Reply With QuoteRegardless of whether it was a goal or not,the run and shot beforehand and incident itself showed a bit of ingenuity,craft and creativity that we have been missing for large parts of the season,and I would love to see Tomlin start the next game.
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
How on earth was the Millwall keeper still in possession of the ball when it was in the air about a yard in front of him?Originally Posted by Forest Green Bluebird
Regardless of whether it was a goal or not,the run and shot beforehand and incident itself showed a bit of ingenuity,craft and creativity that we have been missing for large parts of the season,and I would love to see Tomlin start the next game.
Absolutely spot on.
I found Tomlins behaviour very strange. Whether it should technically have stood or not, let's face it that no-one expected the ref to allow it. So for Tomlin to do it and then the way he celebrated was almost as he was joking around. Would have been funny if we were winning but it just wasted time when we were trying to nick a winner.
Unless the ball bounces the keeper is deemed to be in control of the ball.
Sounds daft I know, but it is what it is.
Oh god, i have just left the Facebook fan page because of the amount of people who are arguing this one still, even though i have provided the rules. It is deemed in the keepers control until thrown, kicked or dropped to the ground. NO GOAL.
Then 1 of them when he realises i am correct says "are you a jack or summit"......
Have a read on the Facebook groups, and even when you explain the rules nobody listens.Everyone in the ground knew it wasn't a goal. The only people who would have given were not present.
Can't believe so many people don't know the rules.
So by that ruling, if we allow that no keeper will be able to kick a ball again because strikers will be there waiting to kick it as he wants to boot it away..... if someone did that to us tomorrow you would probably kick off for being close to him trying to play it away.
LOL! This is pretty much it.
He's kicking it, he does exactly like the same as any other keeper when they kick it. There's absolutely nothing else that he could have been doing.
The rule is clear, you just can't do that now. I expect it's to stop high feet (you have to get your foot to pretty much mid-riff level to nick it). The rule's been around for a few seasons now so the players should know, and I've seen players booked for doing it.
It's fair enough to me anyway. Who wants to see this happening in a game? Pretty crappy way to try and score.
What does 'not in control' mean? Maybe that you can't get a clean strike of the ball? The keeper was certainly going to hit it well, it wasn't thrown that far from his body. It was a textbook keeper kick.
Exactly, he was in control as per rules which people don't seem to know.
Tomlin acted like an idiot, wasting time, no wonder Warnock was going ballistic at him.
Are we still doing this?
Ref spot on.
Tomlin idiot, could easily have been booked (decent effort just before mind)
Perhaps if we debate it say for three pages, the rules might change
Tomlin was booked, wasn't he? Either for high foot or more likely for dissent.Are we still doing this?
Ref spot on.
Tomlin idiot, could easily have been booked (decent effort just before mind)
Perhaps if we debate it say for three pages, the rules might change
Law 12
"A player must be penalised for playing in a dangerous manner if he kicks or
attempts to kick the ball when the goalkeeper is in the process of releasing
it"
So basically Tomlin would have been ok if he'd literally tackled the keeper a millisecond after kicking it, wouldn't he?
PS I'm paying homage to the irritating things thread btw
Come on Bob - you of all aficionados of our beloved sport should appreciate this particular rule of the game.
I am really surprised by the amount of posters who claim that no rule has been broken.
The Millwall keeper intended to kick the ball, regardless of any any exaggerated distance he threw it forward.
He certainly did not release the ball forward in order for it to bounce.
If this was the case then the ball would have been in play and a challenge could have been made.
The ball was released with the sole intention to lump it forward.
Apart from Tomlin, how come that Warnock or any of the players did not complain about the decision?
No, technically that would have been a dangerous high tackle. The law says that the goalkeeper must be allowed to release the ball without hindrance.
Specsavers?
As a point of law, I would argue the fact the ball was released from his hand and in mid air, would suggest he hd completed the release of it , and was not in the process of releasing it.
But as soon as it's left his boot he has released it, surely?
It's part of the act of kicking the ball from hand ergo he had not at that point released it.
I'm not saying that the goal should have been allowed - that was never going to happen because of the problems it would create as a precedent, but the reasons given for why it was disallowed are ludicrous, no free kick would have been given if the same challenge had taken place between two outfield players.
Yes but until the keeper’s kicked the ball or let it bounce he’s deemed to be in control of it.
A free kick would have been given prior due to one of those outfield players having handled the ball with both hands tbh.
And yes, a free kick could have been given for ball in air, two outfield players if the ref deemed high foot / dangerous play.
Posting Permissions
