• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

You are the Ref

1. Ask the player to remove the moustache.

2. Send both players off. First for "raising hand to opponents face" 2nd player for "biting" both are red card oofences.

3. Tough one, it depends on the reason for blowing the whistle. If its a fair challenge then the keeper must be out of the area and its handball. If its an unfair challenge you've blown for a foul not the keeper picking up the ball. If neither of those you're a prat of a ref as it can't be a backpass from a challenge :)
 
chancer said:
Tough ones.

1. The ref's duty here is to start the game on time with 22 players on the pitch wearing proper kit, with nobody else on the field of play or hurling abuse from the sideline.

So, order player to take tache off in the same way he'd be asked to remove jewellery or problem boots. Tell manager to leave field of play and stop abusing. For both of them, escalate to yellow and red cards if they don't comply and you are unable to start the game on time.

2. "Pushing face" needn't be a red, but piece says "shoving", which probably is. The bite is red too I think. So 2 reds.

3. If the asst. said it was ok, you can't sanction the keeper. So, when ref finds out what asst. said he reverses his original free-kick decision and awards an uncontested drop ball in the keeper's favour.
Click to expand...

1 and 2, precisely my thoughts. 3 is slightly odd, though. The question some have raised about the ball possibly being outside the area is surely a red herring. Why would the keeper be asking the lino if he is allowed to handle the ball outside the area when the thing is still in play? He wouldn't, he would dribble it back inside first, so the question must either be about a possible backpass, which it clearly isn't in the terms described, and only a real рrісk of a ref would insist on the award of the free-kick for that, or else that's a distraction, and the reason the ref has blown up is because of something in the original challenge.
 
I think the point with q3 is being lost a bit. The ref has determined that it is an illegal backpass. Whether its the right or wrong call is irrelevant as there's not enough info in what's been given to debate it.

The issue is that the keeper clarified it with the refs assistant. He shouldn't have done that and the assistant shouldnt have responded. It's the ref who officiates the game and he shouldn't have to reverse his decision, which he may be 100% confident with, just because his assistant made a call earlier.

Free kick stands, refs assistant needs a stern talking to.
 
Superted said:
I think the point with q3 is being lost a bit. The ref has determined that it is an illegal backpass. Whether its the right or wrong call is irrelevant as there's not enough info in what's been given to debate it.

The issue is that the keeper clarified it with the refs assistant. He shouldn't have done that and the assistant shouldnt have responded. It's the ref who officiates the game and he shouldn't have to reverse his decision, which he may be 100% confident with, just because his assistant made a call earlier.

Free kick stands, refs assistant needs a stern talking to.
Click to expand...

The referee hasn't blown for an illegal backpass the referee has blown, the fact the ball is in the keeper's hands does not signify he has blown for an illegal backpass it may well have been for the challenge, as you said there is not enough info to glean anything as to why he blew.
 
Q.3 is badly worded, but I think what they are asking about is the status of the assistant's in-game ruling. Does it count as an "offical" directive to the player? As such, the free kick must be for the back-pass.

I suspect the answer is probably quite dry actually - a reg in some sub-clause of a sub-clause of a rule book. But in terms of natural justice, penalising the keeper feels wrong.
 
camspur said:
The referee hasn't blown for an illegal backpass the referee has blown, the fact the ball is in the keeper's hands does not signify he has blown for an illegal backpass it may well have been for the challenge, as you said there is not enough info to glean anything as to why he blew.
Click to expand...

The free kick could be for anything it doesn't matter. The fact is its a free kick and nothing changes just because the keeper and the linesman had themselves a little conversation.
 
You Are The Ref:

If both were standing on the halfway line, which would be more offside - Luiz Suarez' teeth or Mesut Ozil's eyes?
 
THFC6061 said:
You Are The Ref:

If both were standing on the halfway line, which would be more offside - Luiz Suarez' teeth or Mesut Ozil's eyes?
Click to expand...

Ozils eyes would be off both touchlines at the same time then, but do you give one yellow for leaving the field of play or two ?
 
