Jump to content
Cornwall Football Forum

Goal or no goal?


Guest

Recommended Posts

No goal. In my eyes, the penalty has been completed.

It is exactly the same in another video that regularly does its rounds on social media... Penalty shoot-out.. Kicker takes the kick, it hits the crossbar and rockets towards the moon, keeper runs away celebrating. The ball then drops down in front of the line, and the backspin takes the ball into the net. Goal is awarded but in Law, should it have stood? Interpretation...

A quick reference from Wikipedia following an incident in 1986:

A kick is successful if, having been touched once by the kicker, the ball crosses the goal line between the goal posts and under the crossbar, without touching any player, official, or outside agent other than the defending goalkeeper. The ball may touch the goalkeeper, goal posts, or crossbar any number of times before going into the goal as long as the referee believes the ball's motion is the result of the initial kick. This was clarified after an incident in the 1986 World Cup shoot-out betweenBrazil and France. Bruno Bellone's kick rebounded out off the post, hit goalkeeper Carlos's back, and subsequently bounced into the goal. Referee Ioan Igna gave the goal to France, and Brazil captain Edinho was booked for protesting that the kick should have been considered a miss as soon as it rebounded off the post. In 1987, theInternational Football Association Board clarified Law 14, covering penalty kicks, to support Igna's decision

Law 14, pg. 86

Procedure
• After the players have taken positions in accordance with this Law, the referee signals for the penalty kick to be taken 
• The player taking the penalty kick must kick the ball forward
• He must not play the ball again until it has touched another player
• The ball is in play when it is kicked and moves forward

When a penalty kick is taken during the normal course of play, or time has been extended at half-time or full time to allow a penalty kick to be taken or retaken, a goal is awarded if, before passing between the goalposts and under the crossbar:
• the ball touches either or both of the goalposts and/or the crossbar and/or the goalkeeper

 

(For cases in normal play and a shoot-out) The referee decides when a penalty kick has been completed.

 

Upon further digging, the important line here is all about INTERPRETATION; The referee decides when a penalty kick has been completed.

For me, I would say that the penalty has been saved. Ballsy call, but the ball has travelled forward, stopped and then continued forward due to the motion of the goalkeeper. The balls momentum was lost for a split second as it was saved and fumbled, it was the keeper that scored. Therefore, for me, the penalty is complete at the time he has saved it initially.

Should the ball rebound off the post, hit the keeper and go in, the momentum on the ball is still as a result of the kick, so I'd award the goal. But then, could you argue for my scenario above that the goal scored when the ball comes back down to earth and has back-spin on it is awarded as it's been made as a result of the kick?

Penalty kick is taken, keeper saves and the ball rolls towards side of goal area, keeper celebrates... wind blows the ball into the goal... Goal? No Goal? When should the referee deem that the kick has been completed? Interpretation... :ninja:

Queue the onslaught :thumbsup:

 

This is exactly why the lawbook has just been completely overhauled, with close to 90 law changes, and the size of the book almost halved. Lord Elleray is trying to minimise the effect of referee interpretation. like everything though, it's the interpretation and understanding of the LOTG that depicts how a referee performs.

 

Interesting one, thank you for sharing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either way mate, whichever approach the referee takes, half the people at the game are going to want to kill him/her, the other half will be declaring their undying love B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting.. For me, it's a goal.

Unlike the first one, the momentum of the ball from the kick has caused it to spin into the goal directly after the save, therefore the penalty takers taking of the kick has clearly influenced the resulting motion of the ball. 

The first one, the keeper is the one that puts it in the net as he drops it and it ricochets in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Course it's a goal. At no point does keeper have control of the ball nor has it stopped moving. 

Also, dangerous Dave, you said that about a previous law being if the ball struck the post it was deemed missed. How can that be the case of the ball goes in off the post???

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, St Darren said:

Course it's a goal. At no point does keeper have control of the ball nor has it stopped moving. 

Also, dangerous Dave, you said that about a previous law being if the ball struck the post it was deemed missed. How can that be the case of the ball goes in off the post???

 

"When a penalty kick is taken during the normal course of play, or time has been extended at half-time or full time to allow a penalty kick to be taken or retaken, a goal is awarded if, before passing between the goalposts and under the crossbar:
• the ball touches either or both of the goalposts and/or the crossbar and/or the goalkeeper"

The ball is fine to be kicked against a post, keeper, crossbar and then across the goal-line for a valid goal to be scored.

Read my post again, including the quoted paragraph from the Laws Of The Game book.

Remember also, these penalties are being taken in a penalty shoot-out to determine a winner. It is not deemed as open play so they are not the same as a normal penalty during the game.

