the player making the pass has to intend to kick it to the keeper. That's why stupid poo poo like deflections off defenders can be picked up without it being called as a backpass.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 15:11
|
|
|
irlZaphod posted:#3 isn't a backpass, the player making the pass has to intend to kick it to the keeper. That's why stupid poo poo like deflections off defenders can be picked up without it being called as a backpass. Absolutely. I've seen this happen many times.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 15:16
|
|
|
The other defender stepping over the ball is essentially "passing" the ball with intent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 15:36
|
|
|
Messyass posted:The other defender stepping over the ball is essentially "passing" the ball with intent.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 15:44
|
|
|
If the scenario was phrased in such a way that makes it sound like the player who passed the ball had intended for this to happen (for the other defender to dummy it and leave it go back to the keeper), then I could maybe see that argument. But even then, there's no way of proving the intent there. The fact was, the keeper just called for the ball like he would in a different situation, and the player who the pass was meant for left it for him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 15:47
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:1. Yellow Card. I've never seen someone get two yellows for the same incident. I know it's two different infractions, but I just don't see a ref giving two yellows for it. Maybe a red if it's a goalscoring opportunity as it does say he's racing clear of the defense although as last week's pointed out, that's not that important. Yep, spot on. For 1 you don't give two yellows for the same incident. For 2 safety should come first regardless, if you wouldn't expect the players to play if the whole pitch was like that then you can't allow the linesmen to run on that section, and bending a guideline is certainly better than abandoning the match. 3 is not a defender deliberately passing back to the goalkeeper and it's not a defender attempting to circumvent the wording of the rules in order to pass it back so it's not a backpass. What the goalkeeper does is only relevant if he shouted to the passing defender to pass it back to him (which would demonstrate that it was deliberate). e: If you read it as "passing with intent by dummying" then heading the ball back to the goalkeeper would be in breach of the rules too. If memory serves the rule is "deliberately kicks the ball back to the goalkeeper" so that heading is allowed, in that sense it can't be a backpass if he doesn't kick it!
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 19:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 4, 2024 19:42 |
|
|
Scikar posted:Yep, spot on. For 1 you don't give two yellows for the same incident. But it's 2 separate offenses, running into the field without permission (yellow card) and taking him out (another yellow). You can't let him get away with such obvious cuntish behavior.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2011 19:56
|
|