Rate the Ref

[Lundan Cabbie]

Shunting into a vehicle is a good example. To avoid it happening you don't get too close. If you are a chasing defender and you clatter into the player because he moves across your path or stops and you can't avoid him, you are going to commit an offence even if it is the other player who "initiates the contact."

Please don't expect a referee to ignore the law and apply "common sense" simply because YOU think the law is wrong.

Following the driving analogy, you’re wrong. If you are coming up behind another car in a different lane and they suddenly swerves in front of you and jam the breaks on, they are at fault even though you hit them.

It should be the same in the football. I accept that the ref might have made a mistake but to say that was a legitimate penalty is laughable.

The Highway Code certainly does say you shouldn't change lanes in that manner but the Laws of Football do not. A player is perfectly within their rights to take the path that they wish and whether to stop or slow down. Impede them when they do so and you run the risk of being penalised. That's the law whether it appears to be unfair or not. If that is how the referee saw it, a penalty isn't the wrong decision no matter how harsh it may seem.

 

[Vampires11]

so changing direction, moving away from the ball, to make sure you con a penalty from the referee is in the rules of game?

Which particular rules covers this?

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-go ... wsandrules

can't find it myself, where it states this??? Maybe you can enlighten us LC, or are you just spouting garbage

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

so changing direction, moving away from the ball, to make sure you con a penalty from the referee is in the rules of game?

Which particular rules covers this?

https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-go ... wsandrules

can't find it myself, where it states this??? Maybe you can enlighten us LC, or are you just spouting garbage

Law 12. Direct Free Kick. * Impedes an opponent with contact.

 

[Dan Ellard]

Why does it have to be the defender / the one running quicker who "impedes" their opponent?

Thanks for quoting the rulebook LC, but I'm afraid you've rather confirmed the exact opposite to what you're arguing. If an attacker is running in front of a defender, then suddenly stops to initiate contact, that's the attacker "impeding" the defender - not the other way around.

Even if it appears that the defender has clattered into him and fouled him, in that split second, the defender is trying to get to the ball and the attacker is not. I think I know which one is trying to "impede" from that...

 

[Pogleswoody]

Why does it have to be the defender / the one running quicker who "impedes" their opponent?

Thanks for quoting the rulebook LC, but I'm afraid you've rather confirmed the exact opposite to what you're arguing. If an attacker is running in front of a defender, then suddenly stops to initiate contact, that's the attacker "impeding" the defender - not the other way around.

Even if it appears that the defender has clattered into him and fouled him, in that split second, the defender is trying to get to the ball and the attacker is not. I think I know which one is trying to "impede" from that...

:thumbup:

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

Why does it have to be the defender / the one running quicker who "impedes" their opponent?

Thanks for quoting the rulebook LC, but I'm afraid you've rather confirmed the exact opposite to what you're arguing. If an attacker is running in front of a defender, then suddenly stops to initiate contact, that's the attacker "impeding" the defender - not the other way around.

Even if it appears that the defender has clattered into him and fouled him, in that split second, the defender is trying to get to the ball and the attacker is not. I think I know which one is trying to "impede" from that...

Complicated innit? Who'd be a referee? It seems that those that really know, don't want the job.

 

[Pogleswoody]

Why does it have to be the defender / the one running quicker who "impedes" their opponent?

Thanks for quoting the rulebook LC, but I'm afraid you've rather confirmed the exact opposite to what you're arguing. If an attacker is running in front of a defender, then suddenly stops to initiate contact, that's the attacker "impeding" the defender - not the other way around.

Even if it appears that the defender has clattered into him and fouled him, in that split second, the defender is trying to get to the ball and the attacker is not. I think I know which one is trying to "impede" from that...

Complicated innit? Who'd be a referee? It seems that those that really know, don't want the job.

Seems that many of those who've got the job can't (or won't) do it!!

 

[Mark Pedlar]

The first question to any referee should be - do you want to be a referee. Anyone who says yes, should be immediately thrown out. None of them have a clue what they're doing yet they all pretend they do and all think they're right.

 

[Kevin Pedlar]

The first question to any referee should be - do you want to be a referee. Anyone who says yes, should be immediately thrown out. None of them have a clue what they're doing yet they all pretend they do and all think they're right.

Anyone in mind??