|
stickyfngrdboy posted:I never understood the away goals in extra time thing, because it gives the away team in the second leg an extra half hour to get an away goal, but meh.
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 01:36 |
|
|
Howdy posted:Yep, that's how CONCACAF does it. In most other cup competitions the away team would win. Yes, in CONCACAF away goals scored in extra time don't 'count double', therefore getting rid of the tiresome old complaint that extra time with the away goals rule is unfair. I'm happy to see the away goals rule kick in after 180 minutes but if it's still level to do away with it for the final half an hour, as I don't really know if it serves a purpose at that stage. Psybro fucked around with this message at 23:31 on Mar 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2012 23:28
|
|
|
Psybro posted:Yes, in CONCACAF away goals scored in extra time don't 'count double', therefore getting rid of the tiresome old complaint that extra time with the away goals rule is unfair. I'm happy to see the away goals rule kick in after 180 minutes but if it's still level to do away with it for the final half an hour, as I don't really know if it serves a purpose at that stage. Away goals is about as fair a system as you will get that doesn't lead to 2 games of basically attack vs defence (which is terrible) and that can't be gamed with some ridiculous tactic. Nobody wants to see a game decided by penalties so rewarding a bit of attacking intent from an away side seems fairer to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2012 23:40
|
|
|
It's Friday!
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 09:38
|
|
|
1. Don't be a little bitch. The goal stands, ask the player to leave the field and fix his kit. 2. It's clearly a foul. The question is whether a new "phase of play" occurs after the foul, meaning you could allow the goal by playing the advantage rule. I don't think so, so it has to be pulled back for the foul. Yellow card for unsportsmanlike behaviour. 3. Don't be a little bitch. You've asked him to become part of play against, that's what he then does. That's my professional assesment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 10:01
|
|
|
1. goal 2. foul 3. no
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 10:01
|
|
|
1. Goal, tell him to put his shoe back on. 2. Goal, red to defender. gently caress the fucker. 3. No. Tell di Matteo to wipe that creepy smile off his face.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 10:18
|
|
|
1) goal. 2) foul and red for dogso. 3) no problem. Edit: don't be a oval office law says goal and warn defender for 2. Loaf says be a oval office though I'd imagine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 10:39
|
|
|
1. Goal 2. Foul 3. Ask Geordi why the transporter merged di Matteo and Captain Picard
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 10:49
|
|
|
1. Goal, tell the player to put his boot back on 2. Goal, red card for the defender 3. Don't intervene
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 13:44
|
|
|
Based on the last few weeks of YATR I'd like to revise my guesses 1) Restart play from a dropped ball, make a note in your match report 2) Restart play from a dropped ball, make a note in your match report 3) Restart play from a dropped ball, make a note in your match report
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 15:10
|
|
|
1. goal, tell bootless player to leave field of play and put his boot back on. Player can only return when ball next goes out of play after the restart, make sure his boot is back on before allowing him to return probably. 2. foul, free kick to attacking side, penalty if it was in the box, caution defender. 3. Intervene; the player hasn't returned to the field of play, so he can't touch the ball. Restart with a throw in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 16:05
|
|
|
1) Goal. My only little doubt is based on the whole Evra thing from a few weeks ago, but since it's all already happened don't be a dick about it. 2) Foul. Book him for being a dick. 3) Let it go since pulling it back to make him walk onto the pitch to then fetch the ball and take the throw is a dick move.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 16:10
|
|
|
1)Goal 2)Foul, and a card for either unsportsmanlike conduct or denying a clear goal scoring opportunity. 3)Going to have to take the throw again after he steps onto the field of play. Then he can step back into touch and take the throw. Stupid but this actually happens all the time in my rec league with subs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 16:22
|
|
|
the sex ghost posted:It's Friday! 1) Give the goal 2) Blow for the foul. Being offside would seem to negate any advantage, so I think a free kick would be the right move here. Probably also caution the defender. 3) Don't see any problem with this one. You signaled for the player to return to play, that's exactly what he does.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 17:39
|
|
|
the sex ghost posted:It's Friday! 1) Goal stands unless you're the guy who reffed the United/Bilbao game in which case it's an indirect free kick to the defending team. 2) Well I would say it's a foul but you can allow advantage to give the goal, but I don't know if you can apply advantage in this scenario. I'd more inclined to give the goal if the foul would've been inside the area as awarding a penalty in that scenario would be a bit pointless. 3) I think he can since you've signalled that he can become active in the play once more, I'm not sure entering the pitch has anything to do with it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 18:30
|
|
|
the sex ghost posted:It's Friday! 1)Goal stands but tell the winger to put his shoe back on. 2)Goal stands and card the defender. 3)Let him throw the ball in since he is going back in play.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 19:07
|
|
|
#2 is absolutely brilliant. Can't remember the last time I saw a question that good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 20:57
|
|
|
