Question for the referees on here


Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

I dont get the distinction. An own goal counts the same as a goal last time I checked. One :confused:

We were all a little bit sick to the stomach when we saw that runt Luis Suarez celebrating after Ghana missed their pen in the World Cup after his deliberate handball. The difference between what Suarez did in the World Cup and what Mignolet did on Saturday, ethically, is negligible. They both knew it was wrong, they both decided to deny the other team a perfectly good goal, they both cheated, they both did so deliberately.

I understand the rules are the rules and as it stands the ref couldnt send him off. But they should change because this is an anomoly in the rules.

Correct
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

I understand the rules are the rules and as it stands the ref couldnt send him off. But they should change because this is an anomoly in the rules.

It's not at all.

The backpass rule came into force to stop the Eyeties and Argies...and the Germans from playing passy between centre half and goalkeeper, thus winding down the clock when they go one up after ten minutes.

Many backpasses are 'on target', it just so happens that this one was a bit spectacular - if the pass was a steady roller and Mig picked it up we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place even though the offense would have been, for all purposes, exactly the same.
 
I understand the difference is that Larsson was not trying to score a goal so the foul by Mignolet was not denying the opposition a goal scoring opportunity.

A yellow card is mandatory in such a situation. I don't think anyone has had a red before for that.
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

It's not at all.

The backpass rule came into force to stop the Eyeties and Argies...and the Germans from playing passy between centre half and goalkeeper, thus winding down the clock when they go one up after ten minutes.

Many backpasses are 'on target', it just so happens that this one was a bit spectacular - if the pass was a steady roller and Mig picked it up we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place even though the offense would have been, for all purposes, exactly the same.

I agree with the last part here. No other pass back has ever got this much attention.

I understand what others are saying in they are calling it as a goal scoring opportunity but, i think its important to understand the origin of the ball prior to the offence aswell.
I think a true goalscoring opportunity is when the opportunity originates from the opposition player.
I wouldn't class the back pass on Saturday as a goalscoring opportunity in that it wasn't an opportunity for the opposing team but instead a mistake completely of our own creation.
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

It's not at all.

The backpass rule came into force to stop the Eyeties and Argies...and the Germans from playing passy between centre half and goalkeeper, thus winding down the clock when they go one up after ten minutes.

Many backpasses are 'on target', it just so happens that this one was a bit spectacular - if the pass was a steady roller and Mig picked it up we wouldn't be having this conversation in the first place even though the offense would have been, for all purposes, exactly the same.

Yes and the foulplay rules were brought in for a different reason to what they're used for now. But derivation isnt important.

When the rules were made in the 19th century at no point did they believe that denying a goalscoring opportunity with the tug of a shirt would mean a team playing with 10 men.

But, this is the point, rules change. The governing bodies decided a long time ago that teams should be penalised for exploiting the rules by deliberately breaking them when they perceived that the punishment (penalty) didnt befit the crime (denying a goal).

At the moment this works but for one anomoly. This anomoly. A goalkeeper picking the ball up when he knows he isnt allowed from a backpass.
 
I understand the difference is that Larsson was not trying to score a goal so the foul by Mignolet was not denying the opposition a goal scoring opportunity.

A yellow card is mandatory in such a situation. I don't think anyone has had a red before for that.

Not according to Graham Poll. :neutral:
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

I dont get the distinction. An own goal counts the same as a goal last time I checked. One :confused:

We were all a little bit sick to the stomach when we saw that runt Luis Suarez celebrating after Ghana missed their pen in the World Cup after his deliberate handball. The difference between what Suarez did in the World Cup and what Mignolet did on Saturday, ethically, is negligible. They both knew it was wrong, they both decided to deny the other team a perfectly good goal, they both cheated, they both did so deliberately.

I understand the rules are the rules and as it stands the ref couldnt send him off. But they should change because this is an anomoly in the rules.

Imagine Seb running back towards his own goal to pass it towards the keeper, but an Everton player takes him out before he can hit the ball towards his own net. Is that denying a goal scoring opportunity? Should the Everton player be sent off? No, and the same logic applies in this instance. Its only the attacking team which can have a clear goal scoring opportunity when attacking the opposition's goal.
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

I agree with the last part here. No other pass back has ever got this much attention.

I understand what others are saying in they are calling it as a goal scoring opportunity but, i think its important to understand the origin of the ball prior to the offence aswell.
I think a true goalscoring opportunity is when the opportunity originates from the opposition player.
I wouldn't class the back pass on Saturday as a goalscoring opportunity in that it wasn't an opportunity for the opposing team but instead a mistake completely of our own creation.

