The referee retains discretion to choose an end if there is a reason--that is a bit more awkward if a team deciding is built into the process. In stadia, it's intended to be random. Out in the grass roots world, there is usually a reason for the referee to choose an end. The way it is written makes sense to me. There was an experiment with ABBA. My guess is it will be discussed next year when IFAB meets.
As I have said many times, there are more experienced and knowledgable people available. Hopefully Fox will eventually realize this. PH
Do you think that the law should be changed to take things more things into consideration, like being tackled from behind, and empty goal? I see a big difference between the last defender mistiming his tackle, as compared to a defender taking down an attacker from behind as he's about to put the ball in an empty net.
If the referee determines that it was just a take down and not an attempt to play the ball, it is already still a red in the PA. The history on this call has been away from referee discretion. The earliest version was highly subjective and just considered a flavor of serious foul play. But the feeling was that referees didn't call it enough, finding reasons that a particular foul was not cynical enough to warrant the red. That led to the formula of "did the foul happen and was there an obvious goal scoring opportunity." The sometimes harshness of that on an "honest" foul is what led to the changes in the penalty area--very harsh to give up both a PK and get sent off when making a legitimate (but careless) play on the ball.
It shouldn’t have been changed in the first place. If the leagues felt the “triple punishment” was too much it was completely within their discretion to not suspend the player, thus eliminating one of the punishments. Instead we went from supposedly 3 to 1 by their standards. The laws don’t require a suspension for red cards. That’s a league invention.
But, but, but he's a FIFA match commissioner, whatever the hell that is, and what it has to do it refereeing, God knows...
He's a former FIFA match Commissioner, many years ago, for a short time. Match Commissioners oversee the entire match from a technical POV. Facilities, equipment, etc., and also do some liaison with the referee crew making sure everything is OK. Usually not the primary referee assessor. In most countries, they are retired FIFA referees, which obviously Machnik is not. As I said previously, I don't think this is a lifetime title, like President or Senator or General, it's just that Fox likes to use it to make him sound good to the uninitiated. PH
The penalty for a "palpably unfair act" in football is completely up the the head referee, up and including awarding a touchdown (and also forfeiture if deemed necessary under NFHS rules). The most famous example is from the 1954 Cotton Bowl when Alabama substitute Tommy Lewis came off the sideline to tackle Rice's Dicky Maegel who had a straight shot to the endzone (though one defender had a possible angle) because he was "too full of Bama". Refs awarded the TD. https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=108&v=eSteCSinjTs
That's right! I forgot all about the palpably unfair act. I'm pretty sure it's more rare even than the 1-point safety.
I am not watching FOX so I am glad to hear this. It's about time. I imagine they might have got a lot of questions and complaints about being his qualifications to be an "expert" based on what he says. PH
I just wish people knew about the only thing a match commissioner does for referees is unlock the locker room and get them water.
If the defending team ends up bringing a blocked/missed extra point attempt into their own end zone it's a one point safety.