Should this be a goal?

Everything related to tactics, coaching and refereeing
Solid0Snake
Junior Member
Posts: 92
Joined: 04 Jun 2007, 20:03

Should this be a goal?

Post by Solid0Snake » 11 Sep 2010, 23:27

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNC-gvoZ ... r_embedded

This was during a penalty shootout. The ball hit the keeper and kept spinning on the ground untill it crossed the goal line, but the goalkeeper was already away from goal celebrating the save.
Two questions come to mind:
First, is it a goal? and second, could the keeper catch it or stop it from going in even though he already made a save?
Image

2brown347
Veteran Member
Posts: 3339
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 04:15

Post by 2brown347 » 11 Sep 2010, 23:45

I'm fairly certain that would be considered a goal but it isn't really clear by the rules. If that happens during a regular PK it'd be a goal, but since it's a PK shoot-out I think it's really up to the ref to decided.

IMO the ref made the wrong call since the keeper blocked the initial shot and I don't think a keeper in a PK shoot out should need to worry about what the ball does after he saves it.

Rome_Leader
The Italian Mod
Posts: 3028
Joined: 19 Jun 2007, 22:03

Post by Rome_Leader » 11 Sep 2010, 23:49

By the strictest definition of the law, the referee is correct in awarding the goal. There is plenty of criteria given as to disallowed goals. It was not scored off a rebound, since the kicker did not put a second touch to the ball, and no other infringement was made.

Really brown, your argument that the keeper shouldn't have to worry after he makes the initial save is silly IMO. If it were a PK in game, he couldn't just tip it into the path of another opponent and consider his job done. It was his own fault for being too cocky and not making sure the play was finished.

It's the same deal if he were to push it off the crossbar, and it careened in, just different context.
Image

All roads lead to Rome.

Triskaidekaphobia: The unnatural fear of the number 13.
Most of Ballack's opposition have this phobia.

I'm Scott. Don't let the title fool you; I.AM.CANADIAN!

ScottyBoy
Veteran Member
Posts: 1692
Joined: 05 Aug 2007, 15:39

Post by ScottyBoy » 11 Sep 2010, 23:54

2brown347 wrote:I'm fairly certain that would be considered a goal but it isn't really clear by the rules. If that happens during a regular PK it'd be a goal, but since it's a PK shoot-out I think it's really up to the ref to decided.

IMO the ref made the wrong call since the keeper blocked the initial shot and I don't think a keeper in a PK shoot out should need to worry about what the ball does after he saves it.
What are you talking about?

The role of a keeper in a shootout is to stop the ball going into the net after the taker has one kick of the ball.

If he had "saved it" and it hit the post and went in it would count.

Until the ball crosses a line out of play or stops dead it is still active and can therefore roll in.

If the keeper gets a hand to the ball and it spins high into the air and lands over the line it clearly counts.

I would like to hear any justification why it isnt a goal and why the keeper didnt get exactly what he deserved
Image

People who say something cannot be done are often surprised by others doing it.

2brown347
Veteran Member
Posts: 3339
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 04:15

Post by 2brown347 » 12 Sep 2010, 00:08

By definition of the law and all that it's right but it's not the same as "if a keeper blocks the shot and it hits a post and goes in" since IMO that isn't a "blocked" shot. If it'd hit the keeper then gone straight in I'd say its a goal but it bounced away. There isn't really a clear rule for that exact scenario (to my knowledge) and the keeper should have stayed with it but with a PK shootout there is a lot of pressure/excitement/adrenaline and I can see how a keeper could make that mistake.

Would you think the same thing if it was a high profile match, the keeper blocked the shot and it bounced out 6-yards out, hence keeper goes to celebrate with his team and while celebrating the ball rolled in?

If anything I think the rule should be made clearer for that scenario.

Rome_Leader
The Italian Mod
Posts: 3028
Joined: 19 Jun 2007, 22:03

Post by Rome_Leader » 12 Sep 2010, 00:13

Well, there is no way the ball could roll in after having bounced six yards away. :P Unless it was some epicly designed shot, in which case the striker totally deserves the goal, or some serious wind in which they should not be playing in. :P

Fact remains, the keeper gave up a little too early. It's the same way in hockey. I can remember an instance when a player (I forget who) skated in for a shot, and purposely made as if to shoot the puck, but missed. The keeper, figuring he had taken his allotted one shot and missed, started to skate away, but the dude, still in reach of the puck, simply circled and backhanded it in.

What ScottyBoy is describing with a ball that goes off the post is exactly the same idea as what happened: the keeper has gotten a piece, but not enough, and the ball is still in active play.
Image

All roads lead to Rome.

Triskaidekaphobia: The unnatural fear of the number 13.
Most of Ballack's opposition have this phobia.

I'm Scott. Don't let the title fool you; I.AM.CANADIAN!

panchester07
Veteran Member
Posts: 3849
Joined: 27 Aug 2007, 04:25

Post by panchester07 » 12 Sep 2010, 00:14

ScottyBoy wrote:
2brown347 wrote:I'm fairly certain that would be considered a goal but it isn't really clear by the rules. If that happens during a regular PK it'd be a goal, but since it's a PK shoot-out I think it's really up to the ref to decided.

IMO the ref made the wrong call since the keeper blocked the initial shot and I don't think a keeper in a PK shoot out should need to worry about what the ball does after he saves it.
What are you talking about?

The role of a keeper in a shootout is to stop the ball going into the net after the taker has one kick of the ball.

If he had "saved it" and it hit the post and went in it would count.

Until the ball crosses a line out of play or stops dead it is still active and can therefore roll in.