It would be very interesting to get some more referee's views... I would still say that for the first one, the ball was saved.

I'm on a works PC at the moment, I'm not grown up enough to be able to access Facebook to share the post... I'll get some more referee interpretations for you. This is an interesting scenario which, if you are following the process in accordance with the LOTG (the only way to follow it), it is left open to the referee...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets try and clarify, in a penalty shootout or a penalty where time is added (at the end of each half) for the penalty to be taken the moment the ball stops it`s forward momentum the penalty is deemed to have been taken. I will let you make your own minds up on the video`s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair Dave I didn't really go into details on your post and therefore didn't read about the last minute as such

i remember a few years ago. Truro v aggie in combo. Aggie were awarded a penalty and jack rosenfeld blew whistle for half time. Everyone was confused and then he confirmed that he kick would be the last of the half. Boysie duly slotted away to save any issues after

 

but for me in the video you showed then it's a goal all day long as the ball hasn't come to rest at any stage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why the law book has been completely overhauled, there's such a big area where referees have to apply their own interpretation of the event.

The only reason I would say no goal is purely because the keeper saves it, the ball changes direction, momentum then due to his actions, it then goes in. That wasn't caused by the penalty takers kick, but more so the keeper being a bit naive.

I hope keepers out there are taking note of this though :) 

I enjoy scenarios like this that divide opinion, it's shows how wide that opinion is between us all. If I hadn't completed the course and read the laws all the time, I'd be saying goal all day long 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's nothing that states he has to be in control of it. This is why some things are so hard for referee's. We've been talking and considering this for hours, a referee gets a few seconds. Crazy eh!

You will definitely get those that would award the goal and then those that wouldn't. Law is flawed in so many areas because there's too much left to interpretation. Hopefully the overhauled 16/17 lawbook will make these sort of things crystal clear :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a tough job, either way you're gonna p**s off alot of people regardless of what decision you make.

There are times where the referee may be wrong (they are human after all). But what people need to remember is that referee's are going purely by the LOTG whilst players go by what they think is correct at the time, the fact they want to win the game; but most don't have a thorough understanding of Law. Because the LOTG are so open to interpretation, opinions may vary between each party. No referee (I believe) goes to a agme to favour one side more than the other, they are simply there to enforce and ensure the LOTG are adhered to and followed and that the game is carried out in a safe manner.

You guys have seen one example here of a law that is rather confusing in certain situations... Try the offside rule, thats a mindf**k at times, especially when played off a defender. 

Player in an offside position.. Defender deliberately attempts to play the ball, but his attempt falls to the offside attacker (still in an offside position), he is no longer offisde and play continues! Imagine how many arguments that can cause :ninja:

Since I started refereeing (as a qualified ref) and reading (and understanding) the LOTG, I have a completely new found respect for the man in the middle, even now when playing. I still see decisions differently to the referee as a player, because as a player I'm of the mindset that my team must win... So, I don't question the referee's anymore simply because they don't give a monkeys who wins and loses :)  And more importantly, how many refs have ever changed their mind once they've made a call.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, St Darren said:

That's ridiculous. Could be made simpler by just stating that once the ball is dead. Ie: out of play or in the keepers arms or dead away from the goal. Ridiculous law

I believe this may happen this year. There are around 100 changes to the laws this year. Mainly there are word changes to make the the laws easier to understand so hopefully this maybe one of those situations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion both video's in this thread I would give as a goal. The Laws Of The Game may say otherwise. However, each referee would interpret this particular incident differently. Some would give it as a goal, some wouldn't. I'd love to see it happen in a game I was involved in to see what would happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gentleman... The IFAB god's have heard your cries and concerns... From 2016, these penalties will be classed as GOALS (goalkeepers fumble debatable).

Here's the new law change:

The kick is completed when the ball stops moving, goes out of play or the referee stops play for any infringement of the laws'

So, now referee's have a clear and concise instruction :) a good change in my eyes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2015/2016 you'd have been potentially incorrect Dave, but in 2016/2017, you'd have been correct. Basically the idea of the majority of these laws is to leave less to the interpretation of the referees, therefore they become more consistent. 

For example, a game I had recently a player said "leave it"... "You can't say leave it ref, I got booked for that last week".... You can say leave it, there's nothing that says you can't, depending on the circumstances. You can't however intentionally distract a player using your voice... Interpretation  

Much of the interpretation is brought on from players and team officials etc watching and listening to these games on the tv and radio. The commentators haven't a clue what they are talking about, but because they say it... People listen, remember and think it's the referees in the wrong on game day.

