| Refereeing query 15:55 - Jan 15 with 4210 views | Northernr |
Mitrovic has just duffed his penalty in via two touches. Goal disallowed, Newcastle free kick. I think that’s right. However a few years back we had a goal disallowed when Joe hart did the same with a free kick and he got a retake. So is it a retake, or a free kick, or is it different for penalties? |  | | |  |
| Refereeing query on 16:00 - Jan 15 with 3279 views | QPRSteve |
I was thinking the same thing. I'm guessing though that if the opposition had a Q in their name, then he would be allowed to retake it. [Post edited 15 Jan 2023 16:02]
|  | | |
| Refereeing query on 16:08 - Jan 15 with 3224 views | terryb |
The referee wasdefinitely correct today Clive.
I think, but I'm not certain, that the law has changed since the Joe Hart incident & it would now be an indirect free kick to us.
Speaking of the Newcastle Fulham game, I can't recall one 40/60 decision (never mind 50/50) decision that was given in Fulham's favour. This had no effect on the result, but it must have affected the mindset of the players. | | | |
| Refereeing query on 16:09 - Jan 15 with 3214 views | NoDiddley |
The ref f**caked up in our game, it’s an indirect free kick to the opposition when restarting play from a dead ball. |  | | |
| Refereeing query on 16:18 - Jan 15 with 3143 views | PinnerPaul |
He did it on a GK.
At the time ball was not in play until it left the PA, so a retake was correct. NOW the ball is in play from a GK when its kicked, so if he did it now, it would be a FK to us.
Penalty - always been a FK to oppo if attacker touches the ball twice, usually when it rebounds of the post/bar.
THAT was an easy one Clive!  | | | |
| Refereeing query on 16:18 - Jan 15 with 3130 views | gazza1 |
Free kick....same player cant touch the ball twice from a penalty kick.
Incidentally, I played in a game many years ago when the penalty taker touched the ball 6" to the side of the penalty spot and his team mate came running into the penalty area and took it around the most shocked & surprised opposition goalkeeper. | | | |
| Refereeing query on 16:19 - Jan 15 with 3137 views | PinnerPaul |
| Refereeing query on 16:09 - Jan 15 by NoDiddley |
The ref f**caked up in our game, it’s an indirect free kick to the opposition when restarting play from a dead ball. |
Sorry - see above. | | | |
| Refereeing query on 16:20 - Jan 15 with 3130 views | PinnerPaul |
| Refereeing query on 16:18 - Jan 15 by gazza1 |
Free kick....same player cant touch the ball twice from a penalty kick.
Incidentally, I played in a game many years ago when the penalty taker touched the ball 6" to the side of the penalty spot and his team mate came running into the penalty area and took it around the most shocked & surprised opposition goalkeeper. |
Didn't Thierry Henry try to do that once and mucked it up? | | | |
| Refereeing query on 16:22 - Jan 15 with 3118 views | NoDiddley |
Going back I think it was the fact the ball never left the penalty area that the goal was disallowed. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Refereeing query on 17:15 - Jan 15 with 2947 views | Northernr |
| Refereeing query on 16:18 - Jan 15 by PinnerPaul |
He did it on a GK.
At the time ball was not in play until it left the PA, so a retake was correct. NOW the ball is in play from a GK when its kicked, so if he did it now, it would be a FK to us.
Penalty - always been a FK to oppo if attacker touches the ball twice, usually when it rebounds of the post/bar.
THAT was an easy one Clive! |
I didn’t think the Joe Hart one was a gk, it was a free kick in his box possibly from an offside wasn’t it? | | | |
| Refereeing query on 17:20 - Jan 15 with 2921 views | loftboy |
At the time Joe hart did it the ball wasn’t deemed to be in play until it had left the area, so it was retaken as that was the rules at the time. |  |
| |
| Refereeing query on 17:27 - Jan 15 with 2887 views | terryb |
| Refereeing query on 17:15 - Jan 15 by Northernr |
I didn’t think the Joe Hart one was a gk, it was a free kick in his box possibly from an offside wasn’t it? |
At the time, a defensive free kick had to leave the area for the ball to be in play, so it wouldn't have made any difference if it was a fk or gk. | | | |
| Refereeing query on 19:27 - Jan 15 with 2677 views | ozranger |
| Refereeing query on 16:18 - Jan 15 by PinnerPaul |
He did it on a GK.
At the time ball was not in play until it left the PA, so a retake was correct. NOW the ball is in play from a GK when its kicked, so if he did it now, it would be a FK to us.
Penalty - always been a FK to oppo if attacker touches the ball twice, usually when it rebounds of the post/bar.
