Date:Mon, 13 Jun 2005 16:49:20 -0400
Reply-To:Fred Speirs <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees <[log in to unmask]>
From:Fred Speirs <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:Thoughts from the U-20 Competition re YCs for touching the ball
Got this comment from Emerson Mathurin Iım sure he wonıt mind my sharing
I have not seen any of the U-20 matches, but I believe you in your
description of the incidents ... and believe that the penalties awarded
were dumb. I guess that is why it is experimental, just to see how
effective/ineffective/dumb it is before the IFAB approves of it as part of
Why the authorities keep fooling around with the Laws of the Game baffles
me, and must be causing Sir Stanley Rous to roll in his grave. There was a
time when it was stated in the Laws that the cautioning of a player was a
discretionary matter. So referees had the option of cautioning a player for
ungentlemanly conduct (now called unsporting behaviour) if the player
delayed the restart of play in a manner that brought the game in disrepute.
UNFORTUNATELY, like many other aspects of officiating, referees became lax,
cowards, ball-less, dumb, etc., and allowed players to have their way. That
is when the IFAB started to tinker with Laws and, for starters, took away
the term "discretionary power of a referee" from the Laws. In the process,
the IFAB has created and will continue to create robots and .....
No, whereas the 2005 IFAB Decisions will be in effect at the Gold Cup, the
experiments proposed at the last IFAB meeting will not be, and the match
officials will be told so at the referees' symposium in Miami.