A&H

Ball Out of Play

Status
Not open for further replies.
one said:
I am not sure if your statement is correct, for tennis or for football. In below image, to the right is in field, to the left is out of field. Viewing from above there is no daylight between ball and line. In football it is in play, in tennis it is out of play.

View attachment 7378
Click to expand...
I've just read about 'Hawkeye'. You may be correct in that tennis analogy. Just read about it. I think Hawkeye measures the impact point of the ball. But can anyone say that in football they have ever assumed that the 'impact point' of the ball constitutes a 'whole' as in 'wholly' crossing a line?
 
A&H International
I've just asked someone who's done a 'tennis', and he says the reason they don't use Hawkeye on clay is because movement of the clay to any side of the impact mark can distort a 'visible' impact point mark. Thanks for that one, anyway :)
 
Pedro said:
But being clinical, daylight, or 'a gap' is exactly what you'd see between ball and line if you were to view it from a position directly above the ball.
Ok, watch the next game of football closely. Watch how many times a throw-in is awarded at times we can CLEARLY see there is absolutely zero gap between ball and line - as in the 'overhang' you describe in the 'corner' analogy. That's all. You usually get a couple of examples from a good camera angle. I work in a TV camera department btw. :)
Click to expand...
I watch football games for a weekend job! I know how it works. Just because there is no obvious gap doesn't mean the ball isn't out. At this point you are actually questioning the integrity of officials which is rude, unnecessary, and, to a degree, insulting. I get why some people would argue that but the fact that you claim it has never happened in 40 years is quite simply ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kes
I'll get back to the OP rather than discussing tennis.

Some laws of the game are flexed a bit by referees but we are consistent on them and we generally go with what football expects. These are well known and we refer to them as trifling. Keeper 6 second or non-impactful encroachment are the most common ones.

However there are laws that every referee applies to the dot and takes pride in applying it correctly. Applying when ball is in or out out of play is one of them. As a non-referee coming to a referee forum and saying all referees (except for one) deliberately misapplies this law is grossly untrue and is going to offend a lot of referees.
 
I agree with what @one has said above. There are some subjective rules that have wiggle room in terms of how strictly they are applied, this is not one of them. It is factual and applied strictly by every qualified official there is.
 
I put wrong answer. Problem with forum posts stacking up. Ignore last post.
Anyway, no offence intended. Just watch the next game and see if you see any examples. They will be there
 
I see close examples in every game I watch and officiate. Of course mistakes will be made, but we won't deliberately apply the law/rule incorrectly.
 
...however, I strongly suspect that for this particular rule "...There are some subjective rules that have wiggle room in terms of how strictly they are applied..." and it's being wrongly applied more often than it should be.
 
Pedro said:
...however, I strongly suspect that for this particular rule "...There are some subjective rules that have wiggle room in terms of how strictly they are applied..." and it's being wrongly applied more often than it should be.
Click to expand...
If you mean it is being deliberately ignored, you would be so wrong I would class it as simply lying. If you mean by accident, yes it will happen but not often. Also, you can't limit the amount of mistakes someone is allowed to make, that would be simply impossible and would leave us with close to 0 officials. We all make mistakes.
 
Pedro said:
See the tennis ball analogy attached. Imagine if the ball is further over to the left but still has no daylight (as viewed from a position directly above), between right edge of the ball and left edge of the line, in tennis, the ball is still in play, but in football, hardly EVER.
Click to expand...
There have been some very high profile decisions where this has been judged as in play correctly


Thinking Germany game (V Japan?). And also couple inn Premier League, Newcastle V Arsenal and there may have been 1 involving a Manchester club. So that dispels the myth.
Pedro said:
I'm talking touchline/throw-in only. We've all seen the way footballers have recently discovered where they can get away with placing the ball for a corner...
Click to expand...
I'm assuming you mean overhanging outside the arc. That's not a recent discovery and is perfectly permissible in law.
The line belongs to the area of which it is a boundary and any part of the ball touching the line is consider to be in..
Wait til it happens on the penalty area boundary 🤔 that'll blow your mind 😁
 
Gabriel said:
If you mean it is being deliberately ignored, you would be so wrong I would class it as simply lying. If you mean by accident, yes it will happen but not often. Also, you can't limit the amount of mistakes someone is allowed to make, that would be simply impossible and would leave us with close to 0 officials. We all make mistakes.
Click to expand...
Gabriel, I realised before I joined up this morning that this might cause a bit of a heated discussion. But that's exactly why I did it because it's infuriated me for a long time. It is very apparent that in your response you are proud and highly professional and my intention is not to offend anyone - and although I do appreciate how sensitive this subject could get, I am very appreciative of your replies. What would be good perhaps - just like the tennis rule - is for someone to maybe show any evidence where I am wrong, and that this doesn't happen in football, because I feel I could supply many examples of where it does. And that's why I have provoked a discussion on the subject. I absolutely respect your discipline and professionalism.
 
Pedro said:
Gabriel, I realised before I joined up this morning that this might cause a bit of a heated discussion. But that's exactly why I did it because it's infuriated me for a long time. It is very apparent that in your response you are proud and highly professional and my intention is not to offend anyone - and although I do appreciate how sensitive this subject could get, I am very appreciative of your replies. What would be good perhaps - just like the tennis rule - is for someone to maybe show any evidence where I am wrong, and that this doesn't happen in football, because I feel I could supply many examples of where it does. And that's why I have provoked a discussion on the subject. I absolutely respect your discipline and professionalism.
Click to expand...
At this point I'm a bit confused as to what you mean. When you started the thread, you implied the law was incorrectly implied and the throw-ins were awarded before the ball went out. Now I'm not quite sure if that's what you meant. Could you just clarify that so that I don't accidentally take this away from the OP?
 
Just going to throw a warning out now, nice and early for all to take note of, to keep this debate civil and on topic, please.
 
I'm going to sign off now - no doubt to great applause - but would like to suggest that a reason I feel this rule isn't clinically applied more often is due to the fact that if a decision was ever given that a ball is still in play when it was actually out, looks far worse of a decision on the eye than the other way round, due to how far out the ball actually is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top