The Ref Stop

Celtic v Greenock Morton

The Ref Stop
& is the penalty actually taken from the penalty mark, law states it can't be over hanging but on the mark?!?
 
DJIC said:
& is the penalty actually taken from the penalty mark, law states it can't be over hanging but on the mark?!?
Click to expand...
Well, Law 14 says the second part, but not the first. That’s an interpretation of what “on” means. While I think that is what IFAB means, I don’t believe it is said anywhere in the Laws or official guidance. The same is true for TIs—if a player is taking a TI with heels on the line and the rest of the foot on the field , is it a violation if the heels are lifted before the ball is thrown?
 
Maybe it’s the angle shown but I don’t know what I’m looking for. It’s almost as though the camera has lagged.

Guess that answers the C&O point!
 
Suppose if you go on technicalities his arms do make his body bigger however, it shouldn’t have taken as long as it did. Would have liked to have seen Clancy stick with his decision.

Personally don’t want to see these as penalties
 
IFABs guidance is clear on this, as per their guidance document (with videos) it shows two clips similar to this which give 'no expectation' as the reason it is not a penalty. And both of these clips are deliberate clearance by the defenders!
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2023-01-22 at 10.59.56.png
    Screenshot 2023-01-22 at 10.59.56.png
    422.7 KB · Views: 4
  • Screenshot 2023-01-22 at 10.59.16.png
    Screenshot 2023-01-22 at 10.59.16.png
    1.8 MB · Views: 4
socal lurker said:
Well, Law 14 says the second part, but not the first. That’s an interpretation of what “on” means. While I think that is what IFAB means, I don’t believe it is said anywhere in the Laws or official guidance. The same is true for TIs—if a player is taking a TI with heels on the line and the rest of the foot on the field , is it a violation if the heels are lifted before the ball is thrown?
Click to expand...
The answer re the throw is that part of each foot must be ON the touchline or behind it, so if heels are not on the line it's a foul throw IMHO.
 
DJIC said:
& is the penalty actually taken from the penalty mark, law states it can't be over hanging but on the mark?!?
Click to expand...
The law makes no mention of whether it can be overhanging (or not). One might ask, if a ball overhanging the line is still on the pitch, then is a ball overhanging the penalty mark, not still on the mark?

There is though, a question of, "what football expects." Here we have something not explicitly covered in the law and I would say a ball that has only a tiny sliver of its circumference overhanging the mark (especially if that puts it noticeably closer to the goal than if it were centrally placed) is not what is expected.
 
Peter Grove said:
The law makes no mention of whether it can be overhanging (or not). One might ask, if a ball overhanging the line is still on the pitch, then is a ball overhanging the penalty mark, not still on the mark?

There is though, a question of, "what football expects." Here we have something not explicitly covered in the law and I would say a ball that has only a tiny sliver of its circumference overhanging the mark (especially if that puts it noticeably closer to the goal than if it were centrally placed) is not what is expected.
Click to expand...
I have always interpreted the other way.
The laws say about pitch markings that they belong to the boundaries they make up.

I think your interpretation makes more sense though looking at it again...

"• The penalty mark is measured from the centre of the mark to the back edge
of the goal line."

I think this means that on the spot does mean on the spot...

Which at the levels we referee at is not always practicable as the spots are usually a cavernous ditch that you'd struggle to get the ball out with sand wedge never mind by kicking it 🤣
 
Peter Grove said:
The law makes no mention of whether it can be overhanging (or not). One might ask, if a ball overhanging the line is still on the pitch, then is a ball overhanging the penalty mark, not still on the mark?

There is though, a question of, "what football expects." Here we have something not explicitly covered in the law and I would say a ball that has only a tiny sliver of its circumference overhanging the mark (especially if that puts it noticeably closer to the goal than if it were centrally placed) is not what is expected.
Click to expand...
Corners can be taken as long as any part of the ball is overhanging the arch. Id say the same for penalties
 
Degnann said:
Corners can be taken as long as any part of the ball is overhanging the arch. Id say the same for penalties
Click to expand...
I'd have agreed with you until now...

"These lines belong to the
areas of which they are boundaries."

The penalty mark is not a boundary.

The fact that the 12 yards is marked to the centre of the penalty mark suggests that on the spot, means on on the spot.
 
How big is the mark?

I guess we have two principals here - the penalty mark is actually a defined very small spot, typically at the very centre of the visible mark. And the ball is still essentially considered to be on the space it overhangs, almost as if it were a cylinder.

So the overall conclusion is that some part of the ball should overhang the very centre of the visible mark, but if it only overhangs the outside edge, it's not in the correct place?
 
when a penalty mark is a hole in the ground, I have always allowed the kicker the option to overhang the penalty mark behind it, so there can not be considered any gain to the kicker.
 
JamesL said:
I'd have agreed with you until now...

"These lines belong to the
areas of which they are boundaries."

The penalty mark is not a boundary.

The fact that the 12 yards is marked to the centre of the penalty mark suggests that on the spot, means on on the spot.
Click to expand...
You’ve got me there
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top