http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/may/31/you-are-the-ref#zoomed-picture first one with correct answers wins an old celine dion cd and a used copy of the movie bruno
1. Go ahead and replace with a named sub. The game doesn't start until the ball is kicked. 2. "take revenge and mock his rival" - UB/2YC and IDFK out. 3. Unless your AR has info you go with your decision.
1. Game has not started since ball hasn't moved. Allow sub without affecting 3 sub rule. 2. IFK out, YC, RC for 2 count (You better have balls that even Superman can't break them) 3. Stay with decision, but you can change if play hasn't restarted.
I would like to see the situation where the physio of the team that just won a penalty informs the referee that he could be wrong.
great point about the superman situation. could you pull this off and give the second yellow in a club u15-u18 game but maybe not in a higher level game, say MLS or premier league etc. question 3- if you think you made the incorrect call, you can always consult with your AR. the mark on the leg should not help you decide
No, the nightmare scenario is a karaoke round where the Celine Dion song rotates into your turn. Even worse - you nail the song!
I'm still scratching my head over the middle question from the previous strip. After the whistle for taking a PK, the GK walks over to tap his shoes on the goal post -- then wants the resulting goal disallowed because he wasn't ready. Hackett says not only should the goal count, but the keeper must be cautioned for attempting to delay the restart. Doesn't the yellow card seem like piling on? The Laws do include sanctions for certain "attempts to" infractions (kick/trip/strike an opponent, score by deliberate handling, kick ball in keeper's hands, dive), but delaying the restart isn't among them. In this case, the restart was not delayed, and I would expect awarding the goal to be sufficient punishment to prevent the keeper from wandering off at future penalties. - QC
Attempting to delay the restart is kind of a weak sauce explanation and being overly technical with the LOTG. Either you are delaying restart or you are not. Attempting to delay restart is a kind of a contradictory phrase in my opinion.
*Note - I am not a referee and do not claim to be an expert on the laws (though I have read them many times). 1. I believe that the official start of game is the kick, so switching keepers is OK w/o violating sub restriction rule. 2. I don't like the wording on this. Just exactly HOW does one as an official KNOW the action is mocking the other team. Maybe the striker has a 'heading for goal' clause in his contract. How is this much different than backheeling in a cross that could have been easily touched in, nut-megging an opponent, or even juggling a ball 4 or 5 times down the field. If you really think it is USB, then YC and IDK out. NEVER, EVER can you justify RC here (not even Iron Man!!). 3. Stick by your call. In this case, you only used the 'wound' to confirm what you saw. Stick to your guns and call the PK. And please, I don't mind the Celine Dion CD (even if it skips and only plays that horrible song from Titanic), but I will hunt you down until the day I die to return that POS Bruno.
#2 is getting really nitty gritty in technical nuances of LOTG. We are answering based on what the law says, not the spirit. No way in hell will I ever call an IFK disallowing the goal, flash the yellow and then flash the red in this situation. By the way it is Superman, not Iron Man. Get it right.
Well... there's still that "taunting" thing under NFHS rules... (Has anyone here ever actually shown a red card under that rule?)
It seems to me that there was an extended debate about where one crosses a line of USB in how one scores a goal some time back. At the pro level, I can't see it ever being a card (with the possible exception if point and gesturnig at an opponent were added into the mix). In a youth game, IMHO, it becomes a YHTBT -- in a blow out or with bad blood, maybe it's a game control caution. And I'd probably be less likely to give as 2nd. (Another possible "solution," in some cases if a defender is nearby is PIADM as the head to the ground may discourage a kick or slide at the ball. Again, YHTBT.)
JA opined on this one. Maybe it woudl be clled in a higher level match . . . http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/?p=3453
Good luck trying to make that call in.....oh let's say....Argentina or Romania. You will be chased off the field for that, even if the LOTG backs you up, and the federation will hang you out to dry.
I have seen it given. Player scored and ran and jumped into the bleachers while hooting at the opponents.
I've given it...right after a goal the player ran straight to a player he'd been having problems with before and clapped and laughed in his face.
For scenario #2: maybe I'm in left field here, but I think both match control and the spirit and tradition of the Game demand the yellow. The way I see it, the fallout from this, now that that striker is a "marked man," will require far more than a yellow and red for 2C do deal with if he stays on. Do you want to give a single red for 2C or a possible (probable?) red card for SFP/VC, or an untold number of USB cautions for reckless tackles? It's not fair to expect the defending team to exercise discipline whilst simultaneously ignoring the attacker's lack thereof.
Both of these are different from the You are the Ref issue, as the conduct is after the goal is scored. The yellow in the You are the Ref scenario requires disallowing the goal as well as issuing the plastic, which is gioing to create more pain for the R who makes the call.
Totally missed the point. This is before the goal is scored meaning you are disallowing the goal. Huge difference. Not after the goal. We have all issued cards after the goal was scored and the player acting like a jackass with his celebratory taunting.
Well, yes but... the NFHS rule (which I raised and which was the context of those two responses) doesn't say "taunting after a goal is scored." It just says "taunting." And in the FWIW column, JA's post on the topic characterized this very situation as "taunting." So ... if one wanted to put those two things together, one might conclude that if this scenario arose in an NFHS game, one could indeed invoke the taunting rule and show a red card — if one were so inclined. Now, if one found oneself in that situation, would one choose to (a) allow the goal and show the red card, or (b) disallow the goal and show the red card? (Yikes, margarita time...)