Brentford v Manchester City

one said:

And what happens to the other 50%? (I think one of us has how this rule should be described in a twist)

Click to expand...

The other 50% would be the furthest side away, but the theory is that that would still be quicker than 100% being taken from the furthest side away as is currently often the case when the game is being slowed down

Since allowing defenders to play the ball in the PA at a GK, a lot of kicks are taken in the middle of the GA with defenders either side!

RefereeX said:

The other 50% would be the furthest side away, but the theory is that that would still be quicker than 100% being taken from the furthest side away as is currently often the case when the game is being slowed down

Click to expand...

What is the rule? How would the rule enforce only 50% goal kicks to be taken from the near side but allow the other 50% from the furthest side?

Isn't the rule to enforce 100% of goal kicks to be taken from the side they went out (near side)?

bloovee said:

Since allowing defenders to play the ball in the PA at a GK, a lot of kicks are taken in the middle of the GA with defenders either side!

Click to expand...

Put the ball in the middle, defenders drop back either side, goalkeeper decides the short pass isn't on, defenders run up to half-was line, goalkeeper picks the ball up and moves it to the side then punts it long.

bloovee said:

Since allowing defenders to play the ball in the PA at a GK, a lot of kicks are taken in the middle of the GA with defenders either side!

Click to expand...

Not when teams are trying to slow the game down they aren't!

one said:

What is the rule? How would the rule enforce only 50% goal kicks to be taken from the near side but allow the other 50% from the furthest side?

Isn't the rule to enforce 100% of goal kicks to be taken from the side they went out (near side)?

Click to expand...

Yeah I'm thinking of it as a retrieving the ball at a random side of the goal rather than the side it went out... in reality it would be higher than 50% (but not 100% because, for example, ball out of play for GK just before player puts cross in etc)

bloovee said:

So you'd unfairly apply the laws depending
on the score?

if you hadn't had a touch in the opponent's penalty area all game, you'd reason that taking an age to set up for a long throw into the PA is probably worth the time.

O'Reilly's booking came after a delay because the Brentford manager kicked the ball onto the pitch to give his defenders time to mark opponents - which is why O'Reilly was looking for a teammate to throw it to!

(Anyone know the definitive PL advice on towels around the pitch? And - last week - did the player who nicked the opposition GK's towel to dry the ball not get a YC for USB?)

Click to expand...

Yes, because the decision as to whether a restart is taken too slowly is down to the referee, it has to be as there is no set time in the laws.

No team is going to delay the restart if they are 1-0 down with 5 minutes to go, whereas reverse the score and they are very likely to try to delay it. Any referee cautioning a player for delaying the restart when they are 1-0 down with minutes left is going to get pilloried for having no common sense, and with some justification.

socal lurker said:

Why go back with GKs? What would that gain other than delays when the player taking the kick is told he’s on the wrong side?

Click to expand...

That would be a drop in the ocean compared to what I am seeing. IMO there wasn’t really a problem at the time they changed the law, but there certainly is now as one of the main if not the main delaying tactics.

Have people also not taken notice that O'Reilly was also stealing 10 yards plus whilst also taking his time and was allowed to do so yet the assistants on every Brentford throw stood and pointed to where exactly it should be taken before getting back in line.
It really seemed like Pep was in their ear wanting to take away a decent threat whilst forgetting his own team cheat throughout too (there was a City player who went down as if he'd been shot with the shouting too in agony, no free kick given, and as soon as he realised it wasn't given he was up in a flash and chasing the ball down. If he was that hurt he wouldn't be running around that quickly. And dont get me on the cynical fouls on the halfway line to stop promising attacks that weren't carded).

City, like every other team, are no angels and try to bend rules to suit.

RustyRef said:

Yes, because the decision as to whether a restart is taken too slowly is down to the referee, it has to be as there is no set time in the laws.

No team is going to delay the restart if they are 1-0 down with 5 minutes to go, whereas reverse the score and they are very likely to try to delay it. Any referee cautioning a player for delaying the restart when they are 1-0 down with minutes left is going to get pilloried for having no common sense, and with some justification.

Click to expand...

The main reason why the added time thing is being moaned about in Liverpool games.
Of course there will be longer added times when Liverpool are losing, or not winning, as their opponents slow the game down, delaying restarts etc. It gets added on.
Yet when they are winning, the opponents speed everything up otherwise they're wasting their own time. By speeding up, less time is wasted thus less time added on.