Rochdale Vs Scunthorpe
- Thread starter bester
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
2 absolute stinkers in the national league in a couple of weeks sadly. Could make a case for a caution and a retake if you deem that to be feinting at the end of the run up (as per the question in our January LOTG test) but if he doesn’t kick the ball, it can’t be anything other than a penalty kick restart.
Aware these sorts of brain farts can happen to anyone at any time so I’m not criticising the individual, but it’s not a great look for the refs in general that national list refs have got penalty kick law wrong twice in as many weeks
Aware these sorts of brain farts can happen to anyone at any time so I’m not criticising the individual, but it’s not a great look for the refs in general that national list refs have got penalty kick law wrong twice in as many weeks
Last edited:
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Hmm. Feinting at the ball never results in a retake. It is (as the R gave here) an IFK to the opposing team regardless of result. The offense is the feint ( or kicking the ball after a feint) so I would agree with the R that it doesn’t matter if he kicked it—the offense already occurred. (Yes, I’m ducking the question of whether he really “feint[ed] to kick the ball.”)
one
RefChat Addict
Did the referee blow the whistle to start the process? I did not hear it.
Was he cautioned?
For me, he withdrew from the kick twards the end of the run up (not even in the last step). This is not a case of feigns to kick the ball. At the very least there is plenty of doubt there to give him the benefit of.
Was he cautioned?
For me, he withdrew from the kick twards the end of the run up (not even in the last step). This is not a case of feigns to kick the ball. At the very least there is plenty of doubt there to give him the benefit of.
one
RefChat Addict
Without wanting to hijack the thread, a related question.
You set up for a penalty kick, before you signal for the kick to be taken, the taker takes a short run up, feigns to kick after completing run up, then kicks the ball and misses (or scores as an alternate scenario). What do you do?
You set up for a penalty kick, before you signal for the kick to be taken, the taker takes a short run up, feigns to kick after completing run up, then kicks the ball and misses (or scores as an alternate scenario). What do you do?
Last edited:
See below from IFAB Q and A.
It’s got to be a retake because the ball was never in play and when an offence occurs without the ball in play it can’t change how play is restarted….
As I said, this was part of our January LOTG test.
one
RefChat Addict
. Law 14
Yeah obviously this in combination with law 8 is why it’s the case. But I thought easier to show that exact scenario in Q and A
Edit: actually probably don’t even need law 8, that covers it
Even more baffling. An experienced referee too! I was talking about this this morning to a colleague and I did say it's odd that none of the 4 on the game could get it right but equally I acknowledged that it's a hell of a ballsy move to tell a way more experienced referee he's wrong in law. Would like to hear the comms, but sadly I'm not privvy!
ladbroke8745
Censorship
Refereeing aside.
I think this could be viewed as cheating by the player.
Without confirmation of another whistle or anything else those are suggesting was wrong, the player was hoping the keeper would make a move and slot the ball easily home to score a goal. The keeper didn't move. The attacker was confused and decided, nah I'll take that again.
Although not in law, id support a change where once whistle is blown, and taker starts his run no retake can happen if the fault lies entirely with the taker because he "changed his mind".
I get the penalty should be a punishment for whatever reason against the defending team, but the attacking team shouldn't just dictate when/how they take it.
I think this could be viewed as cheating by the player.
Without confirmation of another whistle or anything else those are suggesting was wrong, the player was hoping the keeper would make a move and slot the ball easily home to score a goal. The keeper didn't move. The attacker was confused and decided, nah I'll take that again.
Although not in law, id support a change where once whistle is blown, and taker starts his run no retake can happen if the fault lies entirely with the taker because he "changed his mind".
I get the penalty should be a punishment for whatever reason against the defending team, but the attacking team shouldn't just dictate when/how they take it.
Because they ain't much/any better than the refs from a few leagues below (as is a strong notion of mine)
I have some sympathy with the ref here. When we do a LOTG test, we have time to consider the answer and we don't have a mob of 10,000 baying for an immediate answer. That's why we need to know the LOTG inside out. Recollection needs to be there in an instant and on demand
The other reason for some sympathy, is the confusion over whether this may have been feinting to kick. In the moment, I could understand that determination being reached
There is no excuse whatsoever for the non-caution however. That is mandatory regardless of the interpretation
Not the first time Mr D has been in the headlines
one
RefChat Addict
Not quite sure on this. Care to elaborat why it is mandatory regardless?
I can see that it has to be a caution if a free kick is (incorrectly) given but from my understanding a retake without caution is a good option.
” picked the ball up then rolled it towards the edge of the penalty area to take the free kick!