Welcome!

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

Sign Up Now!

Socceroos vs Canada/USA Oct 25

RIMB said:
I think he considers their ages.

Players like Segecic have many years to be in the team but he tests out the old stagers who don't need to be taught his system to see if they have another game or two in them.
Click to expand...
Hopefully he has crossed a few old stagers off this window and gives Sega more of a chance in next window
 
Mr Cleansheets said:
Even though he was one of our best last time he played?
Click to expand...
When he played 24 minutes as a sub against Indonesia? His international appearances have all been as subs, and against the might of Lebanon and Bangladesh plus Indonesia. I don't see him as an international level player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LFC
Disappointed about Develin. O'Neill with too much time again. I agree with Decentric's analysis that he has good value. I wish to rotate more.
 
Keeper66 said:
Don't think so. Nowhere in LOTG does it separate "denying a positive attack" into those committed with with footballing or non-footballing challenges (or more specifically as per LOTG a genuine attempt, or not, to play the ball) except those that happen in the penalty area and a penalty kick is given. I'm not a referee, but I think I have a good grasp on LOTG. Happy to be proven wrong though with respect to this one.
Click to expand...

@NicCarBel

Actually now you mention it I think that may have been rewritten to exclude the YC for non footballing challenges. I remember this came up at some time this year and we spoke for ages about it.

The logic previously (a couple of years ago) was if you committed a foul but the advantage was played you stepped back a sanction, so no YC, UNLESS it was a non footballing challenge. (Like holding or a deliberate trip with no intention to play the ball.)

I think, though I could be wrong they've taken that out.

The logic flowing through to DOGSO instances where if it was a genuine attempt then it's a YC UNLESS there was no attempt, like a trip or a holding foul, then you could still get a RC send off and a penalty. I'm not sure why the same logic doesn't hold outside the box.

I'll hunt around in the Q and A part of the IFAB laws.
 
Last edited:
Muz said:
@NicCarBel

Actually now you mention it I think that may have been rewritten to exclude the YC for non footballing challenges. I remember this came up at some time this year and we spoke for ages about it.

The logic previously (a couple of years ago) was if you committed a foul but the advantage was played you stepped back a sanction, so no YC, UNLESS it was a non footballing challenge. (Like holding or a deliberate trip with no intention to play the ball.)

I think, though I could be wrong they've taken that out.

I'll hunt around in the Q and A part of the IFAB laws.
Click to expand...
Makes sense if it's recent - I haven't technically updated/done a course since 2023
 
NicCarBel said:
All good,. yes I thought that's the way I had understood that?
Click to expand...

Yeah but now I'm not sure what the rule is.

I was told to step the sanction back unless it was a non-footballing challenge but @Keeper66 is right, it's not written in there. I need to find the guidance section which I'm struggling to find at the moment.
 
Muz said:
Yeah but now I'm not sure what the rule is.

I was told to step the sanction back unless it was a non-footballing challenge but @Keeper66 is right, it's not written in there. I need to find the guidance section which I'm struggling to find at the moment.
Click to expand...
Yeah that all makes sense. I'm anecdotally remembering the guidance from the courses as such - but like you said, not 100% sure it's written that way.
 
Sorry to spam the page.

@Keeper66 @NicCarBel

I'm reading this as a YC even though advantage was played. This is from the IFAB app. 2024/2025 laws because we don't play under the new laws until next season. I haven't looked up what they're playing now but I will.

Screenshot_20251015-173932.Laws of the Game.png
 
So in this case Irankunda was fouled but the advantage was played. It was a shit non footballing attempt and, as @LFC said, should have been a YC.

Anyway like I said before perhaps because the ref was on the other side he let it go.
 
  • Love
Reactions: LFC
Just had a look at 2025/2026 and it's the same example given as above.



This is interesting though.

They seem to be saying that because the advantage is regained via a quick free kick there's no YC.

Screenshot_20251015-174629.Laws of the Game.png
 
Muz said:
Sorry to spam the page.

@Keeper66 @NicCarBel

I'm reading this as a YC even though advantage was played. This is from the IFAB app. 2024/2025 laws because we don't play under the new laws until next season. I haven't looked up what they're playing now but I will.

View attachment 3677
Click to expand...
I read it as the first yellow is for a reckless challenge. So even though advantage was played, the challenge was reckless (not just not a genuine attempt to play the ball , but reckless) so always need to go back and give a yellow card even after allowing play to continue.

The second challenge was stopping a promising attack, and no advantage was played. Therefore a yellow for that also. If the advantage had been played for this second offence, the referee would not give a yellow for the second offence, only the first one.
 
Keeper66 said:
I read it as the first yellow is for a reckless challenge. So even though advantage was played, the challenge was reckless (not just not a genuine attempt to play the ball , but reckless) so always need to go back and give a yellow card even after allowing play to continue.

The second challenge was stopping a promising attack, and no advantage was played. Therefore a yellow for that also. If the advantage had been played for this second offence, the referee would not give a yellow for the second offence, only the first one.
Click to expand...

Yeah well now I'm even more confused.

I need to find a Q and A where the shirt is pulled when it's a SPA AND an advantage is played and then what happens next.

But I'm not sure why you'd go back and give a YC if it was a genuine attempt, albeit 'reckless'.
 
I think I've gotten to the bottom of it.

No YC because the advantage was restored . (Looking at the first part only.)

So you do step back a sanction.

So the ref was right not to caution the bloke who jumped on Irankunda.

Lol. Is that right? That's how I read it.


Screenshot_20251015-180855.Laws of the Game.png
 
Muz said:
I think I've gotten to the bottom of it.

No YC because the advantage was restored . (Looking at the first part only.)

So you do step back a sanction.

So the ref was right not to caution the bloke who jumped on Irankunda.

Lol. Is that right? That's how I read it.


View attachment 3679
Click to expand...
Yes, that's the way I see it.
 
Muz NCB Keeper
I am RIGHT 😃
Though international games let alone friendlies May differ but logically and what I see in league games it’s a yellow despite play in advantage.

Also may I say not over you more experienced ruling devotees.
FIFA are the issue here.
Why not have the same rules no matter the comp ?!
 
LFC said:
Muz NCB Keeper
I am RIGHT 😃
Though international games let alone friendlies May differ but logically and what I see in league games it’s a yellow despite play in advantage.

Also may I say not over you more experienced ruling devotees.
FIFA are the issue here.
Why not have the same rules no matter the comp ?!
Click to expand...

Sorry mate. Actually you're not. No card because the advantage was played.

It's ok. I was wrong too.
 
LFC said:
Muz NCB Keeper
I am RIGHT 😃
Though international games let alone friendlies May differ but logically and what I see in league games it’s a yellow despite play in advantage.
Click to expand...
My understanding of LOTG, is if the referee interprets the challenge as a reckless challenge in an attempt to stop a promising attack but he plays advantage, then he should go back and award a yellow card. If it is a non-reckless challenge and advantage is played, no going back and giving a yellow.

From LOTG -
Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to,
or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned

I can't say I can recall what I've seen in EPL etc. I'll try to remember to keep a closer look.

Also, LOTG are the same irrespective of what comp/friendly/etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top