Refereeing Quiz...

[Matt]

1. You cant just swap keepers can you? I assume its another sub, in which case it depends if the 4th official is ready to make the change.

2. send them both off (intent and simulation respectively), free kick for the keeper to take.

3. Advantage played, goal stands.

[pete0]

1. Play on, tell them to swap when their team has the ball in possession or the game is stopped for a fk/throw-in/corner for them.

2. Second yellow for the striker, so red card for diving. If the defenders impeded the striker give him a second yellow also.

3. Depends how fast you are with the whistle. Blow immediately for a head injury to be checked. If the balls already in the net give the goal.

[Zoo]

1) The ball is out of play, so there is no reason not to allow the players to swap back. Any time lost making changes like this can simply be made up at the end of that period of play.

 

2) Assess this quickly and calmly. First, the defender is guilty of a reckless challenge – regardless of whether or not he made contact – so show him a second yellow card, then a red. Second, the striker is guilty of a shameful piece of simulation, so he too earns a second yellow (for unsporting behaviour) followed by a red. In terms of the restart, rewind to the first offence, which was the reckless challenge inside the area, so award a penalty kick. There is a strong message in all this: if the striker had not tried to con you by diving, he would still be on the field, the penalty would still have been awarded, and the defender would still have been sent off. All he has gained by diving is an early bath.

 

3) First, call on medical aid for the striker. Second, award the goal. Third, deal with the defender. He has not denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity because the ball has gone into the net – but clearly his challenge used excessive force. Because of that, show him a red card for serious foul play.

[Zoo]

Here's the next one for you all to take a punt at;

 

Edited March 4, 2013 by Zoo

[Matt]

1. Play on, cant prove the player kicked the ball to the keeper.

2. Wig off, not part of the official kit. As for the whiny bitch of a captain, I think if he refuses to come out the team either play with 10 men or have to substitute him.

3. Change has been signaled, substitution should go ahead.

[Zoo]

I haven't actually seen the answers (honest) so I'll play along;

 

1 - It's a back-pass but it's hard to prove considering he's booted it 20 yards into the air, I'd play on.

2 - The wig is there to wind the captain up, it should be removed. As Matt said though if the captain has a bitch fit leave him to it and play with 10 men.

3 - The manager is obviously being a dickhead, tell him so and continue with the substitution.

[pete0]

1. Nothing.

2. Allow him to wear it as long as its not a heal rick or give an unfair advantage.

3. Make the sub. Send the manager to the stands.

[Louis]

1. Indirect free kick to attackers

2. Nothing, wigs are allowed as long as they don't harm players

3. Nothing you can do as the player has not left the field of play.

[Zoo]

1) Award an indirect free kick. The law does not state "back pass" – players, fans and pundits use the term, but it's not accurate. A keeper is penalised if he handles a ball that has been deliberately kicked to him by a team-mate, whether the ball goes back, forwards or up, as in this case. Only if you felt that the defender wasn't deliberately trying to get the ball to his keeper would you allow play to continue.

 

2) Keep a straight face and defuse the situation. First, assess whether the wig is a danger to opponents or to the keeper himself. Assuming it isn't, you'll have to allow him to wear it (the bald-headed Bulgarian goalkeeper Boris Mikhailov used to wear a wig during games). But make it clear that any act of unsporting behaviour during the game – deliberate provocation – will result in a yellow card. Then take the teams out on to the field of play, whether the sulking captain is with you or not. It's his choice if he wants his team to start with 10 men.

 

3) The substitution has not taken place despite the board been shown: it is only complete when the substitute enters the field of play. So all you can do is issue a warning to the manager informing everyone that you'll add time on to cover this incident.

[Zoo]

More addition to the referee's thread .

 

Edited March 4, 2013 by Zoo

[MikeO]

Goal, free kick, no (eg Hernandez plays with Chicharito on his back).

[Matt]

1. Goal

2. Penalty probably by law but id give a free kick to be sporting.

3. No, as Mike says. Depends how he is registered.

[Zoo]

1) It's a clever trick, but not one you can let go. If the ball had hit an outside agent and deflected into the net, then that would mean a simple dropped-ball restart. But in this case a clear offence has been committed: a deliberate attempt to influence play. So disallow the goal, show the player a yellow card for unsporting behaviour and restart with an indirect free-kick from the point on the goal area line, parallel to the goalline, nearest to where the snow made contact with the ball.

 

2) As every eight-year-old knows, play to the whistle. It's not up to you to spare the defender's blushes: play was still live, so award a penalty and, if he has denied an obvious goal-scoring opportunity, send him off. And if the defender's original trip was reckless, show him a yellow card.

 

3) This subject is not covered in the Laws, but it will be in the rules of the competition. If the name was offensive in some way, you should have him change the shirt; clubs are required to have spare, numberless shirts with them in case a player has a blood injury and needs a replacement top. But in this case I would let him carry on and leave it to the authorities to decide after the game. If Zenit St Petersburg's Givanildo Vieira de Souza is allowed to have his childhood nickname "Hulk" on his shirt, I can't see a problem with "Rambo".

[Zoo]

Number 2 actually happened in real life recently;

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wopu1XLnl_s

 

and here is the next one;

 

[Matt]

1. I assume its illegal otherwise we'd be picking players up like a lineout in rugby at every opportunity. Its an unfair (though ingenius) advantage, so presumably a pen?

