+-

+-User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 

Login with your social network

Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 966
Latest: Caro Bates
New This Month: 13
New This Week: 3
New Today: 1
Stats
Total Posts: 76142
Total Topics: 5614
Most Online Today: 154
Most Online Ever: 17046
(Mon 29 Mar 2021 19:08)
Users Online
Members: 2
Guests: 116
Total: 118

Author Topic: Kevin Friend Cardiff City v Spurs  (Read 472 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Stroudie

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Kevin Friend Cardiff City v Spurs
« on: Tue 01 Jan 2019 23:16 »
Suprises me that Mr Friend insisted that Son had to leave the field of play after receiving treatment,he received treatment from a cautionable offence so he should have been able to continue

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


ajb95

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,415
    • View Profile
Re: Kevin Friend Cardiff City v Spurs
« Reply #1 on: Tue 01 Jan 2019 23:43 »
Suprises me that Mr Friend insisted that Son had to leave the field of play after receiving treatment,he received treatment from a cautionable offence so he should have been able to continue

I thought if the treatment took longer than an allotted time then the player would still have to leave the pitch?? Happy to be corrected.
That being said I don’t think mr friend handled it at all well and manage to rile both managers

bmb

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,088
  • Gender: Female
  • Causing mischief & mayhem!!
  • Location: Somewhere between Poole & Budapest!
    • View Profile
    • Hungarian Football
  • Referee Level: Observer/Mentor.
Re: Kevin Friend Cardiff City v Spurs
« Reply #2 on: Tue 01 Jan 2019 23:47 »
Not strictly correct: the wording in Law 05 is

* a player is injured as the result of a physical offence for which the opponent is cautioned or sent off (e.g. reckless or serious foul challenge), if the assessment/treatment is completed quickly

I think the general consensus is that if the player is still receiving treatment once the caution has been administered then it's not necessarily going to be considered as being dealt with quickly. Perhaps Mr Friend thought it had taken too long. Very open to interpretation as how quickly is quickly. I assume there was no blood? That would be another reason, if there was blood he'd still have to go off and get that seen to.
Hajrá Lilák. Csak a Kispest. Hajrá Magyarok! Hajrá játékvezetői csapat! Soha ne add fel. Nincs sárga kérem!!! No Chris Kavanagh doesn't live in Ashton or even in the Greater Manchester area!!

nemesis

  • RTR Veterans
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1,295
    • View Profile
Re: Kevin Friend Cardiff City v Spurs
« Reply #3 on: Wed 02 Jan 2019 10:54 »
Not strictly correct: the wording in Law 05 is

* a player is injured as the result of a physical offence for which the opponent is cautioned or sent off (e.g. reckless or serious foul challenge), if the assessment/treatment is completed quickly

I think the general consensus is that if the player is still receiving treatment once the caution has been administered then it's not necessarily going to be considered as being dealt with quickly. Perhaps Mr Friend thought it had taken too long. Very open to interpretation as how quickly is quickly. I assume there was no blood? That would be another reason, if there was blood he'd still have to go off and get that seen to.

Another Law implemented inconsistently throughout League and Non-League football. Saw a match on Boxing Day when the player's treatment was concluded long before the referee had sorted out the 15 player melee and sent off the cause of the injury. Player was still made to wait off the pitch until after the restart.

The whole thing is a nonsense. Designed to stop players wasting time, feigning injury ?  Well it enables them to waste more time as they have to trudge/limp to the sidelines before being waved back on about 2 nanoseconds after the resumption !  Referees rarely add enough time to compensate!
Agree Agree x 2 View List

Acme Thunderer

  • RTR Veterans
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2,430
    • View Profile
Re: Kevin Friend Cardiff City v Spurs
« Reply #4 on: Wed 02 Jan 2019 11:20 »
Not strictly correct: the wording in Law 05 is

* a player is injured as the result of a physical offence for which the opponent is cautioned or sent off (e.g. reckless or serious foul challenge), if the assessment/treatment is completed quickly

I think the general consensus is that if the player is still receiving treatment once the caution has been administered then it's not necessarily going to be considered as being dealt with quickly. Perhaps Mr Friend thought it had taken too long. Very open to interpretation as how quickly is quickly. I assume there was no blood? That would be another reason, if there was blood he'd still have to go off and get that seen to.

Another Law implemented inconsistently throughout League and Non-League football. Saw a match on Boxing Day when the player's treatment was concluded long before the referee had sorted out the 15 player melee and sent off the cause of the injury. Player was still made to wait off the pitch until after the restart.

The whole thing is a nonsense. Designed to stop players wasting time, feigning injury ?  Well it enables them to waste more time as they have to trudge/limp to the sidelines before being waved back on about 2 nanoseconds after the resumption !  Referees rarely add enough time to compensate!

Maybe, but the act of leaving the field means that the player's team have to reorganise, if just for a few seconds, and that can be costly. I recall Graham Salisbury waving the physio on to the field at Gresty Road at a crucial time of a game and the captain waving him off before he could get to the stricken player. The fact that the player was a centre back and a free kick was about to be pumped into their penalty area probably had something to do with it, but the player was allowed to continue and the free kick was cleared.

TheThingFromLewes

  • RTR Veterans
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4,082
  • Location: Eastbourne
    • View Profile
Re: Kevin Friend Cardiff City v Spurs
« Reply #5 on: Wed 02 Jan 2019 12:47 »
Not strictly correct: the wording in Law 05 is

* a player is injured as the result of a physical offence for which the opponent is cautioned or sent off (e.g. reckless or serious foul challenge), if the assessment/treatment is completed quickly

I think the general consensus is that if the player is still receiving treatment once the caution has been administered then it's not necessarily going to be considered as being dealt with quickly. Perhaps Mr Friend thought it had taken too long. Very open to interpretation as how quickly is quickly. I assume there was no blood? That would be another reason, if there was blood he'd still have to go off and get that seen to.

Another Law implemented inconsistently throughout League and Non-League football. Saw a match on Boxing Day when the player's treatment was concluded long before the referee had sorted out the 15 player melee and sent off the cause of the injury. Player was still made to wait off the pitch until after the restart.

The whole thing is a nonsense. Designed to stop players wasting time, feigning injury ?  Well it enables them to waste more time as they have to trudge/limp to the sidelines before being waved back on about 2 nanoseconds after the resumption !  Referees rarely add enough time to compensate!

Precisely why we need a time keeping system like in rugby... an independent time monitor who solely concentrates on this incessant time wasting and faffing around... leaving the officials to do their job on the field, whether it be good or bad!!
Agree Agree x 1 View List