|
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
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 10:55 |
|
|
1) yellow card, free kick to defending side, whats so tough about this one? 2) if there's a camera nearby get the FA to give him a two match suspension 3) two match ban for the defender if there's a camera near by, red card for the pk taker, let someone else take the pk
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2011 01:20
|
|
|
Oh also tell the ball boy to stop being a oval office and let the guy use the towel.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2011 01:35
|
|
|
Alan BStard posted:No idea if there a rule or not, but would you really expect FIFA not have thought about anything that could potentially harm a source of income? How could drawing attention to a sponsor harm income?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2011 02:01
|
|
|
quote:Keith Hackett's verdict Looks like his 3rd answer is not the same as what anyone said here?
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2011 17:44
|
|
|
SteadfastMeat posted:It's Friday! 1. Buy only one, with you first and last name with the number 1 2. No sweat, you have another tab open already with a Hungarian stream on mute that you can switch to 3. Find their shirt on your floor and toss it in the back of your closet so noone sees it, and buy a new jersey following the directions from the answer to #1
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2011 19:08
|
|
|
Guess you guys couldn't Hackett concerning the first call:Keith Hackett's verdict posted:1) Order a retake. The law is clear on issues like this: the referee must "stop the match because of outside interference of any kind". This announcement clearly distracted the player and altered the course of the game. You should talk to the stadium manager, remind him that future PA announcements must be made during a stoppage, and report the incident to the authorities after the game. Of course, if you thought the striker was actually having you on and making excuses, you would play on as normal. Max Seymour wins the shirt.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2011 12:12
|
|
|
SteadfastMeat posted:whoops look what everyone forgot to do quote:Keith Hackett's verdict
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2011 04:34
|
|
|
RAAAHHH! It's Keith Hackett's verdict 1) If you decide the noise was a deliberate attempt to distract the keeper, treat it as unsporting behaviour: show the taker a yellow card and restart with an indirect free-kick from the penalty mark. If not, award the goal. Professional goalkeepers should be well used to noise during penalties – so the offence would have to be obvious. Thanks to Jimmy McManners. 2) It is not up to the teams, it is up to you – and your decision must be based on safety. Only if you are happy that the artificial strip does not represent a danger to the players should you allow the game to go ahead. I remember refereeing in the US in the early 80s at the famous Wrigley Field, which had a flattened out pitching mound. It wasn't dangerous, so we went ahead. Thanks to Johannah Carroll. 3) You have two options. Going by the letter of the law you should play on: you and your assistants are considered part of the field of play, like a goalpost or corner flagpost – so if a player collides with you or an assistant, you play on. But there is also a chance to spare your assistant's blushes here: I would stop play to check both are unhurt, then restart with a dropped ball. Joshua Heppell wins the shirt.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2011 11:09
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:
Hmmm...
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2011 11:45
|
|
|
Keith Hackett's verdict posted:1) The gloves are illegal – they clearly represent a danger, and an attempt to gain an unfair advantage. Show the keeper a yellow card for unsporting behaviour, and, as the offence happened before the ball went out, restart with an indirect free-kick on the six-yard line. Give the gloves to the fourth official so they can be used as evidence by the authorities, and check the replacement gloves before allowing play to resume. Steal his loving gloves, the oval office. Also the 3rd answer... play on around him (and his little dog too) 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2011 08:02
|
|
|
foobardog posted:The vertical line that becomes dotted is showing where the pass would have gone. How could the groundsman have known that though?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2011 22:54
|
|
|
Gonna be pedantic and say kickoff.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2011 12:02
|
|
|
Psybro posted:If you want a vision of the future, imagine Mike Riley blowing his whistle for no discernible reason - forever. What if he doesn't admit it? Does he get off free?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2011 06:35
|
|
|
Why is that unsporting behavior?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2011 18:02
|
|
|
Semprini posted:Because while the law may say 'Unsporting behaviour', it means 'Don't think you can discover some cunning ruse we forgot to legislate against and expect to get away with it' What I mean is why is this particular thing unsporting? If someone has enough skill to balance a ball on their head while running, with or without the use of their own cushy hair, and walk it into the net, why shouldn't they be rewarded for that? Obviously none of you here are Keith Hackett but maybe someone understand why that's a bad thing and can explain it to me.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2011 06:13
|
|
|
1) goal 2) retake but turn your back so you don't see the attacker smash the keepers head in with his boot 3) goal
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2011 10:37
|
|
|
A drop ball (when not uncontested by the attacking side) is supposed to be a 50/50 chance thing, surely if a keeper is putting his face in the way he's making it so the attacking player can't contest for the ball without risking injury to the keeper.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2011 16:48
|
|
|
Keith Hackett's verdict 1) The fact that this is a clear scoring opportunity does make a difference. If the ball was in a neutral area of the pitch you would stop play immediately, prioritising player safety, and would restart with a dropped ball. But the Laws do allow you to play on "if the outside agent does not interfere with play" – so in these circumstances, it makes sense to wait for the chance to resolve itself. If he scores, restart with a kick-off. If not, stop the game. Daniel Cooper wins the shirt. 2) Playing on with a corner of the pitch in darkness really is not an option – there are broadcasters and a paying crowd who are entitled to be able to see the game. Take the players off and talk to the stadium manager. I was at a live TV game between Braga and Benfica when the floodlights failed three times in the first half. The referee dealt with it brilliantly and patiently – eventually bringing the game to a conclusion after 20 minutes of stoppage time. Thanks to Steve Dighton. 3) I would smile and escort him off the pitch – there's no need to cause a scene. But, as always, you need to apply the Laws: he had no right to enter the field of play and his action with the glasses was insulting – so report him to the authorities. Thanks to Johannah Carroll.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2012 07:00