THAT was an easy one Clive! |
I always wondered if the rule change for the GK was because players were stupid enough not to know the laws and that if a ball was passed short to a defender who was just outside the box and that player was about to be closed down, then he could jump into the area and intercept the pass thus forcing a retake of the GK? |  | | |
| Refereeing query on 19:29 - Jan 15 with 2674 views | CamberleyR |
| Refereeing query on 16:20 - Jan 15 by PinnerPaul |
Didn't Thierry Henry try to do that once and mucked it up? |
Think it was Robert Pires but he was trying to lay it off to Henry. [Post edited 15 Jan 2023 19:31]
|  |
| |
| Refereeing query on 20:40 - Jan 15 with 2491 views | dsw2509 |
Looked up the rules of the game. For both a free kick and a penalty, if the player taking it touches the ball a second time before any other player does, it is an indirect free kick to the opposition. | | | |
| Refereeing query on 21:55 - Jan 15 with 2385 views | tonyQPR |
More too the point if wasn’t a penalty to start with, the Fulham player stamped on trippiers foot but fell over anyway which var confirmed but gave it anyway. Surely that’s the major issue in all off this ?… | | | |
| Refereeing query on 07:19 - Jan 16 with 2179 views | johnhoop |
| Refereeing query on 21:55 - Jan 15 by tonyQPR |
More too the point if wasn’t a penalty to start with, the Fulham player stamped on trippiers foot but fell over anyway which var confirmed but gave it anyway. Surely that’s the major issue in all off this ?… |
Yeah but it kind of balanced out because I thought big Dan Burn’s pull-back on their attacker was definitely a penalty (with apologies to Konk). [Post edited 16 Jan 2023 7:19]
| | | |
| Refereeing query on 07:22 - Jan 16 with 2164 views | SydneyRs |
Was it the "DOF's" fault? | | | |
| Refereeing query on 07:57 - Jan 16 with 2114 views | HAYESBOY |
| Refereeing query on 17:15 - Jan 15 by Northernr |
I didn’t think the Joe Hart one was a gk, it was a free kick in his box possibly from an offside wasn’t it? |
From memory I thought it was a goal kick. |  |
| Smells like a trout farm in here |
| |
| Refereeing query on 09:05 - Jan 16 with 2036 views | Antti_Heinola |
My memory is Charlie didn't touch it until it had left the area, so some of the above doesn't make sense?
I remember being furious at the time, but I also remember it being a weird rule where for a goal kick if it's touched twice they get to take it again for some reason. Was a real anomaly. |  |
| |
| Refereeing query on 09:15 - Jan 16 with 2013 views | francisbowles |
| Refereeing query on 09:05 - Jan 16 by Antti_Heinola |
My memory is Charlie didn't touch it until it had left the area, so some of the above doesn't make sense?
I remember being furious at the time, but I also remember it being a weird rule where for a goal kick if it's touched twice they get to take it again for some reason. Was a real anomaly. |
The point is that the keeper, Hart, had touched it twice before it left the area. So under the old rule it was a retake. | | | |
| Refereeing query on 09:40 - Jan 16 with 1952 views | stowmarketrange |
| Refereeing query on 21:55 - Jan 15 by tonyQPR |
More too the point if wasn’t a penalty to start with, the Fulham player stamped on trippiers foot but fell over anyway which var confirmed but gave it anyway. Surely that’s the major issue in all off this ?… |
According to motd2 he didn’t wait to see that video that showed him standing on Trippier’s foot.How can a ref make a decision without seeing all the evidence?
And how the var official,Mike Dean,not see that the 1st pull back by Burn wasn’t a penalty?
Incompetence or arrogance? |  | | |
| Refereeing query on 10:10 - Jan 16 with 1906 views | terryb |
| Refereeing query on 09:40 - Jan 16 by stowmarketrange |
According to motd2 he didn’t wait to see that video that showed him standing on Trippier’s foot.How can a ref make a decision without seeing all the evidence?
And how the var official,Mike Dean,not see that the 1st pull back by Burn wasn’t a penalty?
Incompetence or arrogance? |
"Incompetence or arrogance?"
The answer Stowmarket is that it was Mike Dean, so both of those apply! | | | |
| Refereeing query on 10:11 - Jan 16 with 1902 views | PinnerPaul |
| Refereeing query on 17:15 - Jan 15 by Northernr |
I didn’t think the Joe Hart one was a gk, it was a free kick in his box possibly from an offside wasn’t it? |
Same difference, free kicks in the penalty area also had to leave the penalty area to be in play (Loads of people used to argue that but it WAS true)
Now both FKs in the penalty area and GKs are in play once kicked, so in either scenario it would have been a retake under old law, under current law its a fk to oppo. | | | |
| Refereeing query on 10:13 - Jan 16 with 1882 views | PinnerPaul |
| Refereeing query on 19:27 - Jan 15 by ozranger |
I always wondered if the rule change for the GK was because players were stupid enough not to know the laws and that if a ball was passed short to a defender who was just outside the box and that player was about to be closed down, then he could jump into the area and intercept the pass thus forcing a retake of the GK? |
Partly that I think, partly to speed up the game (failed) and partly as an acknowledgement that the current vogue is to play like a team that can make 22 passes and score from the GK - the reality of course is that 99.9% (made up stat alert) have no chance of achieving that! | | | |
| Refereeing query on 10:14 - Jan 16 with 1880 views | PinnerPaul |
| Refereeing query on 19:29 - Jan 15 by CamberleyR |
Think it was Robert Pires but he was trying to lay it off to Henry. [Post edited 15 Jan 2023 19:31]
|
Cheers | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
