The Ref Stop

Tottenham v Rochdale

JD1 said:
Again I'm unsure how you can class his run up as incomplete when the very next action after the feint is for him to put his planted foot next to the ball, and then strike the ball.

By definition, when is the run up seen to have ended?
Click to expand...
You point to two actions after the 'feint' there. The first action (the step he took to plant his non kicking foot) was needed to cmplete his run up, therefore runup incomplete after at the time of the feint.

If the that doesn't help, if you see the image, he is still a meter away from the ball when he feints. How could his run up be complete when is is that far away?

And one more, consider if he his run up was fluent without a feint, when would you consider the run up complete? for me its when his non kicking foot is planted next to the ball.
 
The Ref Stop
JD1 said:
Again I'm unsure how you can class his run up as incomplete when the very next action after the feint is for him to put his planted foot next to the ball, and then strike the ball.

By definition, when is the run up judged to have ended?
Click to expand...

When he's planted his foot I guess?
 
Trip said:
It's a bit hard to argue that he is showing a lack of respect for the game when what he did is explicitly allowed in the laws.
Click to expand...

Really?

It says you can stop or stutter so as to distract the goalkeeper specifically?
 
hi
Is there not a legacy issue here on what constituted illegal feinting in the past. Many will recall that it was seen as unsporting to stop on the run up (anywhere) and many examples were shown of players that stuttered but never came to a stop on the run up. As I recall it I suspect that thinking was in the referees mind when he saw the stop
 
RustyRef said:
He's wrong I'm afraid, as is the VAR. The run was nowhere near complete as he couldn't kick the ball from where he was and he then took several more steps.

This is a bit of a mess, to put it mildly. Entertaining though ..!
Click to expand...
Not sure he took 'several' more steps, my memory tells me it was one more step, not sure it changes much though.
 
Padfoot said:
Really?

It says you can stop or stutter so as to distract the goalkeeper specifically?
Click to expand...

You know it doesn’t, but it does say that feinting during the run up is permitted.

The question is when is the run up complete?

My opinion and understanding of this is that the run up is complete once the players next action is to kick the ball.

Son was too far from the ball to take the kick, and as he had to take another step closer to the ball before kicking it leads me to believe that his run up wasn’t completed
 
Last edited:
Goldfish said:
hi
Is there not a legacy issue here on what constituted illegal feinting in the past. Many will recall that it was seen as unsporting to stop on the run up (anywhere) and many examples were shown of players that stuttered but never came to a stop on the run up. As I recall it I suspect that thinking was in the referees mind when he saw the stop
Click to expand...
I've been thinking that, but didn't want to mention it in case I was imagining it. I thought it used to be the case that "stopping" in the run up was what was banned, under which law this would have been a perfectly correct decision.
 
Goldfish said:
hi
Is there not a legacy issue here on what constituted illegal feinting in the past. Many will recall that it was seen as unsporting to stop on the run up (anywhere) and many examples were shown of players that stuttered but never came to a stop on the run up. As I recall it I suspect that thinking was in the referees mind when he saw the stop
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting two (CR and VAR) of England's highest ranked referees are that far out of date with the laws of the game?

As earlier mentioned this was a hot topic in 2010 just before the world cup and surly they were around then to know the application as intended by IFAB.
 
Padfoot said:
Really?

It says you can stop or stutter so as to distract the goalkeeper specifically?
Click to expand...
As near as makes no difference, yes. The law says that feinting in the run-up is permitted. Feinting is defined as, "An action which attempts to confuse an opponent."

I'm pretty sure that to "stop or stutter so as to distract the goalkeeper" falls well within the parameters of "an action which attempts to confuse an opponent."

For me though, the question is not so much whether Son's actions were in breach of the letter of the current law as regards feinting at a penalty (in my opinion they clearly were not) but whether they were a violation of the spirit of the law. Ironically enough (given that the change was designed to outlaw unsporting deception of the keeper) under the wording used prior to the change in 2010, this would probably have been more likely to have been deemed unsporting.
GraemeS said:
I thought it used to be the case that "stopping" in the run up was what was banned,
Click to expand...
No, it was never that specific. The law used to say that it was up to the referee to decide whether the feinting was unsporting or not. However I believe that many referees did think that stopping completely was unsporting and (if they thought it was designed to deceive the keeper) would not allow it.
 
zarathustra said:
You know it doesn’t, but it does say that feinting during the run up is permitted.
Click to expand...

It’s no fun if you dig people out of their holes.....let them dig themselves out!

Peter Grove said:
As near as makes no difference, yes. The law says that feinting in the run-up is permitted. Feinting is defined as, "An action which attempts to confuse an opponent."
Click to expand...

The key word was ‘specifically’, not ‘almost’ or ‘nearly’,,,,,,,
 
Peter Grove said:
No, it was never that specific. The law used to say that it was up to the referee to decide whether the feinting was unsporting or not. However I believe that many referees did think that stopping completely was unsporting and (if they thought it was designed to deceive the keeper) would not allow it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I have a feeling I was taught that on my course as a "practical guidelines" kind of thing, hence why I didn't being it up earlier!
 
I find it interesting with all due respect that unsporting behaviour etc is being mentioned because "he's trying to confuse the opponent". For me, that's getting involved too much and trying to police something that doesn't need policing. For example, goalkeepers spread their arms, some stand to one side, others side step across the line, some kick their studs on the post, some feint to go one way and then dive the other way.

I think the stop/stutter is obviously legal in the main, it's just in this case the player was unusually close to the ball.
 
Didn’t the Chelsea player Willian jokingly tell a penalty taker which side to put it and player did that and it got saved! Gamesmanship goes off at all levels in most situations. From physical to psychological, it all goes off, your job is to see what you’ll allow without taking umbridge with it.
 
Padfoot said:
It’s no fun if you dig people out of their holes.....let them dig themselves out!

The key word was ‘specifically’, not ‘almost’ or ‘nearly’,,,,,,,
Click to expand...

I think i might have managed that one all by myself.

I didn't say 'specifically'. I said explicitly. Do pay attention, Padfoot. The law is absolutely explicit that a pause in the run-up is allowed.
 
The law is clear here. Feinting during the run up is allowed. The illegal action as per law is feinting to kick the ball. Forget the end of the run up, when else is he going to kick/feint to kick the ball?
Son did not feint kicking the ball, merely stuttering his run up, which as the law is currently written is perfectly permissable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top