Kicking the ball out of play is not in the rule book, should it be stopped?

Question

I watched a replay Arsenal vs Aston Villa, and the referee didn't want the players to kick the ball out of play.

The referee wants to decide for himself if it is the right time to tend a hurt player and not for the players to decide.

Answer 1

The referee should have stopped play to tend to the injured Eboue. Besdies, I think Villa has no sportsmanship in which they knew someone was on the ground, yet taking advantage of 10 man Arsenal. Referee is the one who gotta have control of the game and blow the whistle to stop the play. What glory is there if you scored cause the opponents were down to 10 man?

Answer 2

it really is the question: if the participant who used his hand hadn't used his hand and basically had chested the ball, might want to he nevertheless were noted as for purpose tending? if so, then at the same time as a participant does use his hand, how do you penalize him and/or the crew then? Do you supply a purpose for the tending, pink card and a penalty for the handball? i imagine the regulations as is are sufficient. What it does is provides the protection a very last decision for masking the purpose keeper. targets are so vast in evaluation to the keeper that you would possibly want to no longer actually have defenders status on the line protecting the purpose throughout a nook kick, it quite is what they're there for (preserve adversarial to deflections off the kick). once you're (no longer you rather, yet referees, FIFA rulemakers, and so on.) now unlikely to allow defenders to help a keeper in a very last ditch project like that, then that is more desirable helpful to make the targets smaller, eliminate the keeper, and take the skill faraway from everybody to handle the ball in any respect. basically then might want to you fairly seem at a purpose-tending style foul, nevertheless no longer positive how that could want to artwork even then, even with the undeniable fact that. I do exactly not see it as being a sensible purpose; if a field participant touches the ball at the same time with his hands in the penalty section, that is a penalty kick and a card, maximum in all probability a pink. enable's get referees to call the fouls, and get in touch with targets suited previously we seem at including new regulations for them to target to implement. of direction they could't even call offsides suited.

Answer 3

I am sure I either read this or saw it on the television, that the F.A were trying to stop it happening, I think they were going to leave it up to the referee to decide weather he would allow it or not, I know its good sportsmanship, which is OK as long as both sides do it, but even I have seen only one team doing it during a match. So in fairness the F.A should stop it now.

Answer 4

if a player is down, he has to be tended to and the ball should be kicked out of play by whichever team has position, the ref has no say in the matter!

Answer 5

It is good sportsmanship if you see a player down, then you kick the ball out of play. The reff was being ridiculous.

Answer 6

if a player is injured, the other team or whichever team has the ball should kick it out. once that matter is taken care of, i think that the team who was in possession should retain possession and get on with the game. i dont know if it goes that way, but i think it should.

Answer 7

that is completely ridiculous. the ref was totally wrong. they can kick the ball out if they want. there is no rule against that. if the ref is worried about wasting time he can just add stoppage time at the end. there really is no benifit to kicking the ball out if the ref is smart.

Answer 8

its about time it was stopped,most times it happens when they have just lost the ball and the other team is on a counter attack meaning the other team will put the ball out

Answer 9

That is part of the "fair play", its a courtesy, so its shouldn't be stopped.

Answer 10

Ref was spot on; new rule is spot on too!!