2. 4th official in his place.

3.play on, nothing you can do about it if hes not trying to gain an advantage.

[Zoo]

We getting the answers to the last quiz mate? If you dont want to post them, can you PM me the site you get it from and I'll take over. It really intrigues me!

 

Sorry mate, been a bit busy recently so didn't have chance to update! You're welcome to take over if you want to though, that's not a problem .

 

1) If the keeper had only made contact because you were in his way then you would allow play to continue – but as he has used you to gain an unfair advantage, show him a yellow card for unsporting behaviour and restart with an indirect free-kick from a point on the six-yard line parallel to the goalline that is nearest to the offence. It cannot be a penalty as the offence was not committed against an opponent. You also need to rethink your positioning and viewing angles: you were too close to play.

 

2) Challenge him. Ask him for more information, and if you are not satisfied about his impartiality, dispense with his services, use a replacement official and report him to the authorities. Clearly this was not a good appointment: officials are always asked to declare allegiance to any team.

 

3) At the next stoppage, summon the player and his captain and inform them that, if there is another act of misbehaviour that you consider shows a lack of respect for the game, you will indeed show him a second yellow card, followed by a red, for unsporting behaviour.

[Zoo]

[Matt]

Ha! Love that question 2 is for diving and Bales face is there

 

1. Foul throw usually means that the opposition gets it instead right? Id say play the advantage, but think it just has to be a throw in to the opposition

2. Tricky one. The player should be booked, goal disallowed - he was tryin to gain an unfair advantage

3. Book him again, send him off. No sub can be made (for that player at least)

[Zoo]

1) Playing advantage whenever possible is definitely good practice, but that is not an option here. The foul throw happened as a result of him slipping before the ball left his hands, which made it an incorrectly taken throw-in. So stop play and order a re taken throw.

2) You cannot allow a player to benefit from cheating – and if he hadn't taken the dramatic leap he would not have been in the position to nudge the ball into the net. So disallow the goal, caution the forward for unsporting behaviour and re start with an indirect free -kick to the defending team.

3) Cheating does not get more obvious than this. Show him a second yellow, followed by a red. And the substitution is cancelled: it is not complete until the player leaving the field has stepped over the touchline, and the player joining the game has entered the pitch. If the team still want to make a change, then they need to pick a new outfield player to take off .

Edited March 18, 2013 by Zoo

[Zoo]

[Matt]

Need to resurrect this...

 

 

Edited June 25, 2013 by Matt

[Zoo]

1 - Dis-allow the goal because the defending side were penalised because of your mistake. Tie your shoe-laces properly and continue the game at a drop-ball.

 

2 - You heard 'leave' so tell the striker to be quiet and book him if he continues to be aggressive. Re-start play from a free-kick to the defending team.

 

3 - He's still on the field and he's still active. Many players hold injured areas to check if they have pulled something - it's the defending teams fault for not marking him properly. Allow the goal and tell the defenders to pipe down.

[MikeO]

2 - You heard 'leave' so tell the striker to be quiet and book him if he continues to be aggressive. Re-start play from a free-kick to the defending team.

 

'specially as his name is Alphonse :shaking fist:.

[Zoo]

 

'specially as his name is Alphonse :shaking fist:.

 

[Avinalaff]

Need to resurrect this...

 

 

 

You allow the first goal, and certainly the goal in the 3rd instance. A boot is part of the field of play, and unless a ref blows, play continues. Don't know about the 2nd one. I'd have thought you could say what you want in the box, but not sure of the guidelines as to fair play.

[Matt]

1) You're not going to be popular here, but you have to award the goal. The striker has not committed an offence, and neither has his team. It is unfortunate that the defender has tripped over your boot – but you and your boots are considered in Law part of the field of play. So calm everyone down, explain your decision – and tie your laces properly.
2) He might be telling the truth here – but it doesn't matter what he shouted. The simple fact is that, if you decide his shout distracted an opponent, then it is unsporting behaviour. Show the striker a yellow card, and restart with an indirect free kick to the defence.
3) Award the goal. He's not in an offside position, and defenders should be playing to the whistle. You judged his injury was not serious enough to stop the game, and you were right. While his behaviour may seem unsavoury, no offence has been committed. There's no reason to disallow the goal.

 

 

I actually disagree with 1st point. Its against the rules of the game to have a player not properly equipped. Anyone remember Cahill losing his boot, then going one-on-one with the keeper only for Webb to stop play?

[Matt]

Since the other thread was initially to bitch about referees and their mistakes, Im starting a new one as I (hope) to resurrect Zoos quiz.

 

I can move the old questions and answers here if people want?

Edited June 27, 2013 by Matt

[Zoo]

I actually disagree with 1st point. Its against the rules of the game to have a player not properly equipped. Anyone remember Cahill losing his boot, then going one-on-one with the keeper only for Webb to stop play?

 

That's because referee's are above everyone else up and can change the rules to suit themselves.

[Matt]

 

That's because referee's are above everyone else up and can change the rules to suit themselves.

Webb was correct according to the rules, think Mike posted something to back him up

[rubecula]

No objections from me Matt.