A&H

NL Final - Chesterfield Vs Notts County

Mooseybaby

Mooseybaby

Retired big bad baldy in all black!
Just turned over from SSSS updates to the play off final and big early call for the referee.

Chesterfield attacker beats the offside trap, attempts to lob the ball over County's keeper, who gets a good hand on the ball, but his follow through wipes out the Chesterfield attacker, referee points to the penalty spot.

Both sides unhappy at the decision - County protest the award of the penalty and Chesterfield's bench wanted further punishment for County's keeper.
 
The Referee Store
Mooseybaby said:
Just turned over from SSSS updates to the play off final and big early call for the referee.

Chesterfield attacker beats the offside trap, attempts to lob the ball over County's keeper, who gets a good hand on the ball, but his follow through wipes out the Chesterfield attacker, penalty points to the spot.

Both sides unhappy at the decision - County protest the award of the penalty and Chesterfield's bench wanted further punishment for County's keeper.
Click to expand...
Personally never seen them given. Keeper has come and blocked the shot, and with the follow through made contact with the player, which is no different to, say, a left back doing the same.
Attacker didn't want even call for it (see the other recent post about calling for it)... Only ones to call were the fans...
Was the ref feeling a bit of pressure from a large crowd?
 
Missed the start, turned over when Sky mentioned the IDFK, they said it was for a backpass :confused:
 
Not convinced the whole ball had crossed the line and AR appeared several yards behind play to know for certain when the flag went up.
 
Chesterfield's Dobra giving us a prime example of why retrospective action needs to be taken against players who blatantly cheat/play act to deceive referees. :mad:
 
RustyRef said:
That was my thought, if he doesn't touch it again the attacker scores.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I thought. Very odd.

Edit: from Law 12:

"... if the offence is playing the ball a second time (with or without the hand/arm) after a restart before it touches another player, the goalkeeper must be sanctioned if the offence stops a promising attack or denies an opponent or the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity."
 
Last edited:
Kent Ref said:
At least 8 in the area.

Different laws for them!
Click to expand...
a) hasn't the ball already been kicked by then? It most certainly isn't at the point of the kick unless he has a telescopic leg that immediately retracts after kicking the ball.

b) referees at senior levels, and not just in England, are told to only penalise if the person(s) encroaching affects the outcome. Personally I'd like to see this written into law to avoid any confusion.

c) the law is, in my humble opinion, a bit of an ass. If players from both teams encroach it would surely be better if the outcome of the kick is allowed to stand, not much different to if two players are holding each other in a physical battle you let it go.
 
I was spamming spacebar hard. So I caught it one double tap before he kicks the ball and one after.

So I reckon this is less than a 200th of a second after he strikes the ball.
 
RustyRef said:
a) hasn't the ball already been kicked by then? It most certainly isn't at the point of the kick unless he has a telescopic leg that immediately retracts after kicking the ball.

b) referees at senior levels, and not just in England, are told to only penalise if the person(s) encroaching affects the outcome. Personally I'd like to see this written into law to avoid any confusion.

c) the law is, in my humble opinion, a bit of an ass. If players from both teams encroach it would surely be better if the outcome of the kick is allowed to stand, not much different to if two players are holding each other in a physical battle you let it go.
Click to expand...
But the law currently stands to say this is a retake.

Why not write to IFAB, explain who you are, and get the law amended?

You regularly quote the LOTG saying they must be observed. But not on this.

Confused.
 
Kent Ref said:
But the law currently stands to say this is a retake.

Why not write to IFAB, explain who you are, and get the law amended?

You regularly quote the LOTG saying they must be observed. But not on this.

Confused.
Click to expand...
How do you know I haven't?

We've seen this on the world's biggest stage, the World Cup, where encroachment is only penalised where it has a material outcome, so it really shouldn't come as any surprise.
 
RustyRef said:
How do you know I haven't?

We've seen this on the world's biggest stage, the World Cup, where encroachment is only penalised where it has a material outcome, so it really shouldn't come as any surprise.
Click to expand...
Did you write and what was their reply?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top