Penalty law of the game

A different view but the contact was near wickhams wrist which cala let go of before it entered the box. The fact his feet were inside the box is surely irrelevant as there was no contact with his feet.

Now that is one large straw you are clutching

Maybe but you haven't denied it

Penalty

Im not sure why the fuss made by some cardiff fans, everyone else can see it. Its as clear as day.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

I dont care what people class "a few" as.

if fifa wanted it to say 4 seconds then they would say it.

Te fact they have said a few means the refs are allowed to decide what os the best amount of time in that particular situation.

Use your brain.

Do you think FIFA wrote "a few" to be lazy and save some ink?

No they wouldnt. They say a few cause they mean 3 or 4. Anything more would be quite a few or a good few.

I dont care what people class "a few" as.

if fifa wanted it to say 4 seconds then they would say it.

Te fact they have said a few means the refs are allowed to decide what os the best amount of time in that particular situation.

Use your brain.

Do you think FIFA wrote "a few" to be lazy and save some ink?

Read the rule again. "The decision to penalise the original offence must be taken within the NEXT few seconds"

The NEXT few seconds.. which means the next 3 or 4 seconds. Dowd didnt do that therefore he fcuked up.

Where has 3 or 4 come from? You just made that up

If you were allowed 4 seconds, they would say 4 seconds.

They say a few, a few means "more than one but not many" so Dowd was correct.

You are fighting a lost battle.

You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

There was no guarantee he would have scored though. He had an advantage, he carried on, Marshall forced him wide, I think he then crossed the ball in. Advantage is not allowing a player to score otherwise Cardiff should have just let him score and keep 11 players. Play was allowed to go on too long. I must say that it's all our fault though as shocking defending led to this farce.

There was no guarantee he would have scored though. He had an advantage, he carried on, Marshall forced him wide, I think he then crossed the ball in. Advantage is not allowing a player to score otherwise Cardiff should have just let him score and keep 11 players. Play was allowed to go on too long. I must say that it's all our fault though as shocking defending led to this farce.

Incorrect.

At no point was there an actual "advantage" to the player because at no point was his chance easier to score than the result of the foul - which was a pen.

The ref gave him a few seconds to see if he would tuck it away anyway so he wouldn't have to ruin the game and send Cala off but he didn't so brought it back. Anything else would have been farcical.

It was perfect refereeing.

The rules are a joke and need to be looked at.

How can you get sent off for "denying a goal scoring" opportunity yet they had TWO opportunitys.

Where has 3 or 4 come from? You just made that up

If you were allowed 4 seconds, they would say 4 seconds.

They say a few, a few means "more than one but not many" so Dowd was correct.

You are fighting a lost battle.

You do realise you're shooting yourself in the foot with this post. "more than one but not many" Exactly!! If it were many it would state in the rules several seconds and not a few. You're the one fighting a lost battle. If youve never heard of a few as meaning 3 or 4 then ummmm.. Im actually lost for words lol.

Where has 3 or 4 come from? You just made that up

If you were allowed 4 seconds, they would say 4 seconds.

They say a few, a few means "more than one but not many" so Dowd was correct.

You are fighting a lost battle.

You do realise you're shooting yourself in the foot with this post. "more than one but not many" Exactly!! If it were many it would state in the rules several seconds and not a few. You're the one fighting a lost battle. If youve never heard of a few as meaning 3 or 4 then ummmm.. Im actually lost for words lol.

You are literally insane.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

The rules are a joke and need to be looked at.

How can you get sent off for "denying a goal scoring" opportunity yet they had TWO opportunitys.

The second "opportunity was hardly an oportunity, cala pushed him into the on rushing marshall. Had no option to go wide and then the chance had gone. Ref hung on a few seconds to see if he would tuck ot away anyway to save cala, he didnt so penalty and cala had to walk.

Perfect.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Then Gary Neville is wrong too. Quite bluntly.

When the goalkeeper handing the ball for 7 seconds came in, it was clearly stipulated in the rules 7 seconds. In the Referees handbook it clearly says to add on up to 30 seconds for a goal in injury time.

