Didn't watch the match but that is slightly surprising for the 90th minute.
World Cup 2018
You really do learn something new each day: -
https://www.bardown.com/bizarre-loophol ... -1.1115704
https://www.bardown.com/bizarre-loophol ... -1.1115704
-
Kafkaesque
- Posts: 886
- Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:20 am
Fun bit of trivial info 
In terms of the semantics in the wording though, "must be in their half" surely isn't nullified only by not being in the opposition half. Even if you take the view that players "do not count" once off the field, then a match has to be ended if a team has less than seven players, so the, aside from the ref clearly not allowing a restart as a function of fair play, he cannot do so as a prectical matter, with only the keeper playing. Seems more like clickbait than anything applicable.
In terms of the semantics in the wording though, "must be in their half" surely isn't nullified only by not being in the opposition half. Even if you take the view that players "do not count" once off the field, then a match has to be ended if a team has less than seven players, so the, aside from the ref clearly not allowing a restart as a function of fair play, he cannot do so as a prectical matter, with only the keeper playing. Seems more like clickbait than anything applicable.It's curious though that Portugal clearly applied the rule in the context in which they thought it mattered. I spoke to an expert this morning and he said that, in theory, a restart is allowed if no players remain on the field of play. If all players are off the pitch he would allow a restart but only really on the occasion that it is being done on purpose to delay a restart. Apparently, that is why the rule is there to stop teams deliberately stopping a restart.
-
Kafkaesque
- Posts: 886
- Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 10:20 am
-
Trader Pat
- Posts: 4327
- Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 12:50 pm
New record for Colombia, only taken them 3 minutes to implode this World Cup