Mellor incident

[djg145]

My understanding, which is probably wrong, is that if a player goes off voluntarily, he cannot come back on until there is a break in play.

In which case the ref was right.

If however Mellor was ordered off by the ref for treatment then the ref can, at his discretion, wave the player back on.

I am probably wrong but didnt see Mellor ordered off by ref, stupid law but thems the rules.

Mellor was about to take a throw-in and the REF stopped him and ordered him OFF the pitch, for our trainer to attend to his bloody face - caused by a foul on Mellor, NOT given by the REF - and to change his shirt.

Mellor then able to continue to play wasn't allowed to enter the pitch for almost 5 mins, by the very incompitant REF.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

My understanding, which is probably wrong, is that if a player goes off voluntarily, he cannot come back on until there is a break in play.

In which case the ref was right.

If however Mellor was ordered off by the ref for treatment then the ref can, at his discretion, wave the player back on.

I am probably wrong but didnt see Mellor ordered off by ref, stupid law but thems the rules.

Mellor was about to take a throw-in and the REF stopped him and ordered him OFF the pitch, for our trainer to attend to his bloody face - caused by a foul on Mellor, NOT given by the REF - and to change his shirt.

Mellor then able to continue to play wasn't allowed to enter the pitch for almost 5 mins, by the very incompitant REF.

I find it very hard to believe that the ball didn't go out of play for as long as five minutes especially as the Argyle players would realise quickly that they were not going to get their man back until the ball goes out of play. They could easily have forced the issue by putting the ball out. Some are saying that that is not the players' responsibility but the referee. Well he is not going to stop play to simply allow a player to return to the pitch, He must wait until there is a natural break in play.

 

[JonB]

My understanding, which is probably wrong, is that if a player goes off voluntarily, he cannot come back on until there is a break in play.

In which case the ref was right.

If however Mellor was ordered off by the ref for treatment then the ref can, at his discretion, wave the player back on.

I am probably wrong but didnt see Mellor ordered off by ref, stupid law but thems the rules.

Mellor was about to take a throw-in and the REF stopped him and ordered him OFF the pitch, for our trainer to attend to his bloody face - caused by a foul on Mellor, NOT given by the REF - and to change his shirt.

Mellor then able to continue to play wasn't allowed to enter the pitch for almost 5 mins, by the very incompitant REF.

Mellor was about to take the throw-in & as such he was off the pitch when the ref stopped him from taking it.

He wasn't ordered off the pitch, he stepped off it to take the throw in but then wasn't allowed back on.

 

[pafcstafford]

My understanding, which is probably wrong, is that if a player goes off voluntarily, he cannot come back on until there is a break in play.

In which case the ref was right.

If however Mellor was ordered off by the ref for treatment then the ref can, at his discretion, wave the player back on.

I am probably wrong but didnt see Mellor ordered off by ref, stupid law but thems the rules.

Mellor was about to take a throw-in and the REF stopped him and ordered him OFF the pitch, for our trainer to attend to his bloody face - caused by a foul on Mellor, NOT given by the REF - and to change his shirt.

Mellor then able to continue to play wasn't allowed to enter the pitch for almost 5 mins, by the very incompitant REF.

I find it very hard to believe that the ball didn't go out of play for as long as five minutes especially as the Argyle players would realise quickly that they were not going to get their man back until the ball goes out of play. They could easily have forced the issue by putting the ball out. Some are saying that that is not the players' responsibility but the referee. Well he is not going to stop play to simply allow a player to return to the pitch, He must wait until there is a natural break in play.

It's nothing to do with a break in play

 

[esmer]

It was more like two minutes

 

[Josh Pope]

Good ref I thought - bar that very odd incident. Nice to have some collective noise.

Good ref ? what were you watching ? he hardly got a thing correct, I thought he had left his cards in the changing room first half !

Did nobody else see him being biased towards us??

 

[chunks]

I spoke to the 4th official and he said that whenever a change of kit is required, for the player to re-enter the field, there has to be a break in play.

 

[ealinggreen]

We made a bit of an error,having the ball on several occasions and choosing to attack and not put the ball dead.

 

[PAFC94]

We made a bit of an error,having the ball on several occasions and choosing to attack and not put the ball dead.

Why should we put the ball out and give them back possession when we could try and attack. The ref was an incompetent idiot.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

We made a bit of an error,having the ball on several occasions and choosing to attack and not put the ball dead.

Why should we put the ball out and give them back possession when we could try and attack. The ref was an incompetent idiot.

Of course you don't have to put the ball out but it was an option available to return the team to eleven players. It was a clear choice. Play on until the ball goes out of play or force the situation by conceding possession to get your man back on.

As has been explained here already, Mellor left the field for an equipment change and not for treatment of an injury. The laws are different. There was no way he was simply going to be waved back onto the field whilst play continued unless the ref was incompetent and bent the laws. to suit Argyle.

 

[PAFC94]

We made a bit of an error,having the ball on several occasions and choosing to attack and not put the ball dead.

Why should we put the ball out and give them back possession when we could try and attack. The ref was an incompetent idiot.

Of course you don't have to put the ball out but it was an option available to return the team to eleven players. It was a clear choice. Play on until the ball goes out of play or force the situation by conceding possession to get your man back on.

As has been explained here already, Mellor left the field for an equipment change and not for treatment of an injury. The laws are different. There was no way he was simply going to be waved back onto the field whilst play continued unless the ref was incompetent and bent the laws. to suit Argyle.

Well if that's the rule it's the stupidest rule I've ever heard of. He had a tiny amount of blood on his shirt and was ordered off by the ref and then not let on whilst Cheltenham piled forward.

Also both times we got the ball back were very good chances to counter attack and create a goal scoring opportunity.

 

[djg145]

Lundan Cabbie I think you are missing a point here - the Ref ordered Mellor to leave the pitch, so the blood injury could be treated by our trainer, the shirt changing was a concequence of the injury.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

Lundan Cabbie I think you are missing a point here - the Ref ordered Mellor to leave the pitch, so the blood injury could be treated by our trainer, the shirt changing was a concequence of the injury.

Nevertheless it was an equipment change which should be checked by the officials which is why it is done during a stoppage of play but I do appreciate that there wasn't any apparent checking by the officials yesterday. By checking I don't just mean if he is wearing a blood free shirt but is he still wearing the the same number etc which if it has changed would need to be recorded. That can't be done in play so the law says wait until a natural break.

 

[dick.argyle]

Lundan Cabbie I think you are missing a point here - the Ref ordered Mellor to leave the pitch, so the blood injury could be treated by our trainer, the shirt changing was a concequence of the injury.

Nevertheless it was an equipment change which should be checked by the officials which is why it is done during a stoppage of play but I do appreciate that there wasn't any apparent checking by the officials yesterday. By checking I don't just mean if he is wearing a blood free shirt but is he still wearing the the same number etc which if it has changed would need to be recorded. That can't be done in play so the law says wait until a natural break.

There was no number on the changed shirt.

 

[djg145]

Lundan Cabbie I think you are missing a point here - the Ref ordered Mellor to leave the pitch, so the blood injury could be treated by our trainer, the shirt changing was a concequence of the injury.

Nevertheless it was an equipment change which should be checked by the officials which is why it is done during a stoppage of play but I do appreciate that there wasn't any apparent checking by the officials yesterday. By checking I don't just mean if he is wearing a blood free shirt but is he still wearing the the same number etc which if it has changed would need to be recorded. That can't be done in play so the law says wait until a natural break.

There was no number on the changed shirt.

Anyhow, he certainly didn't do my throat any good lol