Yet for an advantage it is up to the referee, hence they say "a few" as there is no set amount, it is the refs discretion.

The definition of a few is "not many but more than one" 7 seconds isnt many and is also more than one.

He is spot on.

Last edited by Roath_Magic_ on Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Where has 3 or 4 come from? You just made that up

If you were allowed 4 seconds, they would say 4 seconds.

They say a few, a few means "more than one but not many" so Dowd was correct.

You are fighting a lost battle.

You do realise you're shooting yourself in the foot with this post. "more than one but not many" Exactly!! If it were many it would state in the rules several seconds and not a few. You're the one fighting a lost battle. If youve never heard of a few as meaning 3 or 4 then ummmm.. Im actually lost for words lol.

You are literally insane.

No.. you're ego's insane

No.. you're ego's insane

But at least my ego understands what "a few" means.

Excellent decision, put the lemons down.

So let me get this right. He should have blown up 3:seconss earlier and then awarded the pen and sent off the cheating juan ca?

No.. you're ego's insane

But at least my ego understands what "a few" means.

Excellent decision, put the lemons down.

You're ego's lieing to you

So let me get this right. He should have blown up 3:seconss earlier and then awarded the pen and sent off the cheating juan ca?

Its absolute nonsense, they cry when refs show no common sense and then when they do they still cry.

So let me get this right. He should have blown up 3:seconss earlier and then awarded the pen and sent off the cheating juan ca?

its not rugby you cant wait for 8 seconds, see how the advantage goes, and then bring it back.

So let me get this right. He should have blown up 3:seconss earlier and then awarded the pen and sent off the cheating juan ca?

its not rugby you cant wait for 8 seconds, see how the advantage goes, and then bring it back.

Yes you can. Hence why he did.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Yep, ill take the interpretation of the rule from a guy who has played in the PL for 20 seasons and one of the most respected pundits in the game, over some self indulgent know it all.

Ok, ill take the rule book then

Great decision and he is rightly getting praise from all corners.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Yep, ill take the interpretation of the rule from a guy who has played in the PL for 20 seasons and one of the most respected pundits in the game, over some self indulgent know it all.

Whilst I will use my own common sense and the interpretation of a number of vastly experienced referee's who are clearly better qualified than a tv pundit. fact still remains it was a red and a pen. Surely each case is different when it comes to advantage and its better to play on a "few" seconds to make the right decision than to blow up early. If he had gone on to scoreyou would have remained with 11 men not sure what more dowd could have done for you? Just wave it away? Even if hr had played on too long it was still a red and lets be honest they battered you with ten men.
Maybe uncle vinny should write another complaint to the premier league, uefa and the UN to appeal against the world of football cheating against capital city cardiff.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Yep, ill take the interpretation of the rule from a guy who has played in the PL for 20 seasons and one of the most respected pundits in the game, over some self indulgent know it all.

Whilst I will use my own common sense and the interpretation of a number of vastly experienced referee's who are clearly better qualified than a tv pundit. fact still remains it was a red and a pen. Surely each case is different when it comes to advantage and its better to play on a "few" seconds to make the right decision than to blow up early. If he had gone on to scoreyou would have remained with 11 men not sure what more dowd could have done for you? Just wave it away? Even if hr had played on too long it was still a red and lets be honest they battered you with ten men.
Maybe uncle vinny should write another complaint to the premier league, uefa and the UN to appeal against the world of football cheating against capital city cardiff.

Yawn

He played the advantage, they failed to take advantage. They shouldnt then get another go.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Yep, ill take the interpretation of the rule from a guy who has played in the PL for 20 seasons and one of the most respected pundits in the game, over some self indulgent know it all.

