Welcome to your WILD side! All WildmanPete videos and playlists are posted here!
These include sport videos and playlists of local athletes and teams as well as wildlife, toddler entertainment, musical entertainment and many other types. Check back frequently for new and fun content. Make sure to LIKE and SUBSCRIBE to the WildmanPete channel and share it with your friends!
LOVEING WHOAAAA YEAH!!THE INCREDIBLE PERFORMANCE MY KING 👑 OF COUNTRY LOVE THIS INCREDIBLE ONE 1⃣ ONLY SEXY VOICE STUNNING GORGEOUS STUNNING A CHARM OH YEAH LORD NDEED ILL TAKE UR HAND BABY SMILING CHECK YES CHRIS STAPLETON TENNESSEE WHISKEY LOVE SO MUCH OF GREATEST LEGENDARYS ARTISTS ICONS AMAZEING WOW LOVEING GEORGE STRAIT KING 👑 HIS BEAUTIFUL SEXY VOICE LYRICS SONGS THE MAN NDEED ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
Amazing series of shots! That 2nd one like a huge fish (both fish are grown/adult Goldfish?) the bird caught! The fish was struggling, but the hungry Heron managed to fully consume (alive?!) it all okay? I wonder, does the large Goldfish stand any chance of escaping if eaten in that condition? Maybe it can turn around inside the elastic throat/stomach and has a chance of survival here.
Thanks for watching! Please like and subscribe to my page! There are many more wildlife photos and videos on my wildlife playlist…and at WildmanPete.com!
If you slow to .25 speed, the first one, 0.05, the black jersey definitely pushes the white jersey. No goal. DFK coming out. On the field, we don't get kind of luxury to review much less review at 1/4 speed!
I took my daughter to see King George in Ames. Her very first George Strait concert... Anna is a for real cowgirl. She cried on How Bout Them Cowgirls lol. Amazing as always!
Good eye! If you play the video this came from... you'll see he "comes back" for it! I think it's attached, but if not, go to RU-vid/@WildmanPete to see it! Enjoy!
Pete check out my film "Fredo the Gardener" he is an adult now he still visits every morning, you are so lucky on many levels no Rats no Slugs and Snails and all I do is give them a few raw Chicken wings...
From this angle, that's outside the box, so not a pk. And, Julie is right. The ref should conference with the line judge before making the call. And, I usually deferred to them. That's what they're there for. But if it is outside the box, it is a denial of an obvious goal scoring opportunity. So, if it's a long time ago, that's a "professional foul" and no-card, just a direct-free-kick. If it's a while ago, it's a yellow and a direct-free-kick, and, in 2021, I believe that's a red card and a direct-free-kick. And, I believe this is from a while ago, because it looks like he could have played the ball and chose not to.
Older than dirt former national ref instructor; too old, broke down and ornery to do this in real life anymore. From this, I'd have let this go; white throw. Blue got there first and played the ball out. White then ran him over, but it was a 50/50 ball, both moved to the same spot, blue was there first, but he played the ball out before he was hit. And, the forward did a great job of not kicking the defender in the head. But, I understand why this was called. Not calling fouls after the ball is played tends to allow the game to get out of hand. From this angle, though, I probably wouldn't have called it. For the second, I'd have gone with the linesman. It's his call, and he's in a far better position to see what happened. but, I rarely overruled linesman. From this angle, I'd have gone with a white throw. Nice slide, got the ball, disrupted the play, but white gets another try. Not sure how it was a blue throw. From this angle, just don't see it. For the fourth, from this angle, that look's like a pk. And, I never liked to call pk's. So, on this one, I'm zero for four and all of the ref's calls benefit blue and mine benefit white. Angle matters. I remember calling a high school girls regional playoff game by myself - nobody watching the lines. It was brutal. Probably 30 years ago. Long before cell phones, and we were more than 5 miles from the nearest payphone. I'd traveled 20+ miles and one team had traveled further. Had the sign the card before the game that they agreed for me to run it solo, that they understood that my angle is different from theirs, and that if it was a remotely possible yellow, a yellow would be issued on the assumption that I'd miss way more than I saw. Wrote that all on the card before the game and had both coaches sign it before kick-off. Said the same to the girls. Missed a ton. And it was a good game. The girls deserved a full crew. A few girls got their only yellow cards of their career and a few probably got away with murder. Angle totally matters. Gave out more yellows in that game than any other. Think it was 6. The state called all of us; both the game and the yellows stood. But the point, again, is that the angle matters. Thank you for the walk down memory lane.
