Vic said:
Prestwich_Blue said:
I'd say "interfering with play" more properly means affecting the outcome. And that's what he did when he moved.
It's not Alice in Wonderland - you can't make the rules mean what you want them to. If he doesn't touch the ball, he's not interfering with play. If you can interpret that how you like, no-one would have a clue what it meant.
It's alright saying "The laws say this and the laws say that" but there are always going to be situations which aren't black and white. That's why a series like "Ask The Ref" has been running for so long.
And you're making an assumption that the people who make the laws are rational and intelligent people. Well those of us who were invited to meet Mike Riley were absolutely fucking astounded at a couple of the things he said, as they defied logic, common sense and belief. One was about refereeing conflicts of interest and the other was about DOCGSO. That made me realise we aren't necessarily dealing with the brightest people.
Laws have loopholes and ambiguities and sometimes you have to look at the spirit and not the letter.
Bet you're a right jobsworth in your peaked cap.