Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

Are you blind? Referees discussion thread.

grazorblade said:
Adelaide's 1st goal against auckland is worth an ask

no goal and red card in asia, but that's asia. Thoughts on the decision @NicCarBel @Muz ?
Click to expand...
Barely any contact. Yaya himself was pulled in the box on Saturday night and that wasn’t given as a penalty.

Fair to say they are consistient.
 
grazorblade said:
Adelaide's 1st goal against auckland is worth an ask

no goal and red card in asia, but that's asia. Thoughts on the decision @NicCarBel @Muz ?
Click to expand...
Few factors in this to me - depends on the angle you're watching this in real time. I'm assuming referee on the field wouldn't have been able to see the shirt pull - hence why it was allowed.

Another is, and I've been this way for about 15 years, when analysing after the fact, if I see a tiny tiny shirt pull, but I can see it's clearly being milked (if your shirt is getting pulled from the back, you won't fall forwards, for example - and there's an element of that in this moment), I would be inclined to agree with playing on

In saying that, generally on the field during a game, if I see a shirt being pulled - and it's not both parties - then would be a foul straight away.
I'm hoping I'm watching the right clip - because I don't see a red card at all in that, unless of course for second yellow.
 
NicCarBel said:
Few factors in this to me - depends on the angle you're watching this in real time. I'm assuming referee on the field wouldn't have been able to see the shirt pull - hence why it was allowed.

Another is, and I've been this way for about 15 years, when analysing after the fact, if I see a tiny tiny shirt pull, but I can see it's clearly being milked (if your shirt is getting pulled from the back, you won't fall forwards, for example - and there's an element of that in this moment), I would be inclined to agree with playing on

In saying that, generally on the field during a game, if I see a shirt being pulled - and it's not both parties - then would be a foul straight away.
I'm hoping I'm watching the right clip - because I don't see a red card at all in that, unless of course for second yellow.
Click to expand...
If he had not gone to ground the goal would probably have been disallowed. It wasn't inconsequential because it gave the attacker that moment to get ahead of his player and that is what a quick shirt pull does.

Because the player chose to go to ground to highlight it VAR and the ref can easily ignore it under the current season's guidelines for exaggeration resulting in no foul.

I don't actually agree with the foul not being awarded (bloody shirt tugs) because that is what a foul is and there was a very clear and obvious benefit to the attacker. But I have to applaud the exaggeration effectively being punished.

Surely, with VAR these days, players should be able to do their best to play the whistle - especially for defenders - and expect VAR to take a foul like that into account and disallow a resultant goal.
 
I'm happy with the Auckland decision as long as it is applied consistently. It was clearly a home decision but the fall made no sense. Imagine bumping into someone and they fell like that.

Play the ball, not the ref.
 
TheSelectFew said:
I'm happy with the Auckland decision as long as it is applied consistently. It was clearly a home decision but the fall made no sense. Imagine bumping into someone and they fell like that.

Play the ball, not the ref.
Click to expand...
Take shirt pulls out of player's mentality completely would be better for me than trying to gauge the strength of a shirt pull on the fly. Like grabbing at a player it is stupid play and allows your opponent to go to ground or raise their arms in 'disgust' and receive a free kick. Just don't do the stupid actions.

I liked 'shirt pull is automatic yellow card' - bring that back please globally. If a player did not benefit from a slight shirt tug they wouldn't do it so there is a benefit and therefore a foul. Making it cardworthy again would make it go away.
 
RIMB said:
Take shirt pulls out of player's mentality completely would be better for me than trying to gauge the strength of a shirt pull on the fly. Like grabbing at a player it is stupid play and allows your opponent to go to ground or raise their arms in 'disgust' and receive a free kick. Just don't do the stupid actions.

I liked 'shirt pull is automatic yellow card' - bring that back please globally. If a player did not benefit from a slight shirt tug they wouldn't do it so there is a benefit and therefore a foul. Making it cardworthy again would make it go away.
Click to expand...
May as well turn this sport into netball then.
 
RIMB said:
If he had not gone to ground the goal would probably have been disallowed. It wasn't inconsequential because it gave the attacker that moment to get ahead of his player and that is what a quick shirt pull does.

Because the player chose to go to ground to highlight it VAR and the ref can easily ignore it under the current season's guidelines for exaggeration resulting in no foul.

I don't actually agree with the foul not being awarded (bloody shirt tugs) because that is what a foul is and there was a very clear and obvious benefit to the attacker. But I have to applaud the exaggeration effectively being punished.