Jordinho said:
Andros-Townsend-You-are-t-001.jpg
Click to expand...

Keith Hackett's verdict

1) This really isn't your problem. While the comedy moustache does count as an addition to his equipment, it doesn't constitute a clear danger to the player or opponents, so there are no grounds to intervene or delay the game. If he thinks this is the best way of improving his relationship with his boss, let him carry on. It is up to the club to resolve it. Thanks to Gavin O'Callaghan.

2) I'm sure the striker will argue he would not have bitten the fingers had he not been shoved in the face – but that does not change what he did: clearly both players are guilty of violent conduct, so show them both red cards. And, as the defender committed the first offence, restart with a free-kick to the attacking team. Thanks to David Millward.

3) It's your call. If you know for certain that this was a back pass then you have to go ahead and award an indirect free-kick from where the ball was picked up. But you also need to have a serious word with your assistant – officials should never instruct players what to do – and apologise to the goalkeeper too, though he should also know not to ask officials for advice.
 
1. blow the whistle, drop ball near the goal line
2. play on (but after the game find out from player where he got his super strength laces from and use them for the force of good)
3. if the goggles have been allowed on safety grounds play on, he won't actually get any data as the paired phone will probably be too far away and who gets 3g in a football stadium anyway?
 
1. No goal, an important piece of equipment is not in its required form. Restart with a drop ball after the goalposts are replaced. Match abandoned if no replacement available.

2. Play on, unfortunate incident, give the attacker a lesson on tying shoe laces.

3. Tricky one, but I'd allow it as long as the glasses were not unsafe.
 
Last edited:
1. no goal. halt play, faulty equipment.
2. i wonder what the actual ruling would be. i would play on however, and tell him to do up the laces at the next stop in play
3. tell him to take the glasses off. those were not the glasses that had been approved beforehand by fifa(or whichever appropriate ruling body).
 
I'm going with Armenia for 1) and Neymar for 3).

For 2) I wonder if it depends on if the defender did it purposely? Otherwise, these days you would stop play and give a free kick against if a player loses his boot and kicks the ball with his sock, same principle. Free kick against the striker.
 
1. Goal
2. Free kick, possible red card if deliberate
3. Yellow card for bringing foreign object on to the field
 
Keith Hackett's verdict

1) You cannot give a goal based on what the technology is telling you, because the frame of the goal has been totally compromised. So stop play immediately and signal for the groundstaff to replace the goal. Once that is done to your satisfaction, ask the Hawk-Eye engineers to re-calibrate their system, then restart with a dropped ball on the six-yard line parallel to the goal line. Thanks to Richard Alford.

2) Was it a deliberate act? You would be hard pushed to be certain of that – in all probability it was an accident. So that's how I would treat it: stop play and restart with a dropped ball. Thanks to Gareth Pritchard.

3) It seems bizarre, but, then again, last month the Atlético Madrid assistant coach German Burgos was pictured using this technology while sitting on the bench. So take a look at the glasses, and if they do incorporate the technology insist that they are removed and report the matter to the authorities. The laws state players and staff are not allowed to use electronic communication systems, and I would extend that to this device too. Selina Travis wins the shirt.
 
1) Physio doesn't HAVE to come on, but the ref will need him to get up if he can. But if serious injury has occurred then the physio will need to come on regardless.

2) Goal, as long as the taker only touched the ball once.

3) Ask the player to remove the shirt immediately and warn him about his conduct.
 
1. Tell the player he either needs to get up or be removed from the pitch by the physio. It's not the managers call

2. Re-take as an illegal run up

3. Remove shirt, yellow card
 
1. The ref should be the judge of if an injury is in need of medical attention and if they cannot make that call they err on the side of caution (annoyingly this is overlooked by this whole "kicking the ball out" malarky). The ref also has a duty to ensure all players are fit to continue and should order them to leave the field of play if not.

Get the physio on ASAP and book the manager. If he persists, red card. If the player is Wheelchair, feign surprise.

2. I think this happened in a Middle Eastern game and the player got booked.

3. Yellow card for foul languge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back