You saw a difference in opinion in this that alone, with this new law change, that difference in opinion on this matter has been significantly reduced :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I think I feel a touch of brain-ache coming on! When I were a lad you only needed a 'O' level in football to be allowed to play (an 'A' level to referee) and two brain cells to rub together to spectate. Now you seem to need a degree to understand the rules/laws and a Doctorate to officiate, with intensive annual updates to boot! Considering that some players I know (albeit skilled footballers) have trouble writing their names or counting their feet, it's no wonder they fall foul of the regulations.

I do wonder if there should be one set of simple, straightforward rules for the amateur game and save the ever changing complex laws for the professional players who can afford a tutor to drum them into their skulls.

Just a thought! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, but you wouldn't take a driving test without doing the theory, you wouldn't perform brain surgery without first learning all about neurology... Not that it compares to football, but I believe that a bit of time taken to actually learn about the laws that govern the game that unites us all can't be a bad thing?

They just need to get a good balance between interpretation and fact. The more factual the laws are, there's less room for interpretation.

Through my very short career as a referee thus far (22 games since I qualified in October), the thing that I believe affects the games most is player attitudes. Players thinking they are right because they've never taken the time to understand the laws. If players just accepted the referee's decision and accepted the fact that they /we are just enforcing and adhering to the law book, games would be so much better for both player and official.

When I talk these days I do so more from a referee point of view, but believe me when I say that I genuinely believe that because I have read the law book and taken the time to try and understand it, it has made me a better player. I play with my head and my feet, as opposed to my feet before the course. 

I've had my fair share of run-ins with referees over the years but the one thing I always say to the teams/skippers before I start the game "Has a referee ever changed his mind after you've given him a mouthful or/and questioned his decisions?" No chance, but we still continue to do it, sometimes it even costs us £10+ for the trouble.

Referees arent always fantastic on the day I know that from both sides, but neither are the players. Whilst a referee may make one mistake in a game where he only has a second or two to make a decision (penalty for example), a player will make a multitude of mistakes over the duration of the game; intercepted pass, rubbish tackle, miss the target etc etc. 

The laws can be a pain in the arse, they can be hard to understand at times because scenarios change. Things happen in games where it could be the players/refs first experience, it's difficult.

Im looking forward to the CCFA's meetings that are coming up to discuss behaviour in football. I am hoping that something comes good out of it, because something has to be done. Personally, I believe the best thing for anyone playing football is education. That's why I'm posting about the laws; you never see it on this forum or at clubs so I'm in a way, hoping to educate :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must agree with Dange'rous that players need to learn, and it would be good if managers could put aside a part of their training sessions to do this (provided, of course, that the managers had any sort of grip on the subject). I do however applaud you for trying to educate all the participants, however for some of them you'll have to cut down on the syllables!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D ha, fully understand that one.

All it would take is an evening put aside where the players turn up for training but instead of actual training, they get an hour or so with a referee to discuss certain elements of the game, particularly these new changes. I certainly wouldn't tell the players that they are going to have a "lesson" because no one would turn up.

Would it take much to organise? Not at all. Just a space big enough for a team of players to sit it; and maybe a facility get get a PowerPoint presentation or a white board on show? 

It would also build a rapport between player and official I think :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Dange'rous said:

:D ha, fully understand that one.

All it would take is an evening put aside where the players turn up for training but instead of actual training, they get an hour or so with a referee to discuss certain elements of the game, particularly these new changes. I certainly wouldn't tell the players that they are going to have a "lesson" because no one would turn up.

Would it take much to organise? Not at all. Just a space big enough for a team of players to sit it; and maybe a facility get get a PowerPoint presentation or a white board on show? 

It would also build a rapport between player and official I think :)

You are joking of course (!) :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all. 

Education. Educate your players, your team officials and maybe, just maybe attitudes might change.

Look at the game and how it is all over the world, if you educate people, people learn and apply the new knowledge where applicable (most of the time). 

Obviously this would be in an ideal world...In this world, I don't believe this would happen. I'm a massive believer in educating people, helping those those that don't fully understand to understand would be a massive bonus for me. 

 

For me, the managers need the education just as much as the players. The sidelines can often be horrendous, sometimes more so that the field itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your new found enthusiasm is admirable, I just hope - when what you propose does not happen - you don't lose the will to live.

It's about playing - not studying the of the rules of the game. And I know they're called laws, but they will always be known as the rules.

The same way players will never sit down to a lesson on the rule book, and if they did (!) what problems that would cause......possibly knowing more than the referee (!)

It will always end up as the interpretation of the individual, and only the referees opinion matters anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...