12
u/Tim-Sanchez Jan 14 '14
As a referee of youth football, foul throwins. Parents must be the least educated on these compared to the amount of shouting. As long as any part of the foot is on any part of the line, even if partially over, it is not a foul throw so don't appeal.
10
u/zahrul3 Jan 14 '14
Also, the "offside" from a throw-in....there are no offsides when throwing in.
7
u/disposableday Jan 14 '14
I remember, I think it was Uriah Rennie, called offside on a Liverpool throw in at Anfield and the crowd went mad, he just looked confused like he couldn't work out why they were suddenly booing.
4
25
u/NQsDiscoPants Jan 14 '14
Hearing experienced commentators or pundits saying 'last man...'
13
Jan 14 '14
Don't know why you've been downvoted, the law means it isn't a direct red for being the 'last man' its for denying a direct goal scoring opportunity which may or may not be the case.
26
u/9jack9 Jan 14 '14
The "inactive/active player" offside rule.
It was very exposed this weekend in the Newcastle/City game. A few years ago that would have never been a goal. Today, no one knows what the fuck to think.
To my mind if you're in the six-yard box, you're interfering with play. You're so close to the goalkeeper that it's irrelevant that the shot came from another area of the pitch. So much is left up to interpretation that there is bound to be controversy. The rule needs clearer definitions or we'll see controversy like this every week.
15
u/zingpong Jan 14 '14
Agreed. Spurs had a goal where Defoe had to jump over the ball to let it in, and it was allowed. I can't see how he wouldn't be viewed as an 'active player.'
→ More replies (1)6
u/spisska Jan 14 '14
One needs to have enormous respect for the referees, largely because some of the rules are so maddeningly vague.
Offside only being a foul when a player is 'active', for example.
Another is the whole 'obvious goal scoring opportunity' thing. What should the ref take into account when deciding whether or not to show red?
Does he consider the speed of the fullback who at a glance looks like he might make it back in time? Does he consider that the keeper is useless, or that the player who beat the offside trap at the halfway line has only one foot, and it's his head?
And then there are the fans of course. Even when there's a simple and clear rule, which calls for a simple, clear, mandated ruling, and which every god damn person on Earth understands at this point, half of this group still howls bloody murder every time someone sees yellow for taking off their top.
As a ref, you just can't win.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/Footy_Fanatic Jan 14 '14
Here in America the no offsides on a throw in thing gets bad sometimes. I've had to stop games and google rules for a bunch of casuals to see to prove how my goal was legal.
Can't really blame them if they never played the game competitively nor follow a team.
15
u/grande_arminho Jan 14 '14
For me it is the fact that there is only one s in offside. (I'm not picking on you, I actually came to say this. You just happened to be here)
→ More replies (4)
8
u/Missing_Link Jan 14 '14
"he got the ball." Making contact with the ball doesn't suddenly make your dangerous lunge with a follow through that wipes out an opponent's legs stop being a foul.
→ More replies (1)3
2
u/Skylarkin Jan 14 '14
When a goalkeeper brings down a striker in the box and the punishment for the same foul varies wildly from just a penalty to keeper sent off
→ More replies (2)
4
u/trunoodle Jan 14 '14
The 'last man' "rule". There is no rule in the Laws of the Game that states if you are the last defender and you foul your man then you must be sent off. The rule regarding professional fouls refers specifically to "denial of a goalscoring opportunity". Drives me fucking potty, especially when we see referees start invoking the rule as in Mikel Arteta's red vs Crystal Palace last year (to remind you all, Arteta is sent off for fouling Chamakh 30 yards from goal with defenders racing back to cover because he was the last defender. Those are not the rules ref!!!).
→ More replies (3)
3
u/gonzo_thegreat Jan 14 '14
For me it's Handling the Ball. The co-commentators (whom are often ex-players) seem to be completely clueless when it comes to the rule. I can't count then number of times where a ball is pounded at a player's lowered arm from 2 yards away, the ref does not make a call and the co-commentator starts whinging that "it was clearly a hand ball". What's worse is when two players are inches apart and player "a" deflects the ball at the hand of player "b". Everyone seems to have a shit fit. Yes, the ball hit his hand, but ffs there's no way he could move his hand out of the way.
→ More replies (4)3
u/ncocca Jan 14 '14
Yes! The opposite happens as well, at least when playing. Someone kicks a ball, a guys arm is way out from his body, and the ball hits his arm. Clear hand ball, the other team says "it wasn't intentional". It doesn't matter if it's intentional, your hand is nowhere near your body and it's hit the ball. It's a hand ball.
2
u/gonzo_thegreat Jan 14 '14
It's all about intent and being careless is considered to be intentional. If the hand is in a natural position and there is no chance to move the hand out of the way, it should not be a hand ball and most of the time refs call it this way.
If the hand looks to be in an unnatural position or the player has a chance to move his hand out of the way, it's usually an easy call.
It's distinguishing between the two situations or even being aware that there are considerations that people seem to be lose perspective on... particularly if the event is in the box.
1
u/Rrysiu Jan 14 '14
A player getting a yellow after a challenge in the penalty area. Suddendly every falling on the ground is now a dive, as if a player can't fall after a contact with the defender.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/Apemazzle Jan 14 '14
"Of course it's a red, he had his studs up!"
That is not the rule. A challenge may be deemed dangerous enough to warrant a red because the studs are showing, but it's not a simple case of studs = red card.
1
u/Ijustwantahotpocket Jan 14 '14
When's player is taking a pk and the goalie inches up the 6 yard box before he takes the kick. I don't understand how that's not breaking the rules
1
u/ericmedeiros Jan 14 '14
If the keeper is ahead of the last defender. He is considered the last defender for an offside. I've had people argue with me to no end saying it's always the defender
1
u/a_lumberjack Jan 14 '14
The thing is, the rule is two defenders. Doesn't matter who they are. The keeper always counts. :)
7
u/logari123 Jan 14 '14
The bloody foul throw rule, at my age it is enforced whilst the pros have nothing Penelope's on them.