If a contract doesn't specify something then its not ruled out. For example, if your working contract doesn't have the words "don't go to sleep" in it then you can't be sacked from work for sleeping unless they can prove intent (ie don't have a cushion)
Depends what your job is. It might fall under gross misconduct if for example you are driving a train.
Yes I know .... it's interesting that I interpret one way, you another, yet you say I'm wrong. The strict letter of the law isn't applied, more often than not, which leaves the gaps for different interpretations, you only have to look at offside for that and tackles were the one who comes away with the ball says there's no foul because he got the ball. And then there's all the stuff that the ref says happened which didn't actually... the things they make up are far more annoying than the things they miss. I'm off to look for a penalty where the keeper is jumping up and down while it's being taken, let you know if I find one
The whole purpose of rules is eliminate what you can't do. They don't usually list what you can do. The offside rule is a whole different ball game though
The old rule stated the keeper couldn't move his feet, the new one doesn't, there's a clue there like.....
And therein lies the crux of the matter. The Laws of the games prioritise what you can do and not what you can't do. Take boxing for example - rules 'no spitting, no gouging, no hitting below the belt' - these are things you can't do. Football is completely different because the Laws focus on how the game is to be played and not how it isn't to be played. Starting from how big a pitch must be - it doesn't list all the sizes it shouldn't be. What constitutes a goal - not what doesn't constitute a goal. What a player can wear, not what he can't wear [recent additions notwithstanding of slogan on under garments]. It's completely different to the usual list of rules that start 'no ....'.
Fair shout. I thought Tobes made a good point mind; the fact old rule stated the keeper couldn't move and the new rule doesn't suggests they are now allowed. Otherwise, why remove it?
i'd just forget the rule lloking and see what everyone is doing. It is clear a shooting player cannot stop and a keeper can't come off his line but can dance about... simples. you all see what the pros are at... go by that... job done.
I'm looking at IBWT's signature and thinking about us discussing the 'interpretations' of football. I just watched a vid of a penalty being retaken 3 times and the keeper saves every one - impressive. Here's a good one just for you of a penalty that shouldn't have stood - but watch the celebration. [video=youtube;mZEQrmpJHKg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZEQrmpJHKg[/video]
1) Defender should have sent off. 2) Penalty should have been retaken. 3) Had the keeper saved it, it should have been retaken because the keeper move doff his line before the ball was kicked (because of point two though)
all i want to know is who the f wears shirt 200... what a muppet... see vid. also you lads aint discussion you are going round and round and round.. you may as well be on the london eye.
Neymar should have been booked for unsporting conduct and every **** in a cap can have another yellow too for wearing illegal kit
probably... I'd as soon shoot you all.... Its the same as this freaking ryder cup. they've talked so much about it i couldn't give a toss whats going on.
