Saints1
Straight Edge
Ref has lost the plot in the Spain game - gives two right penalties, Paraguay miss theirs, Spain score theirs, incorrectly demands a retake, Alonso misses and Fabregas is clearly hauled down when about to tap in the rebound.
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Quarter finals thread
- Thread starter Saints1
- Start date
To be honest, Paraguay's penalty should have been taken again as well because the players entered the penalty area before Cardoza kicked the ball
AND Spain's retake 
Saints1
Straight Edge
Great excitement though, let's be fair.
AND Spain's retake
Spain already had to retake their penalty. Paraguay had a goal disallowed in the first half which was a 100% goal. No reason to disallow
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2007
- Messages
- 8,310
- Reaction score
- 4
Ye and they should have to again ... not hard!
No. Barrios was offside, not Valdez, who scored.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2007
- Messages
- 8,310
- Reaction score
- 4
Yes, but Barrios went for the ball, therefore involving himself in play, therefore interfering with play, therefore rendering the goal offside. QED.
Barrios didn't touch the ball, therefore he wasn't part of the play, therefore no reason to disallow the goal. The rules are clear on that. If a player doesn't touch the ball or blocks the sight of the goalkeeper there's no reason to blow the whistle. I am a football referee at amateur level in Holland. I know the rules 
Barrios didn't touch the ball, therefore he wasn't part of the play, therefore no reason to disallow the goal. The rules are clear on that. If a player doesn't touch the ball or blocks the sight of the goalkeeper there's no reason to blow the whistle. I am a football referee at amateur level in Holland. I know the rules
I was under the impression that as soon as he made the attempt to head the ball he was active and therefore offside regardless of weather or not he touched it or not.
shtove
Bench Player
Jeez, I thought it was only the off-side rule that was so difficult! If he goes for the ball I assume he's affecting the reactions of other players and therefore interfering with play, but you reckon it's much more restricted than that. Plus I didn't know the semi-circle at the edge of the box is a no-go area when taking a penalty.Barrios didn't touch the ball, therefore he wasn't part of the play, therefore no reason to disallow the goal. The rules are clear on that. If a player doesn't touch the ball or blocks the sight of the goalkeeper there's no reason to blow the whistle. I am a football referee at amateur level in Holland. I know the rules
Anyway, the game got better after the penalty madness.
ps. Was Klose offside for his second, tap-in goal? It was a bit like the disallowed Arg goal, except the Arg passer was himself offside. (I don't really understand the offside rule. I am NOT a woman.)
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2007
- Messages
- 8,310
- Reaction score
- 4
Barrios didn't touch the ball, therefore he wasn't part of the play, therefore no reason to disallow the goal. The rules are clear on that. If a player doesn't touch the ball or blocks the sight of the goalkeeper there's no reason to blow the whistle. I am a football referee at amateur level in Holland. I know the rules
The rules don't say that at all. A player can be deemed offside if he has touched the ball, if he has interfered with an opponent or if he has gained advantage by being in an offside position. Barrios certainly interfered with the opposition by distracting both defenders and the goalkeeper. I've refereed too actually so don't give me that. I also played in goal for six years as a kid (until I was 14) and know that it can be bloody off putting having forward jumping around all over the place. With that in mind, the Referee would appeared to have made the correct decision. I'll link you a copy of the law in question too (Law XI). No where does it say that the player must touch the ball.
http://www.fifa.com/flash/lotg/football/en/Laws11_01.htm
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2007
- Messages
- 8,310
- Reaction score
- 4
- Joined
- May 25, 2007
- Messages
- 5,708
- Reaction score
- 772
Before the WC started, did anyone here pick Germany, Uruguay, Spain and Holland to be the last four? No Italy, No France, no Argentina, and..... NO BRAZIL!!!
Incidentally, this is technically the first time ever that Spain will contest a semi-final of the World Cup.
NOTE: As a NZ rugby fan, I sympathise with Brazilian supporters; their team unexpectedly losing at the quarter-final stage after having everything under control at half time.
Incidentally, this is technically the first time ever that Spain will contest a semi-final of the World Cup.
NOTE: As a NZ rugby fan, I sympathise with Brazilian supporters; their team unexpectedly losing at the quarter-final stage after having everything under control at half time.
Haha, I was thinking that to myself a few days ago. I would not have thought that those would be the teams for the semis...maybe Germany and Spain. Holland and Uruguay I would not have expected at all.
Well, There's a simple explanation. That semi-circle is exactly 9,15 metres away from the penalty-kick spot. That's the distance everybody should stay away from the ball with any free-kick or even corner kick
Saints1
Straight Edge
I wouldn't mind the encroachment rule if it was enforced properly - which it isn't.
I had Spain, England, Holland and Brazil as my last 4. With Spain to win the final. It's gonna be close!
