The NEW SPL Season 2010-2011 **Spoilers** (Read the Rules Before Posting)

davestar_delux said:
The defeats were at Celtic Park and Hampden though so he is undefeated at Ibrox.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know, I was confirming that for the honourable gentleman. :)


On another point, I just remembered the awful decision where the linesman watched Weir kick and shepherd the ball out of play then award him a throw in. Incredible.
 
davestar_delux said:
Well fortunately there are laws to govern this kind of incident so we don't have to rely on your ill-informed opinion or that of your alleged 99% of neutral fans.
Click to expand...

Ill-informed opinion, behave Dave, it's an opinion and a valid one at that.

Right you thought it was a penalty and that's fair enough but it is very easy to see why it shouldn't have been given also.

Davie Provan in the commentary during the game at the replay *watched the highlights last night after getting home from the match* said that Stokes was clearly off the ground before making contact with Steven Davis.

He is correct in that regard Davis had held his ground, Stokes didn't try to get out of the way of him and simply ran/jumped into him. He turned his body as he did so as well, in all honesty obstruction at best but certainly not a penalty in my eyes.

In this regard and for what appeared to be only obstruction please refer to Section 14 of the rules of the game from the SFA.

40 LAW 14 – THE PENALTY KICK

A penalty kick is awarded against a team that commits one of the ten offences
for which a direct free kick is awarded, inside its own penalty area and while
the ball is in play.
Click to expand...

Obstruction being an indirect free kick would result in no penalty supporting my view on the decision. Again some will argue it was more than obstruction but the player just ran directly into the static Steven Davis and could have avoided him.

McGregor saved it so in the end I was happy with that as it keeps the title race alive albeit out of our hands now :(

Hopefully some twists in the tale to follow.
 
Last edited:
jrodga2k5 said:
In this regard and for what appeared to be only obstruction please refer to Section 14 of the rules of the game from the SFA.

Obstruction being an indirect free kick would result in no penalty supporting my view on the decision. Again some will argue it was more than obstruction but the player just ran directly into the static Steven Davis and could have avoided him.
Click to expand...

Thanks for elaborating on your understanding of the laws. Unfortunately, your information is out-of-date as there is no such thing as obstruction anymore and as soon as there is contact it is impeding which results in a direct free-kick or penalty.
 
Not really its whats refered to in the game as a potential leg breaker.

Players leg is grounded attackers leg is straight studs showing and right below the knee. Lafferty is lucky not to be in plaster after that assault.

But aye Dave clutching at straws :o
 
Last edited:
davestar_delux said:
Thanks for elaborating on your understanding of the laws. Unfortunately, your information is out-of-date as there is no such thing as obstruction anymore and as soon as there is contact it is impeding which results in a direct free-kick or penalty.
Click to expand...

So you really think I'm posting out of date information :rolleyes: Obviously your understanding of the laws of the game is completely made up or ignorant to certain points. As a way of educating you further on the matter to have a discussion regarding this take a read of another passage from the SFA Laws of the Game published on their website with updated rules on 02/11/10.

32 Fouls and misconduct are penalised as follows:
Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any
of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be
careless, reckless or using excessive force:
• kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
• trips or attempts to trip an opponent
• jumps at an opponent
• charges an opponent
• strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
• pushes an opponent
• tackles an opponent
A direct free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any
of the following three offences:
• holds an opponent
• spits at an opponent
• handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own
penalty area)
A direct free kick is taken from the place where the offence occurred
(see Law 13 – Position of free kick).
Penalty kick
A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above ten offences is committed by
a player inside his own penalty area, irrespective of the position of the ball,
provided it is in play.
LAW 12 – FOULS AND MISCONDUCT
33
Indirect free kick
An indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a goalkeeper, inside his
own penalty area, commits any of the following four offences:
• controls the ball with his hands for more than six seconds before releasing
it from his possession
• touches the ball again with his hands after he has released it from his
possession and before it has touched another player
• touches the ball with his hands after it has been deliberately kicked to him
by a team-mate
• touches the ball with his hands after he has received it directly from a
throw-in taken by a team-mate
An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if, in the opinion of
the referee, a player:
• plays in a dangerous manner
• impedes the progress of an opponent
• prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands
• commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which
play is stopped to caution or send off a player
The indirect free kick is taken from the place where the offence occurred
(see Law 13 – Position of free kick).
Click to expand...

Again check the areas in bold and refer to the original point. I thought it was obstruction at best which is defined with the part in bold as impeding the progress of an opponent.

This would mean an in-direct freekick is awarded in these circumstances so please do not try and tell me that this rule/law does not exist when it is clearly in the most up to date version of the SFA's Laws of the Game.

Also in reference to the 10 offences for which I direct free kick is awarded and thus a penalty if inside the box obstruction is not mentioned in any form.

I will refer you to the website I have taken this from which is http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/football_document_libraries.cfm?page=719

So please do not accuse me of not knowing the laws and my information being out of date as it is clear for all to see on the SFA website what the laws of the game are. So yes obstruction is still an offence in terms of impeding the progress of the opponent and yes it would result in an indirect free kick despite being inside the box. There are rules applicable for both a goalkeeper and an outfield player.
 
Last edited:
McMav said:
Not really its whats refered to in the game as a potential leg breaker.

Players leg is grounded thugs leg is straight studs showing and right below the knee. Lafferty is lucky not to be in plaster after that assault.

But aye Dave clutching at straws :o
Click to expand...

Please don't label Celtic players as thugs, you know the rules of the forum.

Just because there is contact, does not make it a straight red. He plays the ball, goes in with one foot and is not too high off the ground. I think some people need to stop getting their opinion on tackling from sports-writers and commentators.

It's not even a patch on the ridiculous assaults perpetrated by Naismith and Edu in the same game. They could have killed someone! (equalling your hyperbole) But doubtless you will either ignore this or have a different opinion on those :o:rolleyes:

If you sent everyone off for that, most games would be abandoned.
 
davestar_delux said:
Please don't label Celtic players as thugs, you know the rules of the forum.

Just because there is contact, does not make it a straight red. He plays the ball, goes in with one foot and is not too high off the ground. I think some people need to stop getting their opinion on tackling from sports-writers and commentators.

It's not even a patch on the ridiculous assaults perpetrated by Naismith and Edu in the same game. They could have killed someone! (equalling your hyperbole) But doubtless you will either ignore this or have a different opinion on those :o:rolleyes:

If you sent everyone off for that, most games would be abandoned.
Click to expand...

Ok attacker is that better? However reading first post I see nothing that says I cant call him a thug for that assault on a fellow professional.
 
jrodga2k5 said:
So you really think I'm posting out of date information :rolleyes: Obviously your understanding of the laws of the game is completely made up or ignorant to certain points.
Click to expand...

Hi mate, sorry but that's the trouble with googling rules from a website as opposed to the knowledge gained when being explained them from the FA itself. As it is actually you who is ignorant of certain points despite reading the rule on the SFA website.

It would do you good to go on a refereeing course, it's only about £100 and you get £75 back once you have ref'd 6 games. I would recommend it to everyone.

Impeding or what you keep calling obstruction is when their is no contact.
When their is contact, it becomes a foul.

I appreciate you don't like it, Davis can't do much about it or you may think it is soft but it is the rule. Which is what I and other referees have to follow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom