56Blueyears
New Member
- Joined
- 3 May 2021
- Messages
- 1
- Team supported
- Man City
I think it probably was.View attachment 58401
How was this not seen?
Where in Law 12 does it say this, because I'm struggling to find it?
Could you show where it says that ?
I’m not convinced one way or the other going off what I’ve seen in real time, but it’s hard to see how that hasn’t touched his arm. Like the Haaland shirt tug I’m sure if it was slowed down & shown from different angles it could look more definitive, there’s shadows on the pitch from the players but none on the ball which suggests close contactView attachment 58401
How was this not seen?
View attachment 58401
How was this not seen?
100%.That's what I though.
If the referee's are 'instructed' otherwise then it flies in the face of the LOTG, and they might as well just admit they are making it up as they go along.
If this indeed is the case then it is yet another 'rule' that can be applied SUBJECTIVELY with ZERO accountability.You won’t because it’s not part of the laws of the game. It’s advice/ instruction not a point of law.
The advice to referees isn't allowed to change how they apply the written LOTG. They are intended as guidelines for how to deal with certain situations.You won’t because it’s not part of the laws of the game. It’s advice/ instruction not a point of law.
If City were threatening the goal, I’d guess he would probably have used some common sense and let it go a few seconds to see what occurred. But the ball was a few feet from the touchline, not far into the Liverpool half, with just about all Liverpool players behind the ball. So this “stopping a City attack” is pushing it a bit anyway.