Older than dirt former national level ref instructor. Too old, too broke down, and too ornery to do this for real. Thanks for the opportunity to relive more exciting times. For the first, there's not enough in the video to tell if it's shoulder to shoulder or something more, but the linesman was right there, so I'd go with his call. For the second, it's hard to tell if there's a jersey pull from behind, but, the ref was in the perfect position to see that and 12 reacted as if he'd been fouled, so, again, I'd go with the call on the field. For the third, white reacted as if he'd been fouled and the elbow was head high, but from this angle and weak resolution, I'd have let it go. Again, the ref was in the right position to make the call, and he delayed the call to see if there was an advantage. For the fourth, it looks like he's reminding the players to stay outside of the circle. The shooter is focused on the goal while the keeper is focused on the shooter, so his hand signals had no effect on the play. For the fifth, yes, there was a hand to the back that looked like a push, but white retained possession, it was weak, and, in this case, it looks like the camera had the better angle. But, it was a push off, even if it was weak. It also could be a game management foul. I don't know. Not enough footage here to tell. Not a big deal because the same team ended up with the ball whether the foul was called or not, so this is a hard one to get up in arms about; you're talking shades of grey. For the sixth, I'm also not calling the trip. It was a hard fought, physical 50/50 ball and both got away with something. Be like the Beatles; let it be. For the seventh, again, the angle and resolution are weak, but the linesman and referee have the play sandwiched and neither flinch. White definitely nut-megged red, but it's unclear from the angle and video if there was a foul. So, I'm going with the call on the field. For the eighth, I hate these. Not because they're hard to call, but because so many people don't get it. This is a 50/50 ball, white got there first, played the ball, and red knocked him to the ground. So, that's a foul on red. But, first you stop play to make sure everyone is ok. Remember, soccer is a contact sport; at least it was 50 years ago. I can't speak for today. If red had gotten there first, that's a foul on white and a yellow card. Fractions of a second matter. I'd have called the ninth. That's an illegal corner because the first touch didn't go far enough. Technically, the ball has to roll more than two feet before it can be played (the circumference of the ball), and most of us let it go at half that. But, when it doesn't go that far, at the lower levels (age and skill) you make them take it again. At the higher levels, it's a turnover. More important, that's a coaching failure and the linesman didn't call it. Something the ref should mention to both. At the high school level, that's unsat. For the 10th, I'd probably have waited a bit longer, but there's four white players closer to him than any red, two between him and the goal, no runner in sight, and he's got his head down, so, it's unlikely he's scoring. More important, games tend to get out of hand when you don't call fouls after someone has already played the ball. Game management means different styles and, in this case, we only have a few minutes of a 90+ minute game, so I'm not bashing the ref for possibly having a quick whistle. For the 11th, the angle and resolution are too poor to make a call, but it appears white touched the ball and red did not. Whether or not someone fouled, who knows. But, for throwing the ball, you have to give red a yellow. Especially at this age and point in the game. Either the linesman got the last call wrong or he called offsides. The ball was played out by red, so it was a white corner if there wasn't offsides. But, from the video, I can't say there was or wasn't offsides, that the linesman did or did not call it, or whether the ref checked with him. However, in the run-up, there were definitely times when white players were closer to the goal than the red players. Thanks. This was fun. Hope my games stand up this well.
Well, as a younger ref (only a year in), I feel better that I won't be a sht as this guy. He must have received a review from a previous game where he didn't use the whistle enough. Making up for it in this game.
It's funny that one call he gets right is the one highlighted in the title. Yes, he is "airborne" and the maroon player undercuts him and takes out his legs. Easily could've been a yellow. The rest... Woof. Pretty bad officiating overall.
