BB in Backwell Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Mr A Hall, I hope not..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 I didn't catch who he was but he was bloody awful, a complete prima donna. And the decision for the first goal to over rule the linesman was just plain wrong as far as I could see. (Not that I think we deserved a point) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tunley Legend Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 By the rules of the game the referee was 100% SPOT ON to overule the lino. The lino only had a side on view, saw a player in an offside position and (correctly) raised his flag to draw it to the attention of the ref. The ref, unfortunately, also had a good view and saw that the Sheffield United player was NOT INTERFERING with play. By the rules that means a goal has to be given. Like it or lump it, the referee was correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 You don't think the player was gaining an advantage by being in an offside position in that case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpin Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 You don't think the player was gaining an advantage by being in an offside position in that case? Did he touch the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Did he touch the ball? Irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 You don't think the player was gaining an advantage by being in an offside position in that case? The player was BEHIND Gerkin so couldn't have been interferring, so it meant Gerkin had a perfect view of the incoming shot. The fact that the player didn't touch the ball helped in the matter also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 The player was BEHIND Gerkin so couldn't have been interferring, so it meant Gerkin had a perfect view of the incoming shot. The fact that the player didn't touch the ball helped in the matter also. I'm not entirely sure either way, it looked to me like Gerken was put off by the player's presence but I haven't seen a replay. It comes down to whether he gained an advantage by being there not whether he played the ball or blocked a view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tunley Legend Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 You don't think the player was gaining an advantage by being in an offside position in that case? Not by THE LAWS OF THE GAME, no. I don't write them and nor does the referee but his job is to apply them correctly - which in that instance he definitely did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Not by THE LAWS OF THE GAME, no. I don't write them and nor does the referee but his job is to apply them correctly - which in that instance he definitely did. OK, I've used the wrong words when I said gaining advantage - but look up the definition of interfering with an opponent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpin Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 OK, I've used the wrong words when I said gaining advantage - but look up the definition of interfering with an opponent. If he didn't touch the ball in this situation then he is not offside. Simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpin Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 No it is not as simple as that. "interfering with an opponent" means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent And if he is stood behind Gerken's line of sight how is he doing any of the above? You are correct in what the Law says and in addition to this Fifa directives have stated that if the attacker does not touch the ball in this siutation then he is not "interfering with an opponent". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olé Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Am I right in saying that by a strange coincidence, this same referee gave us a phantom penalty in a game against Sheffield United at Ashton Gate ten years ago. I mentioned this to my mates at kick off, I'm sure it was him and I'm sure it was Sheffield United, our lot were heading back upfield for a goal kick when Akinbiyi spotted Hall pointing to the spot because someone looked at Thorpe funny or something. Thorpe was apparently the sinned against and had no idea what the penalty was for. Same ref, same opposition. I've always had Hall's card marked since then as prone to odd decisions but to be fair I didn't think there was enough reason for him to chalk off the opener today and he did get a handle on the time wasting so by no means the worst ref we've seen - though amazed at how long he let them celebrate the 2nd goal, many refs are ushering players back for kick off hours before Sheff U bothered to pack it in, that little tit Ward was hugging everyone trying to keep them down our end, even as they wandered aimlessly back Hall was still waiting patiently with a vacant expression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petehinton Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 who are we to argue that we're hard done by, by linesmans? What goes around comes around, Palace game springs to mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 And if he is stood behind Gerken's line of sight how is he doing any of the above? You are correct in what the Law says and in addition to this Fifa directives have stated that if the attacker does not touch the ball in this siutation then he is not "interfering with an opponent". I'd liked to see the replay but I had the impression he impeded Gerken from getting across. Playing the ball is nothing to do with interfering with an opponent it's to do with gaining an advantage (which was the bit I was using the wrong words for). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert Adamo Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 I'm sure we had a man on the post and the player in an offside position would have interfered with his line of vision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpin Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 I'd liked to see the replay but I had the impression he impeded Gerken from getting across. Playing the ball is nothing to do with interfering with an opponent it's to do with gaining an advantage (which was the bit I was using the wrong words for). Read the latest Fifa directives. These are used in addition to the Laws of the Game and are often released to clarify situations that have happened in previous games. In today's game there are extremely few times when an attacker can be penalised for being in an offside position when they do not actually touch the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpin Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 I'm sure we had a man on the post and the player in an offside position would have interfered with his line of vision. Would the defender been able to play the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Read the latest Fifa directives. I have, and they do not contradict the part of the law I've quoted above. The ref was shit for many other reasons today anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpin Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 I have, and they do not contradict the part of the law I've quoted above. The ref was shit for many other reasons today anyway. You are correct they don't contradict the law. However you have obviously not understood them correctly as they provide guidelines on how to implement the law, with the clear remit that an attacker should not be penalised for offside in the situation we are discussing. Whether he was shit for other reasaons is irrelevant to this discussion about the offside but I am in total agreement about Mr. Hall - has a long history of stramge decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 You are correct they don't contradict the law. However you have obviously not understood them correctly as they provide guidelines on how to implement the law, with the clear remit that an attacker should not be penalised for offside in the situation we are discussing. I'm sorry but I'm sure you've misunderstood. Here is the advice to referees which again clearly mentions deceit and distraction. http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdevelopi...aw%2011_554.