Exactly. It's called within the spirit of the game. Free kick and move on.
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

I wouldn't class the back pass on Saturday as a goalscoring opportunity in that it wasn't an opportunity for the opposing team but instead a mistake completely of our own creation.

A goalscoring opportunity is as valid if its created through the attacking teams guile or the defending teams mistake.

Imagine Steven Taylor slips on his arse and Sess nips into score. Imagine then Steven Taylor tugs his shirt before he can score. This scenario was not created by the attacking team but I'd be enraged if that cockney horrible bastard didnt see red for doing such a thing.
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

Exactly. It's called within the spirit of the game. Free kick and move on.

Aye, and within the spirit of the game I think Mignolet is allowed to prevent a certain own goal from a mis-hit backpass without the need to worry about getting a caution. :lol:

A goalscoring opportunity is as valid if its created through the attacking teams guile or the defending teams mistake.

Imagine Steven Taylor slips on his arse and Sess nips into score. Imagine then Steven Taylor tugs his shirt before he can score. This scenario was not created by the attacking team but I'd be enraged if that cockney horrible bastard didnt see red for doing such a thing.

Would you say that Larsson intentionally hoofed it a Mignolet in that manner?
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

At the moment this works but for one anomoly. This anomoly. A goalkeeper picking the ball up when he knows he isnt allowed from a backpass.

So you would have argued that Mig be sent off if the pass was a slow roller but still heading toward the goal, and he picked it up. Right? :confused:
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

A challenge that isn't countered is one helluva tackle.

When your challenge is merely opinion then no counter is necessary. Your opinion is valid, nothing more, and I've no interest in a pointless discussion about it.

Please don't let that spoil your enjoyment with other more interested posters.
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

A goalscoring opportunity is as valid if its created through the attacking teams guile or the defending teams mistake.

Imagine Steven Taylor slips on his arse and Sess nips into score. Imagine then Steven Taylor tugs his shirt before he can score. This scenario was not created by the attacking team but I'd be enraged if that cockney horrible bastard didnt see red for doing such a thing.

you're clouding the issue, the keeper will never get sent off for handling the ball in the box, Everton got a freekick inside our box we were punished enough.
 
Re: Denying a goal scoring opportunity vs denying a certain goal

Imagine Seb running back towards his own goal to pass it towards the keeper, but an Everton player takes him out before he can hit the ball towards his own net. Is that denying a goal scoring opportunity? Should the Everton player be sent off? No, and the same logic applies in this instance. Its only the attacking team which can have a clear goal scoring opportunity when attacking the opposition's goal.

I'm really struggling to understand where you're going with this.

In Example 1 (Seb) clearly it isnt a goalscoring opportunity because, as you say, he was running back to his own goal :lol: As bad as Sebs backpass was I dont think he is a credible constant own goal threat! And even if he was I dont think an Everton player can be sent off for denying his own team a goal!

Example 2 is completely different. A goalscoring opportunity had presented itself because it was flying like a missile into an open net. Its as nailed on a goalscoring opportunity as you're likely to get. Much more likely than Seb ambling about in his own half looking to handle the routine situation you described!

So you would have argued that Mig be sent off if the pass was a slow roller but still heading toward the goal, and he picked it up. Right? :confused:

If it was a slow roller then it possibly wouldn't be denying a clear goalscoring opportunity so possibly not.
 
I understand the difference is that Larsson was not trying to score a goal so the foul by Mignolet was not denying the opposition a goal scoring opportunity.

A yellow card is mandatory in such a situation. I don't think anyone has had a red before for that.

Nope. Far from mandatory its technically not even an option. Dowd used the wildcard of unsporting behaviour to give the yellow - that will be the case in the report as he can't put anything else.

That said, the rules on backpass are a bit silly. Deliberate non-permitted handling by a keeper just outside the box - yellow (could be red), same thing just inside the box - no card.

A keeper, like any player, using their hands to stop the ball outside of when the rules permit is cheating. Stopping a clear goal opportunity is usually a red. It shouldn't be different because its a keeper, but it is. Them's the rules. As has been said by many he didn't handle it, within the rules it was a technical infringement like offside - point is you can't stop a certain goal by being offside.

Normally a keeper has the option to kick and I believe the rules were written on the assumption that its not a major indiscretion. You're just not supposed to have to make diving saves from your own players - deflections don't count of course.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top