I just got the book in the mail today and I'm way more excited about it than I should be
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2012 21:46
|
|
|
1. Shoe coming off unintentionally isn't an offense, goal stands. 2. I can't think of any reason advantage can't be applied here, so let the goal go in and caution the defender for UB. 3. Let him throw the ball. I'm hoping this is just a filler question.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2012 08:35
|
|
|
E4C85D38 posted:2. I can't think of any reason advantage can't be applied here, so let the goal go in and caution the defender for UB. Isn't the difficulty that the foul happened, advantage is played but immediately squandered by the offside, which means you should restart play at the site of the original foul? I think it's a goal, but I can see the case for saying it's not. If the defender had fouled the attacker, who then tripped, handled the ball and scored, that's not a goal, so I can see why this might not be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2012 12:10
|
|
|
Scientastic posted:Isn't the difficulty that the foul happened, advantage is played but immediately squandered by the offside, which means you should restart play at the site of the original foul? Since the attacker wouldn't be offside if not for the foul, it seems reasonable as a spot decision and an application of common sense to give the attacking team the benefit of the doubt and award the goal. On the other hand, seeing that YATR is all about application of the Laws minus any time constraints angry footballers yelling at you, or common sense, I have a feeling the 'official' answer is probably going to be more along the reasoning you provided for it not being a goal. edit: Digging through random YATR backissues probably isn't the best way to try and blow off nerves for the first upcoming game I'm due to AR in, but it's certainly an amusing one. E4C85D38 fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Mar 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 00:48
|
|
|
Have fun with that. Use the flag like you mean it (especially routine ball out of play), count to three (but not necessarily as slow as three Mississippis) before going up for offside, and you'll be fine. Hope your knees don't hurt too much.
Trin Tragula fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Mar 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Have fun with that. Use the flag like you mean it (especially routine ball out of play), count to three (but not necessarily as slow as three Mississippis) before going up for offside, and you'll be fine. Hope your knees don't hurt too much. I survived! And got paid! But more importantly: Keith Hackett posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2012 03:07
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 08:17
|
|
|
the sex ghost posted:Red for the striker for violent conduct. Yellow for unsporting conduct to the defender. Tell the striker that if he does you'll book him for unsporting conduct and give an ifk. Red and penalty for dogso. Ball to hand is only valid if the arm is in a natural position and you can't know the intentions of a player. Sucks, but...
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 08:32
|
|
|
the sex ghost posted:1) Send off the striker for violent conduct. Maybe also caution the defender for unsporting conduct, but really, 'play the whistle' is the first thing you learn after how to kick the ball. (OK actually "verbally distracting an opponent during play" is explicitly mentioned as unsporting conduct, so yeah) 2) I don't think it's your responsibility to ensure the player isn't a dick. I think all you can do here is drop the ball. The uncontested drop ball is a courtesy, not a requirement. 3) This is kind of a crappy situation, but I think your first responsibility is to ensure the safety of the injured player. You would blow play dead anyhow for that. I don't think you could send him off for intentional handball since the signal was an involuntary automatic reaction. So I would restart with a drop ball on the 6 (or wherever play stopped), and expect the striker to react just like the one in #2. Lamont Cranston fucked around with this message at 08:50 on Mar 30, 2012 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 08:36
|
|
|
Masonity posted:Red for the striker for violent conduct. Yellow for unsporting conduct to the defender. Agree with 1 and probably with 2, but the LOAF clearly state intentions matter and I'm 99% sure the "natural position" is poo poo made up by commentators just like the "foul by the last defender" crap. In practice, they're usually given as penalties but in this case we know it's unintentional (and remember, We Are The Ref) so it's not a penalty. Stop play to check in the injured player and then restart with a dropped ball.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 08:47
|
|
|
Once again I must condemn Hackett seemingly having no problem with football being played with a gigantic apricot instead of a football. "Natural position" is not entirely an invention of commentators, but it's not a universal principle either. It's most useful when you're trying to work out whether a player deliberately blocked the ball with his hand, or deliberately put his arms in a position where the ball might hit it; or if he was just trying to play football and got hit. The more unnatural the position of his arm seems to be (in the context of what he was legitimately doing with his body at the time), the more likely you are to think handball if it hits. On the other hand, sometimes people put their arms in weird positions because they're off balance; that is never deliberate handball. The trick is working out which is which and it's something that I'm not sure can be taught, short of requiring advanced biomechanics study (which I do think might be useful for certain things, particularly simulation - I'm given to believe from people who know these things that the body position adopted on the way down by a player who dives or who manufactures contact is usually very different from the body position adopted by a player who has actually been tripped).
