Refereeing question

[The Bear]

Just wondering, do you ever see penalties given for a high boot or a defender diving?

Or are those offences punished with an indirect freekick in the box?

 

[YoungWolf]

Indirect freekick for high foot, I know that.

 

[The Bear]

Cheers.

Where's Frank when you need him?

 

[YoungWolf]

Probably out being his usual hooligan self.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Wigan got a penalty for it at Anfield last season, Skrtel booted Moses in the face trying to clear it. Really we should have had one against Villa when Petrov maimed Frimpong.

 

[Penk Wolf]

I'm not sure a defender would dive in the box.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

A player raising his foot in a dangerous manner would concede an indirect free kick.

Any player guilty of simulation should be cautioned, and an indirect free kick awarded to the other team. If only more referees would take the correct action, we would make an inroad into all the diving and cheating that occurs.

 

[The Bear]

Cheers Frank. So no penalty for either.

 

[James]

Definitely not a penalty just an indirect free kick but referees have been known to give penalties for this when they shouldn't

 

[FrankMunro-371]

Cheers Frank. So no penalty for either.

Correct Sir. A penalty should only be awarded for one of the seven penal offences. Often a player trying an overhead kick will have his foot dangerously close to an opponents head. While clearly not a deliberate act, it could cause injury, which is why an indirect free kick is awarded.

 

[FrankMunro-371]

Cheers Frank. So no penalty for either.

Correct Sir. A penalty should only be awarded for one of the seven penal offences. Often a player trying an overhead kick will have his foot dangerously close to an opponents head. While clearly not a deliberate act, it could cause injury, which is why an indirect free kick is awarded.

 

[Penk Wolf]

When did you turn into Pav, Frank?

 

[yabbadabbadoo]

When did you turn into Pav, Frank?

Pav and Frank, the boards residential Saga Louts, bless 'em.

 

[lemonjelly]

I picture them more like this:

 

[FrankMunro-371]

Harsh, very harsh.....but possibly correct!!!!

 

[Sniffer]

Frank,

Can you answer a query for me please. I think I know the answer but I would like it clarified please.

Croatia v Spain (Spains winner)

The Croatia backline clearly try to play Iniesta / Jesus N offside however only Jesus N is in an offside position and the ball goes to Iniesta. Iniesta then squares the ball to Jesus N who is now onside who then walks the ball in for a goal.

Clearly Jesus N has gained an advantage by being in an offside position as the opposition have let him go and then he is free to tap the ball in. Is this allowed as it is deemed to be another phase of play?
If so why is a man who is offside when a shot is made not allowed to tap the ball in if it comes back off a post or the keeper as he has gained no more of an advantage as Jesus N did last night.

Cheers
Sniffer

 

[lemonjelly]

I'd ask whether Iniesta used his arm to control it?

I'd like also to know why Meireles wasn't booked for deliberate handball in portugal v holland. Nani put the ball in the corner quadrant & tapped it & ran off. The holland players were aware of this & chased down meireles who picked the ball up. The dutch were rightly incensed.

 

[Langers]

Portuguese in cheating unsportsmanlike wankers shock.

 

[lemonjelly]

Frank,

Can you answer a query for me please. I think I know the answer but I would like it clarified please.

Croatia v Spain (Spains winner)

The Croatia backline clearly try to play Iniesta / Jesus N offside however only Jesus N is in an offside position and the ball goes to Iniesta. Iniesta then squares the ball to Jesus N who is now onside who then walks the ball in for a goal.

Clearly Jesus N has gained an advantage by being in an offside position as the opposition have let him go and then he is free to tap the ball in. Is this allowed as it is deemed to be another phase of play?
If so why is a man who is offside when a shot is made not allowed to tap the ball in if it comes back off a post or the keeper as he has gained no more of an advantage as Jesus N did last night.

Cheers
Sniffer

In addition, can it reasonably be argued Navas was not interfering with play? Were he not there, perhaps the keeper would have come flying out directly at Iniesta, narrowing the angle with the intention of challenging for the ball? With the position Navas was in, the keeper is less inclined to commit as he will be aware of the option of the pass & doesn't want to gift an open goal opportunity?

 

[FrankMunro-371]

Frank,

Can you answer a query for me please. I think I know the answer but I would like it clarified please.

Croatia v Spain (Spains winner)

The Croatia backline clearly try to play Iniesta / Jesus N offside however only Jesus N is in an offside position and the ball goes to Iniesta. Iniesta then squares the ball to Jesus N who is now onside who then walks the ball in for a goal.

Clearly Jesus N has gained an advantage by being in an offside position as the opposition have let him go and then he is free to tap the ball in. Is this allowed as it is deemed to be another phase of play?
If so why is a man who is offside when a shot is made not allowed to tap the ball in if it comes back off a post or the keeper as he has gained no more of an advantage as Jesus N did last night.

Cheers
Sniffer

A player may be in an offside position, but because he did not play the ball, the assistant rightly kept his flag down, and when the goal was scored it was another phase of play. That is the interpretation, but I am not saying I agree with it.

If the ball hits the woodwork or rebounds off the keeper then it is deemed that it is in the same phase of play.

Things were a lot simpler a few years back, but that is how the law makers say we must proceed.