The Ref Stop

Union Berlin v Bochum

DJIC

Well-Known Member
Not easy for the referee, 2nd minute of 5 minutes of added time, away GK hit by object thrown by crowd & cannot continue.

Referee suspends match for 30 minutes & resumes match with no subs left, outfield player goes in goal. Both sets of players agree to see out time with neither team attempting to score, match ends 1:1.

Would abandonment be a better option?

 
The Ref Stop
Is it grounds for abandoning? Not sure although definitely a criminal offence. The only remotely analogous example I can recall is an 1990s cup tie between Peterborough and Kingstonian. Similar issue affecting goalkeeper, who goes off and Posh end up winning 9-0. The FA then ordered the tie replayed behind closed doors. Peterborough won that 1-0
 
A match can be abandoned for outside interference so it would have been fine to in law.

However I think the away team's argument for wanting the match abandoned is not the right one. It is no one else's fault that they had used all their subs (assuming these were not all injury-related).

I am assuming the match was allowed to continue mainly because the individual responsible had been apprehended.
 
Surely the teams are going to get in trouble for “fixing” those last 5 mins. I would have thought abandoning on safety grounds would be easiest overall.
 
Perfectly reasonable to abandon in the interests of player safety given the nuance of circumstances involved in this particular incident
 
However I think the away team's argument for wanting the match abandoned is not the right one. It is no one else's fault that they had used all their subs (assuming these were not all injury-related).
A team shouldn’t have to save a sub in case a player is injured by an outside assault. That’s ridiculous. IMO the game should have been abandoned. (I imagine the teams agreed to accept the tie and pretend to p,ay the rest of the game because they both preferred a tie to a replay.)
 
A team shouldn’t have to save a sub in case a player is injured by an outside assault. That’s ridiculous. IMO the game should have been abandoned. (I imagine the teams agreed to accept the tie and pretend to p,ay the rest of the game because they both preferred a tie to a replay.)
I just don't think a lack of subs is sufficient reason to abandon (on its own i.e. if there is no particular ongoing concern for player safety). Where do you draw the line, e.g. what if they do have a sub available but not a goalkeeper, do you still abandon then?

Another voluntary / sporting solution could have been for the home team to withdraw their own goalkeeper, put an outfield player in goal, and play the remainder of the match as 10v10.
 
I just don't think a lack of subs is sufficient reason to abandon (on its own i.e. if there is no particular ongoing concern for player safety). Where do you draw the line, e.g. what if they do have a sub available but not a goalkeeper, do you still abandon then?

Another voluntary / sporting solution could have been for the home team to withdraw their own goalkeeper, put an outfield player in goal, and play the remainder of the match as
 
Another consideration, is the betting implications when neither team tried to score again or win for the final minutes?
 
Another consideration, is the betting implications when neither team tried to score again or win for the final minutes?
No different to other occasions where teams have voluntarily allowed their opposition to score a goal unopposed for sporting reasons. As long as there is no suspicious related betting activity then I don't think that's any cause for concern. If you choose to gamble on sports you accept that situations like this are a possibility
 
Back
Top