The part I missed is where you spoke to the referee.
Do you think he would have told me something different than what he told the players?
The part I missed is where you spoke to the referee.
Ah, the point. The point is that, with nothing more than speculative guesswork, you carry on about a supposed incident to illustrate a referee error as if it was fact when you could have simply asked the referee to enlighten you. I must give you credit though. You do have a knack of carrying ignorance with confident pride.My "hearsay" was watching the game and talking to players afterward, who had spoken to the referee when the call was made. The referee said out loud with transparent gestures that it was handling to the defenders who were complaining about the call. When the attackers asked why it was indirect, he just blew his whistle and waved for them to proceed. A short tap by one player (his only assist of the year) and then a long shot that caught the upper V perfectly. The attacking players thought it was funny, especially since the play resulted in the only goal of the game.
What "point" did JaP make? Do you suppose he was the referee in question? That would be even funnier.
You don't believe in direct communication?Do you think he would have told me something different than what he told the players?
Ah, the point. The point is that, with nothing more than speculative guesswork, you carry on about a supposed incident to illustrate a referee error as if it was fact when you could have simply asked the referee to enlighten you. I must give you credit though. You do have a knack of carrying ignorance with confident pride.
I am speculating that, absent communication with the referee your guesswork as to what the call was or wasn't is neither here nor there.Are you speculating that he was right, when all the witnesses say he was wrong?
Do you think he would have told me something different than what he told the players?
And players always tell their coach, teammates and parents the truth? I have heard more players than I can count tell someone something completely different than what was said on the field. I yellow carded a player this past weekend for telling me a PK call was bullshit. When that player subbed out and the coach asked, the player said he told me good call. The coach approached me after the game and I told him what was actually said. He said, "I kind if figured it was something worse than good call."
Moral: Don't believe everything the players tell you.
Surfref, I see you're trying to reason with the poster known as espola. Good luck with that.And players always tell their coach, teammates and parents the truth? I have heard more players than I can count tell someone something completely different than what was said on the field. I yellow carded a player this past weekend for telling me a PK call was bullshit. When that player subbed out and the coach asked, the player said he told me good call. The coach approached me after the game and I told him what was actually said. He said, "I kind if figured it was something worse than good call."
Moral: Don't believe everything the players tell you.
If everyone had seen, why would they need to be told?In this situation, why would they not just tell what everyone had seen?
If everyone had seen, why would they need to be told?
Surfref, I see you're trying to reason with the poster known as espola. Good luck with that.
I have no doubt you do.I think the average reader can figure out who is being reasonable here.
They needed to be told what they had seen in order to carry out a post-game conversation?It was a topic of post-game conversation, since it was the only goal.
They needed to be told what they had seen in order to carry out a post-game conversation?
It is not a thought. The guesswork with which you are famed for turned out to be wrong again. As usual.This is about the most convoluted thought you have ever posted. Congratulations.
And please continue.
Yes, but ... I have seen indirect kick called even to the point of calling back a goal scored from the kick.
This is an interesting video on handling (out of a whole series of informative videos). Apparently I would suck as a ref because I only went 3 for 6 on the examples. The instructor clearly refers to the defender benefitting as a reason for calling a handball which seems to negate ATR 12.9 "The fact that a player may benefit from the ball contacting the hand does not transform the otherwise accidental event into an infringement." As justification he uses the concept of "taking a risk" that I had never heard or seen published before. So if a defender does a slide tackle he has taken the risk and if the ball hits his hand, whether deliberate or not, it is a handball...too bad, so sad. Also interesting that he places a lot of emphasis on players and the public's perception of a handball call or non-call.
The ATR is no longer used.