|
|
|
 1. red 2. goal 3. no
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2012 14:29
|
|
|
Yeah you can't be offside from a corner.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2012 15:30
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:1. Abandon the match. Where's the second touch?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2012 14:38
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:One to scoop it up, one to flick it. Even if he doesn't pause with the ball on his foot, it's still two touches. Similar to this which although it counted, was outlawed at the end of the season, according to Wikipedia. The scoop and the flick were one motion so it's one touch. I think if there's anyway to disallow it it's what Carrier said Carrier posted:I'm gonna guess the 3rd panel is disallows because he stopped in his runup because they specifically mention he stops
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2012 15:07
|
|
|
1) Game on 2) Go back to the first advantage but hand out yellow cards if players of either team deserve them 3) No goal and free kick to defending team. The striker being in an offside position clearly played a part in the goal
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2012 10:50
|
|
|
Kwik posted:Hackett's answer includes an anecdote about a "well-known" ref who tossed a chocolate biscuit in lieu of a coin, and then snacked on it prior to a throw-in. Any guesses on the ref in question? Phil Dowd?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 5, 2012 07:22
|
|
|
Lamont Cranston posted:Number 1 makes sense as he has said before that suspensions fall under the rules of the competition and you're not there to enforce them. Why the gently caress not?
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2012 13:23
|
|
|
stickyfngrdboy posted:I don't understand 2). I was certain we'd seen similar situations in YOTR before when a player has scored from open play without shinpads (or a boot or something) and the goal was given, and the player told to sort his pad or boot out before rejoining the game. I don't see why that should change in a penalty situation. If you buy into Hackett's reasoning at all it's probably because it's not open play and he had ample time to put on his shin guards before the kick.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2012 13:59
|
|
|
stickyfngrdboy posted:1) Kick the ball boy in the face, drop ball restart. You can play advantage through a red card offense if there's an immediate goal scoring opportunity. Not sure what immediate means in terms of having to round the keeper but I think you could red card the defender in this situation if you really wanted to. 1) Make the ball boy sit with the attacking teams subs after you disallow the goal 2) Is pushing hard in the chest a red card offense? I don't think it is. Yellow to both, play original restart. 3) Red defender, yellow attacker, free kick to offense.
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2012 22:47
|
|
|
Lamont Cranston posted:Show the kisser a red card for a gesture that can be deemed "offensive, insulting and/or abusive", Let's kick homophobia out of football
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2012 14:37
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:It's sexual harassment... It was a joke
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2012 14:49
|
|
|
Vegetable posted:For (1) I'd say adjudge the offending player as offside. But what if the assistant ref hadn't raised his flag (because he was unsure, blind, whatever) and you had already awarded the goal? Would any refs really change their decision after a player complains? There was a YATR about the keeper using comically large gloves in a penalty shootout, but I'm on my phone so I can't easily find it. It might answer your question though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2012 09:47
|
|
|
Mickolution posted:How would wearing boxing gloves injure the keeper? When the opposing team kick the poo poo out of him for knocking one of their players out when trying to punch the ball away from a corner.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2012 14:10
|
|
|
Didn't #2 happen in a Dutch game in the Euros? The refs let them get away with it, wrong as that may be.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2012 13:53
|
|
|
This is a week where punching everyone in the face is the clear and only answer. Are they asking to have an outfielder in goal half the game, between "kicks"? Let them the cunts. How is that keeper so slow that the ball is still on the goal line when the kicker is tackling him? How are they on the 19th kick without this happening on the 6th kick already? Only the playing 11 can participate in a shootout.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2012 11:13
|
|
|
Interesting that the defender in 3 only gets a yellow though.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2013 09:27
|
|
|
Lamont Cranston posted:The defender has not denied an obvious goal-scoring opportunity; he has denied a goal. The latter is only a sending-off if he does it with his hand. He has not committed either of the DOGSO offenses in this instance. It's just weird how disadvantaging the other team more is worthy of a lesser punishment. Unfairly denying a clear goal feels like it should be punished equally or more than denying an opportunity which may or may not result in a goal.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2013 07:13
|
|
|
Tunga posted:I was about to comment on how Hackett is continuing his unusual run of common sense but then I realised that he just said he would let a team play in tights. Surely he means long johns?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2013 13:14
|
|
|
Why wouldn't you change your decision based on what he, the offender, says?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2013 13:22
|
|
|
The difference between all your examples and the one in YATR is that when someone says their opponent did something it's obvious that you ignore whatever they say forever. If someone says that THEY did something and got away with it then perhaps they actually did it. I can't even imagine a situation where a player legitimately tripped then saying "can't believe you bought that dive" to the ref. If they did, they and their team deserve whatever comes their way including losing a pen.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2013 13:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 18, 2024 10:55 |
|
|
CPColin posted:Oops: 1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTAui5ToSu0 2) He could have punched it away/thrown it/let go, punish and keep the game going, monitor situation 3) Punch their smug faces and tell them to lose the hats
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2014 00:44
|
|