Is that valid? I'm always confused on whistles and restarts
by spade (2017-05-15 19:37:13)

In reply to: A fascinating goal in La Liga last weekend  posted by wcnitz


So the referee blew his whistle for a foul, but apparently didn't indicate to decide the reset at his whistle. But he also didn't not indicate to decide when the reset was to occur, which seems to leave Sevilla waiting for a decision and then unable to defend any sort of set play whatsoever.

I've never understood how this can happen when it seems every other time, the referee takes forever to allow the restart to happen. It can't simply just be at the attacking team's whim, that seems incredibly disorderly.


It is a free kick giving direct advantage to kicking team
by wcnitz  (2017-05-15 22:02:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Believe it or not, the LOTG place no restriction on taking a quick free kick unless it meets certain constraints. The referee can always indicate that he is going to want a ceremonial restart, but he is not required to if none of the conditions are met (injury, booking, has to talk to a player, etc.).

I do think the laws need some clarity here, but based on how they are written now this is a perfectly legitimate goal.


this is why defenders stand in front of the ball
by plaid_pants  (2017-05-15 20:27:10)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

until the referee threatens them with a yellow card. The interpretation of the laws brings certain dark arts into the game.

I would call this the 'Right of the Weak'. I realize Madrid is neck-and-neck down to the wire and that Sevilla wasn't a guaranteed 3 points, but this seems beneath a title contender.

If it were Granada or Leganes taking that restart, OK fine. But Madrid should really be more gentlemanly than that.


LA Galaxy did it against a UPSL club! (link)
by Boston Domer  (2017-05-16 11:28:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Much more douchebaggey there
by spade  (2017-06-08 16:20:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

An opponent stops to help the cramping player. To take advantage of that by playing with an injured (only cramping) player is pathetic


That one is a lot more debatable
by wcnitz  (2017-05-16 12:19:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Why? The injured player was still on the ground. The ball was not in play. The referee should have indicated a ceremonial restart and asked for attention for the injured player. This wasn't bang-bang - there was quite a bit of time between the whistle and the restart.

On a side note, I didn't keep watching but I assume the 'injured' player was just fine.


Technically with the update last year
by wcnitz  (2017-05-15 22:03:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

You don't even get a warning for preventing a quick free kick by standing in front of the ball. It's an immediate caution and then a hard restart. I actually did this to a kid a couple weeks ago.

'But he didn't ask for ten!' Doesn't need to, buddy.