If the keeper gets a hand to the ball and it spins high into the air and lands over the line it clearly counts.

I would like to hear any justification why it isnt a goal and why the keeper didnt get exactly what he deserved
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWW where is the facepalm emoticon?


Thank you very much scotty..

Multiple times in a shoot out the ball has hit the post and then the back of a keeper and gone in and it still counts. The ref didn't make a bad call, if the ball is in movement the keeper has to stop it from going in.

What is different from this video, and a keeper that blocks a shot but it has so much power that it still goes in? Absolutely nothing...

Imagine its a shootout, and a striker shoots, and the keeper gets a hand to the shot, but since its so strong it still goes in. Is it a bad call by the ref too?.. Obviously not.. And in reality whats different from this play I just said and what really happened?

Keeper is an idiot, obviously.. It was in the NOT TOP 10 OF sportscenter, so its pretty obvious even to them that it was a blooper by the keeper...
to know Him is to want to know Him more"


"i don't know where the limit is, but I know where it is not"

Tocar y moverse y tratarla siempre muy muy bien..'

2brown347
Veteran Member
Posts: 3339
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 04:15

Post by 2brown347 » 12 Sep 2010, 00:19

Rome_Leader wrote:Well, there is no way the ball could roll in after having bounced six yards away. :P Unless it was some epicly designed shot, in which case the striker totally deserves the goal, or some serious wind in which they should not be playing in. :P
On a hard pitch with lots of backspin and it's totally possible even if a shot doesn't have a ton of pressure.

and panchester a ball bouncing off the post and hitting the keeper isn't anything like the situation in dispute.

panchester07
Veteran Member
Posts: 3849
Joined: 27 Aug 2007, 04:25

Post by panchester07 » 12 Sep 2010, 00:20

Well, I think it can be similar, but are all the other obvious things I mentioned good enough for you then? :wink:
to know Him is to want to know Him more"


"i don't know where the limit is, but I know where it is not"

Tocar y moverse y tratarla siempre muy muy bien..'

klc123
Veteran Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 16:26

Post by klc123 » 12 Sep 2010, 00:22

Imagine its a shootout, and a striker shoots, and the keeper gets a hand to the shot, but since its so strong it still goes in. Is it a bad call by the ref too?.. Obviously not.. And in reality whats different from this play I just said and what really happened?
Exactly what I think. Once the keeper gets a hand to it, it doesn't matter if it still goes in, or if the ball done a lap of honour around the pitch and somersaulted into the goal, it's exactly the same thing.

To suggest that it is not a goal is stupid. The keeper should have looked to see where the ball went, the fact that he didn't is pure stupidity on his part, and sheer luck by the PK taker.

2brown347
Veteran Member
Posts: 3339
Joined: 30 Oct 2007, 04:15

Post by 2brown347 » 12 Sep 2010, 00:25

panchester07 wrote:Well, I think it can be similar, but are all the other obvious things I mentioned good enough for you then? :wink:
No not really, a keeper getting a hand to a ball but not enough to stop it isn't the same IMO as a keeper getting fully behind the ball, and the ball bouncing away from the goal.

Similar doesn't mean anything IMO since it's a very specific and rare type situation. Even the situation Rome brought up doesn't compare IMO since that's a keeper error in thinking the shot had been taken.

If this was a team you liked you'd be singing a very different song.

I'm not saying the keeper isn't a dumbass but IMO it's not as black and white as you'll seem to think.

ScottyBoy
Veteran Member
Posts: 1692
Joined: 05 Aug 2007, 15:39

Post by ScottyBoy » 12 Sep 2010, 00:34

The penalty taker has one kick to score a goal.

The penalty is not "over" until it is either a goal or the ball has no way of going into the goal without interferance for example the ball goes wide or is stopped still.

In this case it is clear that the keepers contact with the ball was not enough to prevent it going into the net before it stopped.

He then chose to ignore this fact which is his own fault.
Image

People who say something cannot be done are often surprised by others doing it.

Canadianfooty
Sophomore Member
Posts: 34
Joined: 24 Apr 2010, 15:04

Post by Canadianfooty » 12 Sep 2010, 05:38

If I were to be reffing a game (come September I will be a 4th year ref) I will only call a penalty over if: the keeper stops it, ball crosses the goal line, stops it forward motion, "double" kicked, has fully stopped motion.
For refs it is a judgement call which I have heard many times with many stories to go along with them.

panchester07
Veteran Member
Posts: 3849
Joined: 27 Aug 2007, 04:25

Post by panchester07 » 12 Sep 2010, 05:41

hahahahhahaha ...... woww this thread is so damn funny... brown defending the most stupid point there is....... we've given you every example on the book, you refuse to understand... fine... send an email to Blatter, tell him to review the call "because the keep saved the first shot" .. I mean what the hell is blatter thinking ... freaking soccer mom attitude...bless your ignorance young boy

sorry, but like, i've been debating with you for 1,000 posts, and you come up with this...... justt makes me giggle, a lot, many times, for long periods....


everything is good though
to know Him is to want to know Him more"


"i don't know where the limit is, but I know where it is not"

Tocar y moverse y tratarla siempre muy muy bien..'

Pichichi
Senior Member
Posts: 280
Joined: 28 Apr 2009, 23:54

Post by Pichichi » 12 Sep 2010, 05:47

What a goal! Brown you're completely wrong. No arguing needs to be done because you're flat out wrong.


I honestly couldn't believe that the goalie didn't see the ball creeping in out of the corner of his eye. Don't think we'll be seeing a pk quite like this for some time.

Post Reply