Surely, with VAR these days, players should be able to do their best to play the whistle - especially for defenders - and expect VAR to take a foul like that into account and disallow a resultant goal.
Click to expand...
I'm far from convinced the slight shirt grab had any effect on the defender, I can't see any change in his stride or momentum because of it. In fact the defender was already trying to step across the path of the attacker and fling his arm across to try to slow him down at the same time as the shirt grab happened.
 
TheSelectFew said:
May as well turn this sport into netball then.
Click to expand...
Netball is actually more robust than it ever was these days.

Skill and years of practice have been largely offset by strength and physicality now.

It has brought the great Aussie team down to other teams' level because skill is no longer the winner. You can almost tackle now and it has changed the game for the worse.

If you wanted to talk about netball ;)

For my part - shirt tugs are professional fouls. Plain and simple. Do it - but be punished for it.
 
RIMB said:
Netball is actually more robust than it ever was these days.

Skill and years of practice have been largely offset by strength and physicality now.

It has brought the great Aussie team down to other teams' level because skill is no longer the winner. You can almost tackle now and it has changed the game for the worse.

If you wanted to talk about netball ;)

For my part - shirt tugs are professional fouls. Plain and simple. Do it - but be punished for it.
Click to expand...
So even LESS contact than Netball...yikes.
 
Keeper66 said:
I'm far from convinced the slight shirt grab had any effect on the defender, I can't see any change in his stride or momentum because of it. In fact the defender was already trying to step across the path of the attacker and fling his arm across to try to slow him down at the same time as the shirt grab happened.
Click to expand...
If a shirt grab has no effect then why do it? It is something that your opponent feels and that is enough to gain the split second, half metre advantage you are obviously hunting for.

It is like a gentle tug on the hair. It may or may not actually hurt but it is a foul every time. So players don't do it because they know they will get penalised for it.
 
www.facebook.com

16K views · 57 reactions | Who else but Adam Taggart to restore parity for Perth Glory?! 🔥 The reigning Golden Boot winner converts from the spot after winning a penalty for his side. Game on! 👀⚔️ 📺 Watch #NEWvPER live NOW on Paramount+, 10 Play &

Who else but Adam Taggart to restore parity for Perth Glory?! 🔥 The reigning Golden Boot winner converts from the spot after winning a penalty for his side. Game on! 👀⚔️ 📺 Watch #NEWvPER live NOW...
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com

What a load of shit this penalty being given. Blasted at point blank range, arm in natural position, ball to hand. Never EVER a penalty.

And then when we ref blokes scream blue murder when we wave them away because that's what IFAB tells us to do.

Ange cracked it the other week when it hit the Newcastle bloke's hand it was rightly waved away and yet they give it here.

FFS, they don't make it easy.
 
Muz said:
www.facebook.com

16K views · 57 reactions | Who else but Adam Taggart to restore parity for Perth Glory?! 🔥 The reigning Golden Boot winner converts from the spot after winning a penalty for his side. Game on! 👀⚔️ 📺 Watch #NEWvPER live NOW on Paramount+, 10 Play &

Who else but Adam Taggart to restore parity for Perth Glory?! 🔥 The reigning Golden Boot winner converts from the spot after winning a penalty for his side. Game on! 👀⚔️ 📺 Watch #NEWvPER live NOW...
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com

What a load of shit this penalty being given. Blasted at point blank range, arm in natural position, ball to hand. Never EVER a penalty.

And then when we ref blokes scream blue murder when we wave them away because that's what IFAB tells us to do.

Ange cracked it the other week when it hit the Newcastle bloke's hand it was rightly waved away and yet they give it here.

FFS, they don't make it easy.
Click to expand...
I agree - but isn't there something about a goal bound shot always being handball? I can't remember what the "shot on goal" was relevant to (other than stats) - was it handball?
 
RIMB said:
I agree - but isn't there something about a goal bound shot always being handball? I can't remember what the "shot on goal" was relevant to (other than stats) - was it handball?
Click to expand...

No. The only thing written is you can't score directly from the hand or if it drops in front of you you can't then score. If you were to pass it after handball then that's fine.

I'll try and find the reference.
 
Muz said:
No. The only thing written is you can't score directly from the hand or if it drops in front of you you can't then score. If you were to pass it after handball then that's fine.

I'll try and find the reference.
Click to expand...
I think it might be the hand contact by the scorer always resulting in a goal struck off I am thinking of.
 
RIMB said:
I think it might be the hand contact by the scorer always resulting in a goal struck off I am thinking of.
Click to expand...

I've cut the beginning off. It's handball if....


Screenshot_20250126-105001.png
 
@RIMB

Actually at the end of this clip there's some clarifying information further to what I said previous.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top