The relevant bit of the law is ignored

The law requires a judgment to be made as to whether the keeper is prevented from playing the ball as a result of the obstruction.

Yet again nobody seems to read the actual laws of the game.

Posted By: Jim on April 7th 2024 at 08:10:53

Message Thread

That Wolves goal (NCFC) - Jim, Apr 7, 07:29:38
- Such a weird take by all the pundits (n/m) (NCFC) - jAC, Apr 7, 08:30:24
- I barely ever watch VAR replays now. I just look away and wait for the decision (NCFC) - Lentil Weaver, Apr 7, 07:56:34
- Irrelevant that he wouldn’t have saved it (NCFC) - SCC 28, Apr 7, 07:42:38
  - It is one of the clearest offsides I have ever seen (NCFC) - earlydoors, Apr 7, 08:10:53
    - It’s baffling that there has been any controversy around it (NCFC) - SCC 28, Apr 7, 08:20:54
  - It’s not as the rule states that the interfere cr (n/m) (NCFC) - Jim, Apr 7, 07:47:38
    - Sorry it’s not irrelevant as…. (NCFC) - Jim, Apr 7, 07:49:18
      - Which he does! (NCFC) - SCC 28, Apr 7, 08:05:07
        
        The relevant bit of the law is ignored (NCFC) - Jim, Apr 7, 08:10:53
        
        No you are misinterpreting it (NCFC) - SCC 28, Apr 7, 08:17:02
        
        They have been given guidance as to how they should interpret it (NCFC) - Jim, Apr 7, 08:39:45
        
        It applies to more than just vision (NCFC) - SimonOTBC, Apr 7, 09:23:47

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.