URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       RateTheRef
  HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 91966--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leyton orient v Stockport - Benjamin Speedie
   DIR By: Leggy
       Date: May 12, 2025, 12:36 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: rustyref link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Leggy link=topic=6981.msg91960#msg91960
       date=1747067637]
       > The error (on the offside) was made by the AR not spotting the
       flick on.
       >
       > But could the referee have bailed him out had he taken the
       (old-fashioned) wider position?  The referee was centrally
       placed and not wide (apparently not required anymore as the need
       to actually look at one's AR has gone up in smoke with buzzer
       flags and comms).
       >
       > If he had been wide, he would have been better placed to see
       the change in the flight of the ball and - most importantly -
       what caused it.
       >
       > Sometimes the old ways can be better .........
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       The assistant couldn't possibly have been any wider and he
       didn't see it, so I'm not sure how the referee being wider would
       help.
       [/quote]
       Wider than his actual position but considerably nearer than the
       AR might have helped.
       #Post#: 91968--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leyton orient v Stockport - Benjamin Speedie
   DIR By: TA_Ref
       Date: May 12, 2025, 12:43 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Leggy link ---
       >
       > [quote author=rustyref link=topic=6981.msg91963#msg91963
       date=1747068396]
       > [quote author=Leggy link=topic=6981.msg91960#msg91960
       date=1747067637]
       > The error (on the offside) was made by the AR not spotting the
       flick on.
       >
       > But could the referee have bailed him out had he taken the
       (old-fashioned) wider position?  The referee was centrally
       placed and not wide (apparently not required anymore as the need
       to actually look at one's AR has gone up in smoke with buzzer
       flags and comms).
       >
       > If he had been wide, he would have been better placed to see
       the change in the flight of the ball and - most importantly -
       what caused it.
       >
       > Sometimes the old ways can be better .........
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       The assistant couldn't possibly have been any wider and he
       didn't see it, so I'm not sure how the referee being wider would
       help.
       [/quote]
       Wider than his actual position but considerably nearer than the
       AR might have helped.
       [/quote]
       It’s already been mentioned in the thread but it’s worth
       remembering that the Stockport manager said the officials told
       him that they did see the flick on by the Orient attacker and
       that Kelman was deemed onside because they thought the Stockport
       defender behind him got a touch, while making a deliberate play
       for the ball - hence the attacker being offside is irrelevant.
       Now, no one can be sure if what the manager said was correct but
       if true, I have not seen a camera angle which shows a clear
       definitive touch by the Stockport defender.
       However, I must add that the controversy in this game will mean
       James Bell will be under massive pressure to produce an
       excellent display of officiating at Edgeley Park
       #Post#: 91971--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leyton orient v Stockport - Benjamin Speedie
   DIR By: Ref25
       Date: May 12, 2025, 1:57 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: TA_Ref link ---
       >
       >
       > It’s already been mentioned in the thread but it’s worth
       remembering that the Stockport manager said the officials told
       him that they did see the flick on by the Orient attacker and
       that Kelman was deemed onside because they thought the Stockport
       defender behind him got a touch, while making a deliberate play
       for the ball - hence the attacker being offside is irrelevant.
       Now, no one can be sure if what the manager said was correct but
       if true, I have not seen a camera angle which shows a clear
       definitive touch by the Stockport defender.
       >
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Assuming this is true, the LOTG say:
       [i]The following criteria should be used, as appropriate, as
       indicators that a player was in control of the ball and, as a
       result, can be considered to have ‘deliberately played’ the
       ball:
       -  The ball travelled from distance and the player had a clear
       view of it.
       -  The ball was not moving quickly.
       -  The direction of the ball was not unexpected.
       -  The player had time to coordinate their body movement, i.e.
       it was not a case of instinctive stretching or jumping, or a
       movement that achieved limited contact/control
       -  A ball moving on the ground is easier to play than a ball in
       the air
       If you are judging this following the flick on from the LO
       attacker (which I think you have to), I don’t think any of them
       are indicating there was a deliberate play.
       #Post#: 91989--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Leyton orient v Stockport - Benjamin Speedie
   DIR By: Ref Watcher
       Date: May 13, 2025, 3:22 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Leggy link ---
       >
       > The error (on the offside) was made by the AR not spotting the
       flick on.
       >
       > But could the referee have bailed him out had he taken the
       (old-fashioned) wider position?  The referee was centrally
       placed and not wide (apparently not required anymore as the need
       to actually look at one's AR has gone up in smoke with buzzer
       flags and comms).
       >
       > If he had been wide, he would have been better placed to see
       the change in the flight of the ball and - most importantly -
       what caused it.
       >
       > Sometimes the old ways can be better .........
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I think this rather misunderstands the way the officials work
       when they are in communication with each other.  The AR would
       have been concentrating on the defensive line and very much
       relying on his colleagues (especially the referee) to relay
       information about who has flicked a ball on in flight.  This is
       a team error not just an AR error.
       *****************************************************
       Page 4 of 4
   DIR Previous Page