The Ref Stop

Throw in (one handed)

The Ref Stop
They all thought the Pistorius Blades gave him a massive advantage but they didn’t apparently! It went all scientific for him to compete equally!
 
OK, been thinking about this a bit more and I think perhaps I see a way to 'square the circle.' Even though the player is taking the throw with only one hand and even if we're waiving the requirement to use both hands due to extenuating circumstances (the player can't use both hands if they only have one) I still think the other parts of the law should apply. If the player is doing a full-on goalkeeper throw then the ball would not be coming "from behind and over the head" - it would be coming past the side of the head. I'm a former goalkeeper so I know that throwing mechanism well. I'm pretty sure that a throw with one hand using the throwing motion specified in law 15 will not be traveling 25 yards, so by requiring the throwing motion part of the law to be followed, the 'unfair advantage' scenario would no longer be in effect.
 
Peter Grove said:
OK, been thinking about this a bit more and I think perhaps I see a way to 'square the circle.' Even though the player is taking the throw with only one hand and even if we're waiving the requirement to use both hands due to extenuating circumstances (the player can't use both hands if they only have one) I still think the other parts of the law should apply. If the player is doing a full-on goalkeeper throw then the ball would not be coming "from behind and over the head" - it would be coming past the side of the head. I'm a former goalkeeper so I know that throwing mechanism well. I'm pretty sure that a throw with one hand using the throwing motion specified in law 15 will not be traveling 25 yards, so by requiring the throwing motion part of the law to be followed, the 'unfair advantage' scenario would no longer be in effect.
Click to expand...
I am pretty sure my posts #44, #48, #54, #58 and #67 say almost exactly the same thing. Its a long thread though :) , I even proved the theory for myself in post #67
 
one said:
I am pretty sure my posts #44, #48, #54, #58 and #67 say almost exactly the same thing. Its a long thread though :) , I even proved the theory for myself in post #67
Click to expand...
Yeah, sorry - skipped through the thread pretty quickly and you're right, you pretty much covered it already.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
I agree with you Ciley. If I was the referee I would allow the throw but maybe explain to the coaches in the pre-game that he is not allowed to chuck the ball 25 yards towards the goal. It is unfair and should be dealt with. And yeah this could get quite messy but its a fine line. How we deal with it is another matter in itself. That is how I would go about it. Sure its not allowed in the LOTG but we as referees need to also use our best judgment in what we feel is safe and fair.
 
IslandReferee said:
I agree with you Ciley. If I was the referee I would allow the throw but maybe explain to the coaches in the pre-game that he is not allowed to chuck the ball 25 yards towards the goal. It is unfair and should be dealt with. And yeah this could get quite messy but its a fine line. How we deal with it is another matter in itself. That is how I would go about it. Sure its not allowed in the LOTG but we as referees need to also use our best judgment in what we feel is safe and fair.
Click to expand...
Dont encourage him, He's not used to people agreeing with him!!!
 
bloovee said:
I'm not sure how easy it would be to determine "over the head". Would that be if any part of the ball is over any part of the head?

Seriously, I think the issue here is not inclusion but allowing a team to take an advantage from disability.



The singling out is by his team coach saying he takes every throw-in.
Click to expand...
Common sense. Come on....
Singling out? No, saying he can't take a TI is saying he can't do it.

the coach saying he IS the thrower? Happens a lot in plenty of teams. You couldn't have it more upside down if you tried.

Peter Grove said:
OK, been thinking about this a bit more and I think perhaps I see a way to 'square the circle.' Even though the player is taking the throw with only one hand and even if we're waiving the requirement to use both hands due to extenuating circumstances (the player can't use both hands if they only have one) I still think the other parts of the law should apply. If the player is doing a full-on goalkeeper throw then the ball would not be coming "from behind and over the head" - it would be coming past the side of the head. I'm a former goalkeeper so I know that throwing mechanism well. I'm pretty sure that a throw with one hand using the throwing motion specified in law 15 will not be traveling 25 yards, so by requiring the throwing motion part of the law to be followed, the 'unfair advantage' scenario would no longer be in effect.
Click to expand...

This is really the only post this thread needs. Anybody saying they wouldn't even allow this needs to take a good hard look at themselves.

Just playing around with a ball, one-handed the starting position can still be behind the head almost like it would be with a normal throw.

Even if we're talking a normal keeper type throw that sort of somehow manages to go over the head at the end, it's being abused. We can all apply common sense here.
 
IslandReferee said:
Shef I am more inclinded to think about hte spirtt of the game and the fairness of the game on tihs thrown in onlu. The best part of this is that, we as referees get to witness this, discuss it and run some great dialogue on it. Agreed Shef
Click to expand...
We couldn’t agree as a group if we tried! 😂
 
IslandReferee said:
If I was the referee I would allow the throw but maybe explain to the coaches in the pre-game that he is not allowed to chuck the ball 25 yards towards the goal.
Click to expand...

For me, it's not that he's not allowed to throw the ball 25 yards (and the logistics of enforcing that would be extremely tricky - how are you going to measure it, for instance?) it's that as @one stated, "The ball must still be thrown from behind and over his head" and if he does that, there's no way the ball will be going 25 yards in the first place.

Assuming you're going to make allowances for this player's disability to let him take throws at all, then I think you should still enforce all the parts of the law that apply. If a player has only one hand/arm, you can't enforce the 'both hands' provision as the player hasn't got the physical capability to comply with that but all other parts should be met. And as others have said, he could only throw the ball 25 yards by using a goalkeeper throwing technique which would not meet the requirement for the ball to come from behind and over the head. With a goalkeeper throw, the ball comes past the side of the head (or should, if the correct technique is used).

The YouTube clip below illustrates it - although the author of the clip talks a couple of times about the ball coming over the head, it never actually does. As he more accurately says at other points, it comes over the shoulder and past the side of the head (not sure why most of these explanatory clips seem to be made by Americans but anyway).


To get the ball to come from behind the head, you need to bend the elbow well past 90 degrees and if you bend the arm like that (as the author of the YouTube clip says) you will not get anything like the optimum distance.
 
Don't take this off topic folks. Last five posts are most definitely OT and if we have to close it those responsible will at a minimum be getting warning points.

This is my stepped approach, bringing the captains in way of dealing with it. You all know what happens after that …!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top