Exiled AusJag

The IFAB has released a 48 page book outlining the details of the changes. The change to the DOGSO law applies to all players, not just goalkeepers Where a player denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by a deliberate handball offence the player is sent off wherever the offence occurs. Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offending player is cautioned unless: •• The offence is holding, pulling or pushing or •• The offending player does not attempt to play the ball or there is no possibility for the player making the challenge to play the ball or •• The offence is one which is punishable by a red card wherever it occurs on the field of play (e.g. serious foul play, violent conduct etc.) In all the above circumstances the player is sent off.

It took a bit of time for last year's strip to grow on me, but on first viewing I really like this new one. I'm glad there's more black than before and I think it gives it a more balanced look.

I find it really difficult to believe that in a major international tournament like this that 5th and 6th officials aren't used. If they had, then there would never had been an issue with the Peru "goal". It would have been picked up by the official on the goal line, a yellow card issued and a free kick to Brazil. Decision made, no controversy, and the game would just have continued.

That's some ride. Last year one of my friends did a shorter journey, riding from London to Malaysia.

Re the Hamilton player possibly committing a foul. He's not actually holding in the picture but not far off it, but if this then becomes a hold preventing the Jags player moving, then it's definitely a foul. I once gave 2 penalties in one match against the same team for doing this.

I met Brown 10 years ago at Firhill when I was back in Scotland on holiday and he made me very welcome. My condolences to his family. He was far too young to go!

It does happen that both the ref and A/R can be unsighted at the same time. If you look at the position of the hand in relation to the body, the head is obscuring the hand when viewed from the position the A/R would be in on the touchline at the time. The fourth official's duties mean that he isn't necessary watching the field all the time.

Definite handball but possibility of being unsighted just at the critical moment.

Or playing on red ash

It's legal. There's no stipulation as to what colour the lines are.

As long as people don't think you're supporting the gold coast suns

The hairstyle's similar http://digital.nls.uk/oor-wullie/images/meet-oor-wullie/wullie_on_bucket.png

It reached today's Herald Sun in Melbourne. If they're going to keep this mascot, though, there has to be some red in the mascot. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/football/partick-thistle-mascot-scottish-club-unveil-terrifying-kingsley-as-part-of-new-sponsorship-deal/story-fnp0lxax-1227411131571

Definately not a penalty. It was shoulder to shoulder outside the box and it was the momentum from the fall by the thistle player that caused the contact indside the box. The only way it could have been given was if it had been a careless, reckless etc challenge, but there wasn't a challenge after the initial shoulder charge.

I was watching the Scotland v Sri Lanka match from Hobart last night, and one of the Scottish supporters was wearing the current Jags top. Another to add to the down under supporters club

I'm surprised no one has commented on this from the Spurs Sunderland game at the weekend. What has surprised me even more, but shouldn't, have been the comments from some members of the general public on various media websites actually AGREEING that Vertongen was offside, even when Law 11 has been quoted to them. He was inside his own half when the ball was played to him, so, and all media commentators surprisingly agreed, there was no way he could be offside. Even if he had been in his opponents half when he received the ball, he would still have been onside.

Not really. As you said it was taken quite quickly and the ball was kicked only 4 seconds after the whistle was blown. If players were booked that quickly for time wasting then the number of yellow cards shown would escalate dramatically.

Back then the ball had to actually be kicked, but as this had never been done before it created a lot of confusion. Now there are clear guidelines, and this is legal nowadays. In the interpreation of the laws and guidlines for referees (which is a lot longer than the actual laws) it states "A free kick can be taken by lifting the ball with a foot or both feet simultaneously"

This section of the law was changed years ago (about 1997/8). The ball only needs to be kicked and move (no minimum distance) for it to be in play, subject to the provisions of the defence taking any dead ball kick in their own penalty area where the ball must clear the area as well as moving before it's in play.

maybe this idea should be revived https://www.flickr.com/photos/enjosmith/10534116206/

An apt tribute would be for as many fans in Scotland to wear a 'sports' jacket on a designated "Arthur Montford' day.

I remeber one morning running late to primary school and Arthur pulled over to give me a lift in his volkswagen beetle. 'What a sensation' it was

Your copy/paste is absolutely correct, but ALL free kicks taken by the defending team inside their own penalty area MUST be kicked directly out the penalty area. The ball remains out of play until this happens. As soon as the ball is IN PLAY it's fair game, unless the opponent tries to prevent the free kick being taken, but the ball must be in play to allow play to continue. However, as mentioned before, when a free kick is taken by the defending team inside it's own penalty area, the ball MUST directly leave the penalty area after being kicked to be in play. If it's touched by a player of EITHER side inside the penalty area after it's been kicked but before it leaves the penalty area, then the kick MUST be retaken. The last paragraph you quote relates to all opposing players being outside the penalty area until the ball is in play. copy/paste from law 13 Free kick inside the penalty area Direct or indirect free kick to the defending team: • all opponents must be at least 9.15 m (10 yds) from the ball • all opponents must remain outside the penalty area until the ball is in play • the ball is in play when it is kicked directly out of the penalty area • a free kick awarded in the goal area may be taken from any point inside that area

I've just been watching the highlights of the West Ham v QPR game where Sakho had a goal chalked off after the QPR keeper took a free kick in his own penalty area. The ball went straight to Sakho who was still inside the penalty area and he put it in the net, but it was correctly disallowed. What amazed me was the commentator stating that he thought he wasn't 10 yards from the ball. The problem here is that so many people believe what commentators say about the laws of the game as being completely correct, even when they they are 100% wrong. All free kicks taken by the defence in their own penalty area, as well as goal kicks, the ball must LEAVE the penalty area before it is in play. The ball wasn't in play in this instance, so the free kick had to be retaken. copy/paste from the laws of the game If, when a free kick is taken by the defending team from inside its own penalty area, the ball is not kicked directly out of the penalty area: • the kick is retaken Rant over

Once you catch the mooloolabas it's incurable http://www.mooloolabatourism.com.au/