LOL WHY ARE THESE PARENTS COMPLAINING FOR A TRIP, He clearly got the ball in the cleanest way possible according to the rules of the game (that parents don't know or bother to read)
0:01 - That doesn't look like a foul from this angle. Burgundy player is first to the ball and his arm doesn't strike or push. I think the AR is being a bit too active here. The contact looks normal. 0:24 No foul/PK. Goodness, the ref is too sensitive for this level of play. There is no pushing, pulling, holding, etc. Had to stop watching the video after awhile. Ref's need to attend their association training and talk through these calls. They need to watch video and ref with some more senior people.
As a referee I can that being in the middle can be very stressful, and scary at the same time. I don't think this referee is right for this age. Although his calls may have been with the "letter of the law," he should have played through and managed his way out of it. As this is not a high level game, players may be playing the player and not the ball. He should be closer to the play and try and predict ball movement. This kind of referee style may be good on a younger age group, but for this age you must play through some of the tiki taki fouls and continue the game.
I have refereed thousands of youth soccer games and some semi-pro games. I have yet to call a perfect game, but I'm sure my next match will be the one.
From having the privilege to slow it down and from the angle this was being recorded, of course it's from outside the 18. But when you're officiating, behind the play, and not having the same angles or slow motion replay that you do, it's a quick judgement call that I understand the official calling either way. Officiating soccer is unlike any other sport. You do not have to call every foul, advantages everywhere, and sometimes you need to stop an advantage so other situations don't escalate that would have if you let the advantage proceed.
At first glance, at game speed, it looks like a PK should have been awarded. But after watching a few times, the attacker actually starts to fall before any contact is made by the defender (the defender's upper leg is still straight down, and his lower leg is still behind him when the attacker starts to fall). No contact between the players is made until the attacker has turned horizontally with his right shoulder toward the ground and his left shoulder toward the sky. The attacker's right shoe actually contacts the defender's left ankle (the ankle travels backward after the contact). The attacker's reaction supports the referee's decision - there was no protest that the whistle didn't blow, and he sportingly checked on the defender who was slightly injured by his shoe.
By the letter of the law, almost every one of his whistles was correct. ...Red attacker made contact with white defender in the 1st situation. ...12 red held 13 white in the penalty area. ...Red defender jumped at white attacker with a raised knee to win the header. ...Red clipped white's ankle in the middle of the field. ...White's foot was on the ground not moving; red tripped over a stationary foot. ...White trapped the ball, red tripped over the stationary ball. ...The white defender jumping for the header is one I completely disagree with - his path was always to the ball, not at the red attacker, and he won the header; red created contact under white with no attempt to play the ball (playing in a dangerous manner - IFK for red). ...Red held white with his hands stretched out behind him. ...White received the ball with his back to goal and a defender less than a yard away - no advantage. ...Red used his body (backside) to push white away from the ball while white was in the air. But I'm with Dino. Just because it's a foul by the letter of Law 12 doesn't mean that the referee has to stop the game. ...Although the red attacker made contact with the white defender, the defender was the one who put his leg in front of the attacker to try to win the ball. Trifling contact. Goal. ...12's hold had absolutely no effect on 13's inability to play the ball - it was too far over his head. No PK. ...Red defender did not use his knee to intimidate the opponent - it was a reactionary maneuver to protect himself from anticipated contact, and it was angled slightly down, not up into the opponent in an intimidating gesture. No foul. ...The contact to white's ankle was trifling - from close range, no backswing, foot not planted - and the ball went to a teammate facing forward with no defender in front of him. No foul. ...No trip ...No trip ...Red's body was always between the opponent and the ball; the hands were not used to prevent the opponent from playing the ball. ...No advantage. ...White would not have been able to make a play on the ball without fouling red. Trifling contact - the contact was more of a nudge, not an undercutting motion that would keep an opponent from landing on his feet. No foul. A foul is a foul. But different ages, heights, weights, and levels of skill call for various levels of foul recognition, foul selection, and foul discretion. I would say his recognition is fine, but his selection and discretion were not appropriate for this age and skill level.
Yes, almost every one of these is trifling. I typically watch these videos prepared to roll my eyes at the clueless parents complaining, but these are legitimate complaints. This referee needs some instruction.
