DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 91074--------------------------------------------------
Sam Purkiss - Newport v Walsall
DIR By: TA_Ref
Date: April 21, 2025, 10:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
An outstanding decision from one of the linesman (not sure who)
to disallow Walsall’s 101st minute goal for handball. Took a
while as Sam Purkiss ran over to talk to him but from the
replays you can clearly see it strikes the Walsall attacker on
the hand. Correctly disallowed as the laws state the goal scorer
cannot use his arm to score a goal.
HTML https://vm.tiktok.com/ZNdYmCupT/
#Post#: 91075--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Purkiss - Newport v Walsall
DIR By: Rhys147
Date: April 21, 2025, 11:14 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Should have sent off the Walsall goalkeeper for a challenge
similar to the Millwall goalkeeper and also gave a harsh red
card to Newport for a lot less than what the Millwall goalkeeper
did. Again it shows how much leighway goalkeepers are given when
it comes to making tackles
#Post#: 91076--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Purkiss - Newport v Walsall
DIR By: Failed Ref
Date: April 21, 2025, 11:26 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I wonder what the protocol is in such circumstances? Does the
flag go up or does the AR speak over comms to bring it to the
referee's attention? Was the AR in making what looked like a
late call influenced by the defender's protests and reflected on
what he saw? I ask because of the delay but it was an excellent
decision with the right outcome.
The incident regarding the keeper was a tricky one. The keeper
got to the ball first and I'm not aware of a law that the keeper
should use force to clear the ball proportional to the position
of the attackers head! His foot was high but not as high as in
the Milwall incident. A tricky one to judge but imho correct.
#Post#: 91077--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Purkiss - Newport v Walsall
DIR By: Rhys147
Date: April 21, 2025, 11:51 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Failed Ref link ---
>
> I wonder what the protocol is in such circumstances? Does the
flag go up or does the AR speak over comms to bring it to the
referee's attention? Was the AR in making what looked like a
late call influenced by the defender's protests and reflected on
what he saw? I ask because of the delay but it was an excellent
decision with the right outcome.
> The incident regarding the keeper was a tricky one. The keeper
got to the ball first and I'm not aware of a law that the keeper
should use force to clear the ball proportional to the position
of the attackers head! His foot was high but not as high as in
the Milwall incident. A tricky one to judge but imho correct.
>
--- End Quote ---
The question is would an outfield player get away with what he
did I don't think they would
#Post#: 91078--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Purkiss - Newport v Walsall
DIR By: Leggy
Date: April 21, 2025, 12:56 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It was a great spot by the AR on the handball, but a caution for
the attacker should have followed as his actions were very
"Maradona-like", shall we say.
Also, the offence by the goal-keeper was on a par with the
Millwall 'keeper in the FA Cup. The TV experts (I use that word
very advisedly) seemed to think that it was OK because (i) he
got the ball and (ii) he did not mean to hurt the attacker.
That did not cut any ice for the Millwall 'keeper and the same
outcome should have happened today.
#Post#: 91082--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Purkiss - Newport v Walsall
DIR By: tomchappell19
Date: April 21, 2025, 1:59 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Immense decision for the handball, pressure moment, spot on
call. With regards to protocol, I think they did a good job of
taking a moment to discuss and then 'selling' the decision.
Perhaps Purkiss didn't see the offence and wanted to be sure.
#Post#: 91094--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Purkiss - Newport v Walsall
DIR By: aaa
Date: April 21, 2025, 2:48 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: TA_Ref link ---
>
> An outstanding decision from one of the linesman (not sure
who) to disallow Walsall’s 101st minute goal for handball. Took
a while as Sam Purkiss ran over to talk to him but from the
replays you can clearly see it strikes the Walsall attacker on
the hand. Correctly disallowed as the laws state the goal scorer
cannot use his arm to score a goal.
>
>
HTML https://vm.tiktok.com/ZNdYmCupT/
>
--- End Quote ---
That was AR1.
#Post#: 91095--------------------------------------------------
Re: Sam Purkiss - Newport v Walsall
DIR By: Original82
Date: April 21, 2025, 2:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It was Kevin Howick.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1