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 11:40
|
|
|
1) Red for the Striker for violent conduct, Yellow for the Defender for unsportsmanship. That said, the Striker should play to the whistle, not a cock of a defender. If you can't send him off for a slap, send him off for being a retard. 2) Play on. If the defending team don't contest it, that's up to them. 3) Stop play, make sure the defender is actually hurt. If he is (this is presumably the case) then drop ball on the 6yb. If he's been taking the piss, red card and penalty.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 12:04
|
|
|
1. I agree with red for the striker, and I guess yellow for the defender, but definitely tell the striker he's a dumbass. 2. I would call over a defender and say that he's planning to shoot, would they like to contest it? Congrats, we're wasting more time, dumbass. 3. No card unless I determine he's faking. Uh, dumbass.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2012 13:14
|
|
|
the sex ghost posted:1: Red card the striker. Red card the defender for good measure. 2: Tell him if he does you'll card him for unsportsmanlike conduct. 3: Get the trainer on for some magic spray to fix him up. Then either drop ball on the 6y line, or IDFK on the 6 yard line (can you do this?).
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2012 13:01
|
|
|
the sex ghost posted:2)I would just ignore him and yellow if he keeps on complaining. Other than that just drop the ball as plan. 3)Call the play dead since the defender seems to be really hurt and drop the ball at the six yard line.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2012 19:59
|
|
|
Keith Hackett posted:1) Really daft behaviour all round. Stop play and show the striker a red card – officials are advised that any sort of deliberate strike which makes contact from the neck up should be considered violent conduct, even if it does not involve excessive force. Then show the defender a red card too: his action has clearly denied an obvious goalscoring opportunity. Restart with an indirect free-kick to the attacking team, punishing the first offence. Thanks to Andy Spooner.  dogso
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 03:59
|
|
|
Here's a YATR question: A player who has been substituted and is leaving the field gets enraged by a nearby opponent. Before he reaches the sideline to leave play, he runs over and punches the opposition player. The manager is shouting that his substitute, who is waiting at the sidelines to come on, should be allowed to replace the player, while the opposition team say that since he hasn't left the field yet he should be red carded and they should have to play with 10 men. What do you do?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 04:19
|
|
|
Red card, team has to play with 10. If he hasn't left the field he hasn't been substituted. I'm pretty sure this was actually a question once.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 05:24
|
|
|
EvilHawk posted:Red card, team has to play with 10. If he hasn't left the field he hasn't been substituted. I'm pretty sure this was actually a question once. I think that is the case. So alternatively, what if the player getting subbed has a beef with the oncoming player and smacks him in the face. I could imagine a situation where it was ambiguous if the substitution had been made. What if both players were on the pitch, or off the pitch for that matter?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 16:22
|
|
|
HinderedUseless posted:I think that is the case. So alternatively, what if the player getting subbed has a beef with the oncoming player and smacks him in the face. I could imagine a situation where it was ambiguous if the substitution had been made. What if both players were on the pitch, or off the pitch for that matter? edit, ignore stickyfngrdboy fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Apr 2, 2012 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 18:37
|
|
|
EvilHawk posted:Red card, team has to play with 10. If he hasn't left the field he hasn't been substituted. I'm pretty sure this was actually a question once. Except you can actually sub a player after he has been red carded too! At least according to Trin, once, like 4 years ago, when he was perhaps drunk posting
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 01:36 |
|
|
There's a hole in the LOAF; it does not actually say anywhere that you cannot replace a player who has been sent off during the match with a named substitute. That aside; if both players are on or off the pitch the substitution has not been completed according to the letter of the law, so the departing player is sent off but may not be replaced because he was still a player when the offence occurred. However, if it were to actually happen, a sensible referee would find a way to sell it to everyone that the substitution had actually been completed properly and allow the team to play on with 11 (although if the incoming player couldn't continue, he himself would then have to set a new record for "shortest time on pitch before being substituted").
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2012 20:51
|
|