The I&G reference is for when The R hasn't called the foul. The fig leaf is for when it isn't clear whether or not it is a PK. The problem with just moving toward the goal line, is that the AR is typically going to be moving down the line to get in position for the DFK, too -- it takes a while before it is apparent which the AR is doing. If the R needs help on whether it was in or out of the PA, the delay isn't helpful.
You think? As opposed to one is the I&G, and the other is the GTP? What then is the ROTW AR signal for "I think that foul was in the area?" For fouls outside the area, the I&G says this: I don't see any other suggestions in the I&G for signaling in or out.
You lost me. The section you initially quoted from the I&G was for when the R hasn't acted and is simply how an AR should signal for a foul -- my point was that section had nothing to do with the fig leaf signal. I was not suggesting the fig leaf was elsewhere in the I&G . . . I already posted in this thread that it was a USSF signal. The I&G basically says make eye contact and figure it out; USSF says "here's a signal so you aren't standing around trying to figure it out." (I actually liked the old USSF signal because it was more subtle.)
I think we lost each other. You said: "The I&G reference is for when The R hasn't called the foul." Is that what you tell your ARs to do when they signal a PK - especially one right on the line - that you haven't seen? And you said "The fig leaf is for when it isn't clear whether or not it is a PK." But you've also said the fig leaf is a US-only thing (which comports with my understanding). Thus my question as to what's the ROTW signal for in-the-area, whether the center saw the foul or not?
Europa League, Sevilla vs. Betis. A Sevilla player is injured, and his substitute enters the field without permission while the injured player is still being put on the stretcher. The sub is standing in the penalty area with the injured player. Referee cautions the sub and orders him back off the pitch. Color commentator: "If he's been given a yellow card for that, then that is absolutely ridiculous. Sometimes the referee has to use discretion. It's not like he snuck on to the field. Someone on the sidelines saw him come on." Cut to the replay, with the sub running onto the field, with the 4th official right next to him shouting "No! No! Not yet!" and trying to get him to come back. Match announcer comments that the referees clearly didn't want him on the field yet, and that it was a good replay. Color commentator: "You will not convince me that should have been a yellow card." Would a quick read of Law 12 convince you then, genius?
They should have asked Dr. Joe! With all his experience refereeing professional and international soccer, he would know
On one hand, I agree with the color commentator that it would be nice in some ways for the referee to have discretion here, for when the player is clearly not breaking the spirit of the rule. But I disagree that referees should just ignore the rules. I don't think anyone wants that. And anyway, a pro should probably know by now not to come on until he is beckoned.
I don't know the "magisterial" guy's name, but here are some snippets I captured from last week's Clasico: It’s a cross between a rapier and a sledgehammer More electrifying than a hairdryer in a hot tub He’s had a number of chances here today, and he’s filled his pants every time Tiptoeing through the tackles and coming at them like Edward Scissor hands When Benzema gets service like that from the Argentina man it’s like showing your neck to Dracula. Karim, again, pounces with a death ray hit. He’s got a beautiful velvet cushion around his right foot as he steadies this. Take a look; he settles it magisterially, and then is pinpoint accurate Another emphatic detonation from the spot
I used to loathe that guy's commentary, but actually does give credit where it's due when the referee makes the correct decision. The guy working with him sounds like a basketball commentator who got roped into soccer at the last minute.
It sounds like Ray Hudson, although I didn't see that game. He is from Newcastle and played and was captain for Ft. Lauderdale Strikers in the old NASL. He later became a coach of a couple of teams (Miami, DC?) in early days of MLS, before going into TV work. Very popular with fans as a player and coach, but as a TV guy, they either love him or loathe him, for obvious reasons. PH
Yes, that is indeed Ray Hudson. The other guy is Phil Scheon who used to do MLS games way back when. He is fingernails on a chalkboard for me. He says the stupidest stuff just to be saying something. You can almost hear Hudson rolling his eyes at him sometimes and then putting him in his place.
Rapids PBP re stoppage time: "Thirty seconds the referee is obliged to allow for each substitution." I mean, yeah, it's a handy general estimate to throw out, but every substitution is different. The referee is obliged to allow however much time was actually lost, ya dupes.
Well, it's not really that either: "The allowance for time lost is at the discretion of the referee."
Moron colour guy for Portland after the double red: Colour: "One to see again. But your initial thought is, could the referee have pulled the players aside and chatted to them instead of affecting the game on both sides." PxP: "It's a mystery to us at the moment [why they were shown red cards]."
Later, they said they got an explanation from the 4th that the Portland red was for a shirt tug and the Dallas red was for a swing taken in retaliation. They seemed yo accept the explanation.
I'll gladly put up with Phil Schoen in order to hear Ray Hudson's commentary. He (Hudson) really does add something to the entertainment.
Shirt tug = foul, not red card.... So really, something else was probably going on. I was watching the game live on TV and the incident was never shown and was a total mystery (and still is).
I don't mind Phil. My son and I watch all the Barca games on beIN and love hearing Ray. We shout out "nickname alert" whenever he uses one of those (The Illusionista, X-man or Chameleon Eyes, Electric Sanchez, etc..) and, of course, have to point out every "magisterial".
I referee basketball and the current rules interpretations instruct us to eject players in this situation. If a player does something (which by itself may not be worthy of an ejection) to which another player reacts by fighting (swinging a punch in this case), we consider the initial instigation to be fighting as well.