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpin Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 I'm sorry but I'm sure you've misunderstood. Here is the advice to referees which again clearly mentions deceit and distraction. http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdevelopi...aw%2011_554.pdf This presentation is a very simple and standard training introduction to the concept of offside to referees. It does not go into what FIFA class as deceit and distraction. The guidelines I am refering too are released to clarify what FIFA mean by deceit and distraction. In these it is clear to see that in 99% of cases you need to actually play the ball to be considered as offside. Watch any top class football match and you will see this in practice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 I'd love to see that clarification, I can't find it anywhere. You seem to be describing something completely at odd with that part of the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpin Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 I'd love to see that clarification, I can't find it anywhere. You seem to be describing something completely at odd with that part of the law. It has been sent to officials at the start of previous seasons and I have also been part of seminars with FIFA standard officials from both the Premier League and other European leagues discussing this. The simplest method of looking at this is to watch the top European leagues / Internationals and look at the decisions that are made in regards to deceiving and interfering with an opponent. From that it will be quite clear to see how this law is applied in today's game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidercity1987 Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Andy Hall is the worst ref in the football league and quite what he's doing at Championship level is a total mystery to me. This is a guy who sent off Wiltshire at Huddersfield for the heinous crime of being fouled, and sent Sankofa off at Swindon for a shoulder barge. Since those days I've always looked out for his ugly mug, usually found giving dodgy penalties and strange red cards in the lower leagues. He was an absolute disgrace today, disallowing our goal for a Sheff Utd defender taking out his own keeper, dishing out god knows how many yellow cards and letting them get away with blatant time wasting from the first minute. One of the more ridiculous decisions was only allowing 5 mins added time, despite all the subs, bookings and Utd taking 2 minutes to take a corner and 3 minutes to take a throw in while Hall pansied about fussing about nothing. Look out for this guy in the future, he really is the most inept ref I've ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpin Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Andy Hall is the worst ref in the football league and quite what he's doing at Championship level is a total mystery to me. This is a guy who sent off Wiltshire at Huddersfield for the heinous crime of being fouled, and sent Sankofa off at Swindon for a shoulder barge. Since those days I've always looked out for his ugly mug, usually found giving dodgy penalties and strange red cards in the lower leagues. He was an absolute disgrace today, disallowing our goal for a Sheff Utd defender taking out his own keeper, dishing out god knows how many yellow cards and letting them get away with blatant time wasting from the first minute. One of the more ridiculous decisions was only allowing 5 mins added time, despite all the subs, bookings and Utd taking 2 minutes to take a corner and 3 minutes to take a throw in while Hall pansied about fussing about nothing. Look out for this guy in the future, he really is the most inept ref I've ever seen. I do agree pretty much word for word with you on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Andy Hall is the worst ref in the football league and quite what he's doing at Championship level is a total mystery to me. This is a guy who sent off Wiltshire at Huddersfield for the heinous crime of being fouled, and sent Sankofa off at Swindon for a shoulder barge. Since those days I've always looked out for his ugly mug, usually found giving dodgy penalties and strange red cards in the lower leagues. He was an absolute disgrace today, disallowing our goal for a Sheff Utd defender taking out his own keeper, dishing out god knows how many yellow cards and letting them get away with blatant time wasting from the first minute. One of the more ridiculous decisions was only allowing 5 mins added time, despite all the subs, bookings and Utd taking 2 minutes to take a corner and 3 minutes to take a throw in while Hall pansied about fussing about nothing. Look out for this guy in the future, he really is the most inept ref I've ever seen. Tbh, I wish it only was 5 minutes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonwheeler Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 The ref = are defending today. Both CRAP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kit Posted November 28, 2009 Report Share Posted November 28, 2009 Andy Hall is the worst ref in the football league and quite what he's doing at Championship level is a total mystery to me. This is a guy who sent off Wiltshire at Huddersfield for the heinous crime of being fouled, and sent Sankofa off at Swindon for a shoulder barge. Since those days I've always looked out for his ugly mug, usually found giving dodgy penalties and strange red cards in the lower leagues. He was an absolute disgrace today, disallowing our goal for a Sheff Utd defender taking out his own keeper, dishing out god knows how many yellow cards and letting them get away with blatant time wasting from the first minute. One of the more ridiculous decisions was only allowing 5 mins added time, despite all the subs, bookings and Utd taking 2 minutes to take a corner and 3 minutes to take a throw in while Hall pansied about fussing about nothing. Look out for this guy in the future, he really is the most inept ref I've ever seen. I must have missed the disallowed goal. Can't remember any goals disallowed, or even fouls given when their keeper went flapping. To be honest the ref did well there, about 3 oportunities where I think 80% of refs would give a foul because they see a keeper on the floor, and he didn't give any. On first site at the ground I thought there was maybe a case for offside for the goal, I thought the player was level with Gerken, and therefore impeding. Having seen it on Sky he was well behind and out of the way, simple case of Gerken not saving a shot that he really should have. I am struggling to think of any free kicks given that I couldn't see why they were given. McCalisters and Sproules bookings, although soft, at the end of the day they were both being idiots. Referee was average today - don't think he will be getting marked down by any inspectors. I think no blame for the defeat today lies at his feet, soley at our own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.