Any Refs on here?

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

I thought the rule changed and you cant be sent off and have a penalty anymore.

No, not when its an obvious goal scoring opportunity, like that one was or an outfield player handling the ball on the line etc.

 

[joey_macmo]

No, he'd have been sent off for denying a clear cut scoring opportunity.

Not strictly true anymore, the referee has to determine whether it was a genuine attempt to win the ball. Considering he won the ball (after the man so still a foul) it probably would have been yellow.

 

[joey_macmo]

No, not when its an obvious goal scoring opportunity, like that one was or an outfield player handling the ball on the line etc.

• Addition to list of cautions (YCs) for a ‘denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity’ (DOGSO) offence in the penalty area which was an attempt to play the ball

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

• Addition to list of cautions (YCs) for a ‘denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity’ (DOGSO) offence in the penalty area which was an attempt to play the ball

It would have to be deemed as an 'accidental' foul for him to get away with a yellow there, not sure it was like.

 

[Death]

We go down that road then people will start fake slipping into people.

 

[joey_macmo]

It would have to be deemed as an 'accidental' foul for him to get away with a yellow there, not sure it was like.

No it wouldn’t that’s the rule above, if you attempt to play the ball it’s a yellow.

That’s the decision for the ref, its a tough one and could have gone either way.

 

[joey_macmo]

The Lennon one is a penalty though no doubt about it, the only time intent matters is when you don’t connect with someone.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

No it wouldn’t that’s the rule above, if you attempt to play the ball it’s a yellow.

That’s the decision for the ref, its a tough one and could have gone either way.

The previous 'triple-punishment' rule required a red card - and therefore a suspension - as well as the award of a penalty under those circumstances.

However, players committing accidental fouls that deny a goalscoring chance will now be cautioned instead.

But deliberate fouls will still incur a red card.

Those include holding, pulling or pushing, not playing the ball, serious foul play, violent conduct or deliberate handball in order to deny a goalscoring opportunity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36047575

 

[milks]

Or anyone who knows the rules on these two :

- Lennon pen yesterday. OK, looks like the lad slipped, but does that make a difference? He still took Lennon out. If a ball hits your arm, it’s a penalty. Doesn’t matter whether it was intentional.
For me, that’s a 100% pen, slip or no slip. Isn’t it?

- Niasse goal. Clearly taken out by the last man with a tackle/lunge from behind. Refs often give cards for incidents back in play. There’s no rule that states he can’t give red, because a goal was scored, is there?

Penalty was a penalty - nothing in the laws regarding intent. A foul is a foul whether the offending player meant their actions or not. Same for 'intentional' handball; there's no such thing.

Niasse goal - I didn't see it as an offence a the time. On the replays there looked to have been something once he got past the keeper. No idea what decision may have been taken had the ball not gone in - I'd have not given anything myself though.

 

[jtl60]

No it wouldn’t that’s the rule above, if you attempt to play the ball it’s a yellow.

That’s the decision for the ref, its a tough one and could have gone either way.

Thats what I thought as well. Clear as mud!

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Thats what I thought as well. Clear as mud!

Yeah it's still down to the refs subjective opinion, but does allow him some leeway I suppose.

 

[joey_macmo]

The previous 'triple-punishment' rule required a red card - and therefore a suspension - as well as the award of a penalty under those circumstances.

However, players committing accidental fouls that deny a goalscoring chance will now be cautioned instead.

But deliberate fouls will still incur a red card.

Those include holding, pulling or pushing, not playing the ball, serious foul play, violent conduct or deliberate handball in order to deny a goalscoring opportunity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36047575

This has been done before, the bbc and sky sports are wrong there is absolutely no reference to the word accidental in the rules.

Edit to include link

http://www.theifab.com/laws/fouls-and-misconduct/chapters/disciplinary-action

DENYING A GOAL OR AN OBVIOUS GOAL-SCORING OPPORTUNITY
Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a deliberate handball offence the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs.

Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off. A player, sent off player, substitute or substituted player who enters the field of play without the required referee’s permission and interferes with play or an opponent and denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity is guilty of a sending-off offence.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

This has been done before, the bbc and sky sports are wrong there is absolutely no reference to the word accidental in the rules.

Correct. It appears to be a case of whoever wrote that article thinking that an "accidental foul" was the same as a player going for the ball and "accidently" fouling an opponent, as opposed to a "deliberate" foul like shirt pulling etc etc.

Thr rules are all in the link i posted earlier, if people would read them rather than just posting whatever they think the rules are, or should be things would be a lot simpler.

http://www.theifab.com/laws

 

[joey_macmo]

Penalty was a penalty - nothing in the laws regarding intent. A foul is a foul whether the offending player meant their actions or not. Same for 'intentional' handball; there's no such thing.

Niasse goal - I didn't see it as an offence a the time. On the replays there looked to have been something once he got past the keeper. No idea what decision may have been taken had the ball not gone in - I'd have not given anything myself though.

Handball has to be deliberate to be an offence

 

[Gladystweet]

Or anyone who knows the rules on these two :

- Lennon pen yesterday. OK, looks like the lad slipped, but does that make a difference? He still took Lennon out. If a ball hits your arm, it’s a penalty. Doesn’t matter whether it was intentional.
For me, that’s a 100% pen, slip or no slip. Isn’t it?

- Niasse goal. Clearly taken out by the last man with a tackle/lunge from behind. Refs often give cards for incidents back in play. There’s no rule that states he can’t give red, because a goal was scored, is there?

Of course it was a nailed on pen.

Unless of course it was against us, therefore the ref must be burned at the stake.