- Thread starter
- #41
Why should the goalie have to waste his own time changing direction? The onus is on Wilson to get out of the goalie's way, according to the laws of the game.
Ref got it spot on and applied the rules accurately.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
You Be The Ref - Bournemouth's disallowed goal
- Thread starter Mellotron
- Start date
Why should the goalie have to waste his own time changing direction? The onus is on Wilson to get out of the goalie's way, according to the laws of the game.
Ref got it spot on and applied the rules accurately.
drew
Drew
Should have been a goal purely on the basis that the goalkeeper didn't need to kick it against him. Had he moved to the side a few more steps and Wilson mirrored that then yes he would be attempting to block the kick. Problem would be that the ref would be 30/40 yrds away in a position and probably didn't see all that led up to it. Should have been helped by his 'lino' but that would be expecting too much!
Algernon
Well-known member
The keeper cocked up then the ref cocked up. Goaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllll!!!!!!!! Well I guess not.
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,297
Agree, it was obstruction. Nothing like old Sneaky George...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVcVCH80cQY
I bet in this day and age, and to avoid the possibility of a much scrutinised mistake or dodgy decision (even though it wasn't), most refs would give a free kick for Paris' perfectly legitimate tackle - just because the goalie got a bit of rough contact!
Keeper deliberately kicked the ball at the opponent. Should have been sent off as well as goal!
Cadiz Seagull
Grey bearded old man
I don't agree with the ref. The forward didn't block the goalkeeper, he blocked the ball; that's his job. he just stood there, didn't move to impede the keeper who was stupid enough just to kick it at him.
Th guy didn't move, the keeper could have easily run either side and kicked it. Looks like the keeper got annoyed that he just stood there and deliberately booted it at him. More fool him. Goal should stand
Garage_Doors
Originally the Swankers
Wrong, Keeper ran towards the player with the ball, it the attackers responsibility not to impede the keeper, not run away when being ran at.
KJP
Well-known member
Agree, it was obstruction. Nothing like old Sneaky George...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVcVCH80cQY
I was sitting behind the goal, wish there was a better quality video
This . keeper could have checked his movement and re kicked
The ball is considered to still be in the keeper's possession until AFTER he has cleared it. It doesn't matter if he's not touching it at the time.
Nail on head, and that is an offence.
Last edited:
Creaky
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #55
The fuller quote:
12.17 PREVENTING THE GOALKEEPER FROM RELEASING THE BALL INTO PLAY
An opponent may not prevent the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands. While players have a right to maintain a position achieved during the normal course of play, they may not try to block the goalkeeper's movement while he is holding the ball or do anything which hinders, interferes with, or blocks the goalkeeper who is throwing or kicking the ball back into play.
The player knew EXACTLY what he was doing by getting in the way. Onus is on him to move out of the way, he didn't, he interfered with the keeper kicking it out and the ref got it spot on.
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
Do you think that the rule was designed in stop this kind of block though? He doesn't physically impede the 'keeper, just blocks the space into which the 'keeper kicks the ball. The law specifically says that you can't interfere with the 'keeper and his movements, nothing about the ball. It's obviously pretty cynical, but I'd probably give it.
Where does it say this in the laws? I understood the ball to be in the keeper's possession while he's in the act of clearing the ball - so you can't intercept it during a drop kick when the ball is between hand and foot - but in this case he's completed his kick unimpeded.
Creaky
Well-known member
Nothing in that law says the onus is on a player to move out of the way.
The law states what a player must not do, (i.e. try to block the goalkeeper's movement) - maintaining a position is passive, trying to do something requires an action.
The only action Wilson took prior to the goalkeeper attempting a clearance was away from the GK.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I can't see a problem if the player is 10 yards away.
maltaseagull
Well-known member
I sort of agree with you.He didn't move to block the kick. Goalie was stupid making a point by kicking the ball at the striker.
Goalies have far too much protection as it is.
Brighton Boy
New member
Once the keeper has kicked it the ball is back in play. If the keeper tosses it up to kick it and it's Intercepted before he has kicked it than fine. But like any other "dead ball" once it is kicked then it's back in play. No rule is in place to say he should be 10 yards away from the ball so I can't see much wrong.