| Tomorrow's referee 08:40 - Dec 10 with 1486 views | Northernr |
Same one from the 4-3.
|  | | |  |
| Tomorrow's referee on 10:25 - Dec 10 with 1420 views | Walnut |
Where's that photo of the encroachment he ignored at Wells' penalty? |  | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 10:37 - Dec 10 with 1406 views | Northernr |
| Tomorrow's referee on 10:25 - Dec 10 by Walnut |
Where's that photo of the encroachment he ignored at Wells' penalty? |
| | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 10:50 - Dec 10 with 1385 views | Mick_S |
That is incompetent. |  |
| Did I ever mention that I was in Minder? |
| |
| Tomorrow's referee on 13:44 - Dec 10 with 1279 views | Northernr |
| Tomorrow's referee on 10:50 - Dec 10 by Mick_S |
That is incompetent. |
I wonder if Pinner will back me up on this but I suspect it fell into the category of 'couldn't be doing with the hassle' given the circumstances. Same reason they always side with the goalkeeper when it's 50/50 on a deliberate pass back. | | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 13:55 - Dec 10 with 1248 views | Mick_S |
Probably - there's that many in there they look like a bunch of grapes. | |
| Did I ever mention that I was in Minder? |
| |
| Tomorrow's referee on 14:07 - Dec 10 with 1226 views | RANGERS4EVER |
| Tomorrow's referee on 10:37 - Dec 10 by Northernr |
|
I mean i do think the encroachment rule is an annoying one as it is hard to not slightly go over the line. But that is just ridiculous. In a no context scenario i would honestly think that isn't a pen but a cross in which one Birmingham player is going in for a slide tackle.
Absolute insanity. |  |
| |
| Tomorrow's referee on 14:33 - Dec 10 with 1202 views | francisbowles |
Mr Bond, licensed to kill.......your hopes! | | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 14:47 - Dec 10 with 1178 views | PinnerPaul |
| Tomorrow's referee on 13:44 - Dec 10 by Northernr |
I wonder if Pinner will back me up on this but I suspect it fell into the category of 'couldn't be doing with the hassle' given the circumstances. Same reason they always side with the goalkeeper when it's 50/50 on a deliberate pass back. |
That's one way of putting it.
'No surprises' is the phrase I'm often given by refs when I'm an AR.
To be fair , before VAR, how many times was a goalkeeper penalised for moving before the ball was kicked, or anyone picked up for encroachment?
The caveat for that 'no surprises' instruction is usually that we should give it if the Gk is a mile off his line or if the encroachment is obvious and one of those players 'impacts' the game, ie clears the rebound - I would say that the Birmingham encroachment meets both those last two criteria so should have been a retake. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Tomorrow's referee on 15:52 - Dec 10 with 1129 views | enfieldargh |
| Tomorrow's referee on 14:07 - Dec 10 by RANGERS4EVER |
I mean i do think the encroachment rule is an annoying one as it is hard to not slightly go over the line. But that is just ridiculous. In a no context scenario i would honestly think that isn't a pen but a cross in which one Birmingham player is going in for a slide tackle.
Absolute insanity. |
if a pen has to be retaken cos keeper saves and defenders encroached, does he player who took the first pen have to take the re-take? |  |
| |
| Tomorrow's referee on 15:59 - Dec 10 with 1120 views | Northernr |
| Tomorrow's referee on 15:52 - Dec 10 by enfieldargh |
if a pen has to be retaken cos keeper saves and defenders encroached, does he player who took the first pen have to take the re-take? |
No. | | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 16:06 - Dec 10 with 1108 views | stowmarketrange |
| Tomorrow's referee on 14:47 - Dec 10 by PinnerPaul |
That's one way of putting it.
'No surprises' is the phrase I'm often given by refs when I'm an AR.
To be fair , before VAR, how many times was a goalkeeper penalised for moving before the ball was kicked, or anyone picked up for encroachment?
The caveat for that 'no surprises' instruction is usually that we should give it if the Gk is a mile off his line or if the encroachment is obvious and one of those players 'impacts' the game, ie clears the rebound - I would say that the Birmingham encroachment meets both those last two criteria so should have been a retake. |
Both penalties saved by Tim Kruul for naarwich against Man Utd should’ve been retaken because of him not having his feet or one foot on the line.And that was with var. |  | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 17:40 - Dec 10 with 1039 views | Stanisgod |
You would think that that still photo would shame him into packing in, but no, here he still is wallowing in the attention. |  |
| It's being so happy that keeps me going. |
| |
| Tomorrow's referee on 18:23 - Dec 10 with 996 views | ManinBlack |
Robbed us of another one of our great comebacks from the dead. Can't forgive the cretin for blatant cheating. No ref can be as blind as that if straight. |  | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 18:35 - Dec 10 with 967 views | PinnerPaul |
| Tomorrow's referee on 18:23 - Dec 10 by ManinBlack |
Robbed us of another one of our great comebacks from the dead. Can't forgive the cretin for blatant cheating. No ref can be as blind as that if straight. |
Think Mr Wells had a bit more to do with it tbf. | | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 20:00 - Dec 10 with 900 views | ManinBlack |
| Tomorrow's referee on 18:35 - Dec 10 by PinnerPaul |
Think Mr Wells had a bit more to do with it tbf. |
Yes but a ref doing his job properly should have given Wells another chance and applying the letter of the law is the function of the ref. | | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 15:43 - Dec 11 with 718 views | PinnerPaul |
| Tomorrow's referee on 20:00 - Dec 10 by ManinBlack |
Yes but a ref doing his job properly should have given Wells another chance and applying the letter of the law is the function of the ref. |
Not quite - I've said it before - if the referee applied the letter of the law there would be a riot after 10 minutes. | | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 16:36 - Dec 11 with 685 views | LongsufferingR |
| Tomorrow's referee on 15:43 - Dec 11 by PinnerPaul |
Not quite - I've said it before - if the referee applied the letter of the law there would be a riot after 10 minutes. |
Didn't realise there was a law in the book saying you had to have a riot after 10 minutes. |  | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 16:50 - Dec 11 with 677 views | PinnerPaul |
| Tomorrow's referee on 16:36 - Dec 11 by LongsufferingR |
Didn't realise there was a law in the book saying you had to have a riot after 10 minutes. |
 | | | |
| Tomorrow's referee on 18:45 - Dec 11 with 637 views | terryb |
| Tomorrow's referee on 15:43 - Dec 11 by PinnerPaul |
Not quite - I've said it before - if the referee applied the letter of the law there would be a riot after 10 minutes. |
I agree with this Pinner.
I remember being referee of a youth match where I got so fed up with the moaning that I announced that I would give a free kick for every foul committed. The whistle was then blown for nearly every challenge made. It also took an age for a throw in to be taken that was within the laws & taken from the correct place!
After five minutes the players were pleased to get back to normal officiating. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
