WC 2014 2nd round Netherlands vs Mexico

[Ouroboros]

I'd imagine the issue here is that only incidents that the referee doesn't see can be retrospectively adjudicated on.

The referee didn't judge that the Suarez incident wasn't an infringement, he just didn't see it at all.

Conversely....If you're trying to con the referee into giving a penalty and he doesn't even see you doing it, you're really barking up the wrong tree.

[Flyingkiwi]

If you're trying to con the referee into giving a penalty and he doesn't even see you doing it.

If he DOES see you doing it, he's supposed to issue a yellow card. If he DOESN'T issue a yellow card, that just implies that he didn't think the contact was a foul.

[Ian Royal]

If you're trying to con the referee into giving a penalty and he doesn't even see you doing it.

If he DOES see you doing it, he's supposed to issue a yellow card. If he DOESN'T issue a yellow card, that just implies that he didn't think the contact was a foul.

Or that he isn't sure it was a deliberate attempt to con him.

[Ouroboros]

If you're trying to con the referee into giving a penalty and he doesn't even see you doing it.

If he DOES see you doing it, he's supposed to issue a yellow card. If he DOESN'T issue a yellow card, that just implies that he didn't think the contact was a foul.

You misunderstand my point.

If the referee sees you dive and doesn't recognise that you have dived, it is considered by FIFA that he had adjudicated on that incident.

It's irrelevant to FIFA whether he is right or wrong, they're just not comfortable with a panel retrospectively overruling refereeing decisions.

They don't mind, however, adjudicating on incidents that the referee missed completely, like the Suarez bite.