I wish I had seen the incident better. Can someone clarify something for me? If a player commits "light" violent conduct (but violent conduct nonetheless) and the opposition makes a meal of it, is there no penalty for the "victim"? It just seems perfectly possible that a player could foul his opponent AND the opponent could make a meal of it (as happened in this instance), but the laws say nothing about consequences for the opponent in this scenario. Shouldn't both players be penalized?
Well, a knee to the lower back/tailbone is rather painful, just throwing that out there. Sure he rolls around, but that's irrelevant in terms of giving the red card. You can't really caution him for simulation because he was actually hit, and he's not grabbing his face trying to claim he suffered a headshot (a la Ronoldo in the '02 World Cup)
Easy red. As much as Chelsea fans harass refs, I hope Terry gets hung out to dry or tared and feathered by Chelsea fans. Talk about selfish. Download the USSF 7+7. The opponent could still be cautioned for UB - F -Fakes an injury or exaggerates the seriousness of an injury.
While this may be technically correct, I would hate to see it in a game. If you send someone off for violent conduct and then give a yellow to the exaggerator, the guy going offs team will argue vehemently that if the player was faking then it's not violent conduct. It'll make a tense situation worse.
From what I saw, he definitely got hit, but he seriously exaggerated. That's not fair IMO. The USSF 7+7 is helpful (and seems fair), but that doesn't apply to competitions outside the USSF.
I think it could be applied in rare, rare circumstances. And Rivaldo is really the poster child for it: [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mo4oUnpcmws"]Rivaldo - Bad Acting - YouTube[/ame] Because Rivaldo wasn't booked, many people wrongly remember this being an inappropriate red card. The truth is, the red card was completely just; the guy deliberately blasted the ball at an opponent from about ten yards at a stoppage. But everyone remembers the unsavory holding of the race, when the ball struck much, much lower on his body. A red and a yellow would have gone a long way to letting everyone know that the referee saw exactly what happened and that--although he was sending off the Turkish player for VC--he was not fooled by Rivaldo's acting. Admittedly, cases like this are extremely rare. But in such rare cases, where a referee feels his hands are tied and that he must send off the player in question, booking the other player for exaggeration is a useful tool.
OH My God. Have to say, I saw no contact on the PK. Caution Dive, FK going out. But, when you go to ground in your PK, that's the risk you take.
I thought you were right. Or think you are right. I'm getting my verb tenses confused because I'm not sure what the answer is now. But I also remember it being made impossible to sit the final through caution accumulation. Or perhaps it was that cautions got scrubbed before the semifinals and if you got booked in both matches, you still sat out? That might be it.
It's pretty easy. In this instance, the player employed clear theatrics. That's not what you look like when you're really in pain.
Ramires was booked in the first leg as well as this one, so that must be why he'll be out of the final (if Chelsea makes it).
I don't think I can stress this enough but, You Cannot know how much pain someone is in. It's impossible.
No, you can't. You also can't 100% know a players intentions at any given time, yet there are numerous laws that ask the ref to judge intent. Its one of the hardest parts of reffing, but part of reffing nonetheless.
But I can and will, and USSF asks you too. BTW, I guess you'll never call handling ever again. You have to judge intent. Since that can't be absolutely 100% known, you can't make the call.
Which ones are those? The phrase intent is mentioned four times in the LOTG. The first relating to delaying the restart of play The other three are related to the taking of free kicks, corners, and throw in's
So why was Drogba not given a yellow card for the intentional handling at the 78 minute mark? Did the advantage played negate the handling?