The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
What with all the penalty’s during the weekend’s games it was obvious that it would be a topic of discussion on The Premiership, what I found interesting is how each referee, pundit and fan sees them in a different way.
This is fine for the fans to think this way and can actually lead to some fairly interesting conversations, but surely for consistency the referee’s should deal with these incidents much the same way as each other.
According to the rules, if the defender is the last man when he commits a foul then he should be sent off. However when the pundits where discussing and comparing the Hyypia foul with the Woodgate foul they said that because Woodgate came from the side that it is therefore not a red card offence. This confuses me, surely it doesn’t matter where the player comes from, in front, behind or from the side, as long as the player that commits the foul is the last man then he should be given his marching orders.
Then there was the handball just inside the Newcastle half by Andy O Brian I think it was. I can understand why there may be some confusion on the referee’s part in this case; it was near the half way line and therefore may not have led to a definite goal scoring chance had the defender have let it go, there was another defender pretty much level with him (just a little behind so technically he was the last defender) that may have been able to get back and cover his mistake, and the referee, according to the wealth of knowledge that is the pundits may not have been able to see if it was a deliberate handball from where he was standing.
Finally there was the Biscan penalty. This is one that pretty much everyone seems to have his or her own idea of whether it was a penalty or not and how the ref should have handled it. The most interesting one I have heard so far was from John Barnes, he said it was a 50/50 ball that they both went for, and he didn’t believe it was a penalty but infact an indirect free kick for obstruction.
I think it is a complicated area of the game and that the rules will never be simple enough to make it a black or white decision for the poor old referee’s.
Anyway, what are your views on all of this?
This is fine for the fans to think this way and can actually lead to some fairly interesting conversations, but surely for consistency the referee’s should deal with these incidents much the same way as each other.
According to the rules, if the defender is the last man when he commits a foul then he should be sent off. However when the pundits where discussing and comparing the Hyypia foul with the Woodgate foul they said that because Woodgate came from the side that it is therefore not a red card offence. This confuses me, surely it doesn’t matter where the player comes from, in front, behind or from the side, as long as the player that commits the foul is the last man then he should be given his marching orders.
Then there was the handball just inside the Newcastle half by Andy O Brian I think it was. I can understand why there may be some confusion on the referee’s part in this case; it was near the half way line and therefore may not have led to a definite goal scoring chance had the defender have let it go, there was another defender pretty much level with him (just a little behind so technically he was the last defender) that may have been able to get back and cover his mistake, and the referee, according to the wealth of knowledge that is the pundits may not have been able to see if it was a deliberate handball from where he was standing.
Finally there was the Biscan penalty. This is one that pretty much everyone seems to have his or her own idea of whether it was a penalty or not and how the ref should have handled it. The most interesting one I have heard so far was from John Barnes, he said it was a 50/50 ball that they both went for, and he didn’t believe it was a penalty but infact an indirect free kick for obstruction.
I think it is a complicated area of the game and that the rules will never be simple enough to make it a black or white decision for the poor old referee’s.
Anyway, what are your views on all of this?
Man U's number of penalties at Old Trafford this season is fairly close to the number of games they've played there this season.
That is all. :-D
That is all. :-D
ok the only real way to solve this is if players actually play like sporting hero's and not the cheating fools that they are. I mean just look at how far people go flying whe they get tackle.d Just get on with it you silly players if it is foul the referee will give it so there is no need to go rolling for 40 yards . . .
With TV evidence you could tell whether it was ball to hand or hand to ball.
At least stick an extra linesman on each side of the pitch to help with such decisions.
Too much is down to the referee, with the assistants not taking nearly enough responsibility.
At least stick an extra linesman on each side of the pitch to help with such decisions.
Too much is down to the referee, with the assistants not taking nearly enough responsibility.
Ok then! Meka there is no such thin as not having referee's discretion. For example Handball in the box. If you had no referee's discretion then Handball to the letter of the law would be a penalty and a sending off. However this would be a ridiculously over harsh punishment on a player who's arm it accidentally hit on the way through, as opposed to the player who purposely diverts away a goal bound shot with his hand. With out ref's discretion they would both be off. "But we have rules for accidental handball" i hear you cry! But who decides what is accidental and what isn't?....the referee so again it is his opinion. It is impossible to lay down hard and fast rules for these things as it is not possible to plan for all contingencies and degrees of offence.
Meka Dragon wrote:
> Thing is, there shouldn't be anything 'up to the referees
> discression'.
>
> The laws should be set out so that there can be no complaints. This
> action is a foul, and gets this punishment.