Whilst I will use my own common sense and the interpretation of a number of vastly experienced referee's who are clearly better qualified than a tv pundit. fact still remains it was a red and a pen. Surely each case is different when it comes to advantage and its better to play on a "few" seconds to make the right decision than to blow up early. If he had gone on to scoreyou would have remained with 11 men not sure what more dowd could have done for you? Just wave it away? Even if hr had played on too long it was still a red and lets be honest they battered you with ten men.
Maybe uncle vinny should write another complaint to the premier league, uefa and the UN to appeal against the world of football cheating against capital city cardiff.

Dont be silly, Gary Neville has refereed in the premer league for 20 years

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Yep, ill take the interpretation of the rule from a guy who has played in the PL for 20 seasons and one of the most respected pundits in the game, over some self indulgent know it all.

Whilst I will use my own common sense and the interpretation of a number of vastly experienced referee's who are clearly better qualified than a tv pundit. fact still remains it was a red and a pen. Surely each case is different when it comes to advantage and its better to play on a "few" seconds to make the right decision than to blow up early. If he had gone on to scoreyou would have remained with 11 men not sure what more dowd could have done for you? Just wave it away? Even if hr had played on too long it was still a red and lets be honest they battered you with ten men.
Maybe uncle vinny should write another complaint to the premier league, uefa and the UN to appeal against the world of football cheating against capital city cardiff.

Yawn

He played the advantage, they failed to take advantage.They shouldnt then get another go.

He played on "incase" there was an advantage due to the proximity to the goal, not "because" he had an advantage. There wasnt one, so he called it back... correctly.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Yep, ill take the interpretation of the rule from a guy who has played in the PL for 20 seasons and one of the most respected pundits in the game, over some self indulgent know it all.

Whilst I will use my own common sense and the interpretation of a number of vastly experienced referee's who are clearly better qualified than a tv pundit. fact still remains it was a red and a pen. Surely each case is different when it comes to advantage and its better to play on a "few" seconds to make the right decision than to blow up early. If he had gone on to scoreyou would have remained with 11 men not sure what more dowd could have done for you? Just wave it away? Even if hr had played on too long it was still a red and lets be honest they battered you with ten men.
Maybe uncle vinny should write another complaint to the premier league, uefa and the UN to appeal against the world of football cheating against capital city cardiff.

Yawn

He played the advantage, they failed to take advantage. They shouldnt then get another go.

Yawn
he played advantage, there wasn't any advantage so he brought it back. If tje ref did make a mistake it was the fact he could have blown earlier as it was clear there wasnt going to be andvantage as jaun ca had ensured the chance was wrecked. The only benefit of the advantage was to Cardiff as it was the only way you could avoid going to ten men.

Gary Neville said on MNF that we have no reason to be aggreived about the actual decision but every right to feel aggreived about him taking 8 seconds.

He said within the game the "few seconds" advantage rule is read by all as 3 seconds. Anything longer than 3 seconds on an advantage is poor refereeing.

Exactly! Terrible refereeing.

Yep, ill take the interpretation of the rule from a guy who has played in the PL for 20 seasons and one of the most respected pundits in the game, over some self indulgent know it all.

Whilst I will use my own common sense and the interpretation of a number of vastly experienced referee's who are clearly better qualified than a tv pundit. fact still remains it was a red and a pen. Surely each case is different when it comes to advantage and its better to play on a "few" seconds to make the right decision than to blow up early. If he had gone on to scoreyou would have remained with 11 men not sure what more dowd could have done for you? Just wave it away? Even if hr had played on too long it was still a red and lets be honest they battered you with ten men.
Maybe uncle vinny should write another complaint to the premier league, uefa and the UN to appeal against the world of football cheating against capital city cardiff.

Yawn

He played the advantage, they failed to take advantage. They shouldnt then get another go.

Yawn
he played advantage, there wasn't any advantage so he brought it back. If tje ref did make a mistake it was the fact he could have blown earlier as it was clear there wasnt going to be andvantage as jaun ca had ensured the chance was wrecked. The only benefit of the advantage was to Cardiff as it was the only way you could avoid going to ten men.

So because they didnt take advantage it wasnt advantage.



Thats not the rules, this isnt rugby.

He had a clear goal scoring opportunity, and fucked it up. You dont then pull it back.