A&H

Circumvention? Atletico Madrid V United

The Referee Store
a player heading a ball in play back to the keeper first time cannot be any kind of circumvention imo.

if he'd flicked it up to himself or played it with his feet first then yes, but not like this
 
I was thinking back to the Veratti one but he did play that one with feet first. It's a very unusual technique though... But agree with you that it's not. 👍
 
  • Like
Reactions: es1
JamesL said:
03:55 on the video... Thoughts on deliberate trick to circumvent the law?

Atletico 1-1 Man Utd | Champions League Highlights | Point rescued 👊 Anthony Elanga helps Man Utd snatch a late draw against Atletico 🤠The Red Devils go back to Old Trafford with everything to play for! | By TNT Sports

fb.watch fb.watch
Click to expand...
I thought it whilst watching the game tbf. I thought it was circumvention as well, but I guess the more you think about it, it’s not really. Can certainly see the case for it though
 
I'm not seeing any video, just a prompt to log into Facebook. If I do so, it takes me to a list of random videos having nothing to do with football.
 
I'm not sure I'd call it in real time. However, on reflection, I do think this is a trick. Heading the ball in this situation is entirely unusual and surprising and has been done by the defender for one reason only .. to allow the GK to use his hands.
 
Peter Grove said:
I'm not seeing any video, just a prompt to log into Facebook. If I do so, it takes me to a list of random videos having nothing to do with football.
Click to expand...
Ever heard of phishing? 😉
@JamesL now has your login details to Facebook.🤣

What minute of the game was the OP?
 
Russell Jones said:
I'm not sure I'd call it in real time. However, on reflection, I do think this is a trick. Heading the ball in this situation is entirely unusual and surprising and has been done by the defender for one reason only .. to allow the GK to use his hands.
Click to expand...

surely a player can play the ball however he chooses while the ball is in open play?
 
es1 said:
surely a player can play the ball however he chooses while the ball is in open play?
Click to expand...
Mostly yes. However there are still numerous situations in law where this isn't the case. Same player playing the ball a second time at most restarts, GK handling the ball after a deliberate kick from a team mate, attacker in penalty area playing the ball from a goal kick (in most cases) etc. And most pertinently, where a defender in open play deliberately uses a trick to circumvent the 'back pass' law. All we are debating is whether this highly unusual play by the defender was done as a normal part of open play or with the express intention of circumventing the 'back pass' law
 
Russell Jones said:
Mostly yes. However there are still numerous situations in law where this isn't the case. Same player playing the ball a second time at most restarts, GK handling the ball after a deliberate kick from a team mate, attacker in penalty area playing the ball from a goal kick (in most cases) etc. And most pertinently, where a defender in open play deliberately uses a trick to circumvent the 'back pass' law. All we are debating is whether this highly unusual play by the defender was done as a normal part of open play or with the express intention of circumventing the 'back pass' law
Click to expand...

well that's granted, but in this situation, where the player has not played the ball previously, the player is entitled to play the ball however he wishes
 
I think the fact its on the 4th minute of 4 added here may have saved him here if it were to be given at all
 
es1 said:
well that's granted, but in this situation, where the player has not played the ball previously, the player is entitled to play the ball however he wishes
Click to expand...
@es1 , I totally get your perspective. However all that the law states is:

  • initiates a deliberate trick for the ball to be passed (including from a free kick or goal kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands; the goalkeeper is penalised if responsible for initiating the deliberate trick
So as referees, we simply need to decide whether this play is a deliberate trick. In my opinion it is (because there was no other reason to head it other than to ensure the keeper could use his hands) however it's certainly not the most blatant of examples and I can understand it not being called
 
The GK can normally play the ball with his hands - except for in situations where he can't. It's entirely consistent with law for there to be specific exceptions to the "normal" rules of play, I don't see why you're so morally opposed to this one?
 
Russell Jones said:
@es1 , I totally get your perspective. However all that the law states is:

  • initiates a deliberate trick for the ball to be passed (including from a free kick or goal kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands; the goalkeeper is penalised if responsible for initiating the deliberate trick
So as referees, we simply need to decide whether this play is a deliberate trick. In my opinion it is (because there was no other reason to head it other than to ensure the keeper could use his hands) however it's certainly not the most blatant of examples and I can understand it not being called
Click to expand...

i just dont see heading the ball in open play as any sort of trick
 
Now that I have seen it I can state my opinion. I wouldn't caution this. This is one of those that if you applied the strict wording of the law it means a caution. But there are many laws we don't apply the strict wording because we know the law makers have never been good at wording what they mean.

We need to look the context and the reason behind a law. We all know the reason behind the 'backpass' law. The law that this is meant to be circumventing was not meant to stop this from happening. So why punish when it happens.
 
Nothing doing here for me. Had the defender already taken a touch and then done it, 100% a caution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top