>
> A second ref with TV replays wouldn't half help a great deal, the
> views of two are more likely to be somewhere nearer what the rules
> state, than one solitary figure.
I think having a tv thing will good but i will make the game too correct and i think might make the game into some girly sport
> Thing is, there shouldn't be anything 'up to the referees
> discression'.
>
> The laws should be set out so that there can be no complaints. This
> action is a foul, and gets this punishment.
>
> A second ref with TV replays wouldn't half help a great deal, the
> views of two are more likely to be somewhere nearer what the rules
> state, than one solitary figure.
I think having a tv thing will good but i will make the game too correct and i think might make the game into some girly sport
Thing is, there shouldn't be anything 'up to the referees discression'.
The laws should be set out so that there can be no complaints. This action is a foul, and gets this punishment.
A second ref with TV replays wouldn't half help a great deal, the views of two are more likely to be somewhere nearer what the rules state, than one solitary figure.
The laws should be set out so that there can be no complaints. This action is a foul, and gets this punishment.
A second ref with TV replays wouldn't half help a great deal, the views of two are more likely to be somewhere nearer what the rules state, than one solitary figure.
its mainly at the refs discression. You can't get everything right. Personally i won't have sent Hyppia off (and i don't like liverpool) it was a definite penalty, but wasn't reckless, and was made to look worse by Van nistelrooy doing a 20 yard leap over dudek. The penalty was punishment enough really.There can't really be any debate about biscan commiting a foul, the only questionable issue is were it was commited. He miskicked and hit scholes so it was a definite foul, however he may feel that it was outside the box and so might have been a free kick instead.
What with all the penalty’s during the weekend’s games it was obvious that it would be a topic of discussion on The Premiership, what I found interesting is how each referee, pundit and fan sees them in a different way.
This is fine for the fans to think this way and can actually lead to some fairly interesting conversations, but surely for consistency the referee’s should deal with these incidents much the same way as each other.
According to the rules, if the defender is the last man when he commits a foul then he should be sent off. However when the pundits where discussing and comparing the Hyypia foul with the Woodgate foul they said that because Woodgate came from the side that it is therefore not a red card offence. This confuses me, surely it doesn’t matter where the player comes from, in front, behind or from the side, as long as the player that commits the foul is the last man then he should be given his marching orders.
Then there was the handball just inside the Newcastle half by Andy O Brian I think it was. I can understand why there may be some confusion on the referee’s part in this case; it was near the half way line and therefore may not have led to a definite goal scoring chance had the defender have let it go, there was another defender pretty much level with him (just a little behind so technically he was the last defender) that may have been able to get back and cover his mistake, and the referee, according to the wealth of knowledge that is the pundits may not have been able to see if it was a deliberate handball from where he was standing.
Finally there was the Biscan penalty. This is one that pretty much everyone seems to have his or her own idea of whether it was a penalty or not and how the ref should have handled it. The most interesting one I have heard so far was from John Barnes, he said it was a 50/50 ball that they both went for, and he didn’t believe it was a penalty but infact an indirect free kick for obstruction.
I think it is a complicated area of the game and that the rules will never be simple enough to make it a black or white decision for the poor old referee’s.
Anyway, what are your views on all of this?
This is fine for the fans to think this way and can actually lead to some fairly interesting conversations, but surely for consistency the referee’s should deal with these incidents much the same way as each other.
According to the rules, if the defender is the last man when he commits a foul then he should be sent off. However when the pundits where discussing and comparing the Hyypia foul with the Woodgate foul they said that because Woodgate came from the side that it is therefore not a red card offence. This confuses me, surely it doesn’t matter where the player comes from, in front, behind or from the side, as long as the player that commits the foul is the last man then he should be given his marching orders.
Then there was the handball just inside the Newcastle half by Andy O Brian I think it was. I can understand why there may be some confusion on the referee’s part in this case; it was near the half way line and therefore may not have led to a definite goal scoring chance had the defender have let it go, there was another defender pretty much level with him (just a little behind so technically he was the last defender) that may have been able to get back and cover his mistake, and the referee, according to the wealth of knowledge that is the pundits may not have been able to see if it was a deliberate handball from where he was standing.
Finally there was the Biscan penalty. This is one that pretty much everyone seems to have his or her own idea of whether it was a penalty or not and how the ref should have handled it. The most interesting one I have heard so far was from John Barnes, he said it was a 50/50 ball that they both went for, and he didn’t believe it was a penalty but infact an indirect free kick for obstruction.
I think it is a complicated area of the game and that the rules will never be simple enough to make it a black or white decision for the poor old referee’s.
Anyway, what are your views on all of this?