| That is simply wrong 15:38 - Apr 5 with 3512 views | redrickstuhaart |
Once he tries to play it and there is a problem, it is a new phase and he is entitled to save it. Not a back pass. |  |
| |  |
| That is simply wrong on 16:13 - Apr 5 with 738 views | Wacko |
| That is simply wrong on 16:06 - Apr 5 by Smoresy |
I would say that confirms he's wrong Wacko, because Palmer wasn't clearly kicking or attempting to kick the ball to release it into play. He was trying to take possession of the ball and it went horribly wrong.
All's well that ends well though! [Post edited 5 Apr 2025 16:07]
|
I think it's a grey area as what's the definition of releasing into play? Passing or controlling?
Really though the rule was designed to stop teams gaining advantage when under pressure from the opposition - don't think it was meant for this kind of genuine error. Happy it worked out fine! | |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 16:23 - Apr 5 with 706 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| That is simply wrong on 16:07 - Apr 5 by redrickstuhaart |
I was about to post Law 12 myself :-)
Its absolutely clear. Ref was wrong. Also gave an unreasonable yellow before the fk.
Reffing is tough. But knowing the relatively short rules properly ought not to be beyond them. [Post edited 5 Apr 2025 16:07]
|
Which bit of that rule means it wasn't an indirect free kick? |  |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 16:31 - Apr 5 with 690 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| That is simply wrong on 16:13 - Apr 5 by Wacko |
I think it's a grey area as what's the definition of releasing into play? Passing or controlling?
Really though the rule was designed to stop teams gaining advantage when under pressure from the opposition - don't think it was meant for this kind of genuine error. Happy it worked out fine! |
Surely, releasing it into play is fairly clear. It involves playing the ball into an area where another player is likely to play it or the ball goes out of play. I can't see how what is described in this incident would fit the description at all. | |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 16:34 - Apr 5 with 679 views | redrickstuhaart |
| That is simply wrong on 16:31 - Apr 5 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Surely, releasing it into play is fairly clear. It involves playing the ball into an area where another player is likely to play it or the ball goes out of play. I can't see how what is described in this incident would fit the description at all. |
The wording is poor. But whatever touch he takes the ball is "released into play". Anyone can come and play it.
The problem is the bad wording that talks of releasing the ball into play when it is never out of play.
Would be very odd if taking a swipe and missing means you can handle it and taking a touch does not. [Post edited 5 Apr 2025 16:35]
| |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 16:50 - Apr 5 with 644 views | redrickstuhaart |
| That is simply wrong on 16:31 - Apr 5 by Nthsuffolkblue |
Surely, releasing it into play is fairly clear. It involves playing the ball into an area where another player is likely to play it or the ball goes out of play. I can't see how what is described in this incident would fit the description at all. |
Why "likely"? Its either in play or its not. And it plainly is in play after a failed touch. | |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 16:52 - Apr 5 with 635 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| That is simply wrong on 16:50 - Apr 5 by redrickstuhaart |
Why "likely"? Its either in play or its not. And it plainly is in play after a failed touch. |
By that logic the goalkeeper touching the ball with his feet at all then turns a backpass into one he can pick up. You seem to be arguing with the rule rather than the interpretation. | |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 16:53 - Apr 5 with 634 views | redrickstuhaart |
| That is simply wrong on 16:52 - Apr 5 by Nthsuffolkblue |
By that logic the goalkeeper touching the ball with his feet at all then turns a backpass into one he can pick up. You seem to be arguing with the rule rather than the interpretation. |
No- because its then intentionally setting yourself up which you cant do.As I have pointed out three or four times. | |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 17:01 - Apr 5 with 617 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| That is simply wrong on 16:53 - Apr 5 by redrickstuhaart |
No- because its then intentionally setting yourself up which you cant do.As I have pointed out three or four times. |
And, as has been pointed out to you repeatedly, that is not how the rule is worded. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| That is simply wrong on 17:06 - Apr 5 with 610 views | Smoresy |
| That is simply wrong on 16:52 - Apr 5 by Nthsuffolkblue |
By that logic the goalkeeper touching the ball with his feet at all then turns a backpass into one he can pick up. You seem to be arguing with the rule rather than the interpretation. |
Willful misinterpretation of the rules because he absolutely hates to be wrong, would be my guess. We all know the difference between a kick to release the ball and a touch to control it, really, and that Palmer had attempted the latter. I'm going to stick my neck out and predict this won't be flagged as an error on MOTD tonight! | | | |
| That is simply wrong on 17:27 - Apr 5 with 571 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| That is simply wrong on 15:44 - Apr 5 by redrickstuhaart |
Its no longer a back pass. Its a mistake by the keeper- not setting himself up. If he touched it. If he didnt, then probably fair enough. |
Learn the rules of it doesn’t touch another outfield player it’s a back pass. |  |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 17:27 - Apr 5 with 571 views | BarcaBlue |
| That is simply wrong on 17:06 - Apr 5 by Smoresy |
Willful misinterpretation of the rules because he absolutely hates to be wrong, would be my guess. We all know the difference between a kick to release the ball and a touch to control it, really, and that Palmer had attempted the latter. I'm going to stick my neck out and predict this won't be flagged as an error on MOTD tonight! |
Indeed. |  | | |
| That is simply wrong on 20:21 - Apr 5 with 503 views | TexacoCup |
If we get a free kick like that, I’d love to see a touch to Delap and watch him send the ball and a couple of defenders into the net ! |  | | |
| That is simply wrong on 20:22 - Apr 5 with 498 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| That is simply wrong on 20:21 - Apr 5 by TexacoCup |
If we get a free kick like that, I’d love to see a touch to Delap and watch him send the ball and a couple of defenders into the net ! |
I’d just smash it at the goal and hope it deflects in anyway, seems almost impossible to score laying it off that close. | |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 20:25 - Apr 5 with 486 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| That is simply wrong on 20:22 - Apr 5 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
I’d just smash it at the goal and hope it deflects in anyway, seems almost impossible to score laying it off that close. |
That's a good idea. Laying it off allows them to close the shot down too. With that number of bodies, it is bound to hit someone and that's all it needs isn't it? | |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 20:28 - Apr 5 with 476 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| That is simply wrong on 20:25 - Apr 5 by Nthsuffolkblue |
That's a good idea. Laying it off allows them to close the shot down too. With that number of bodies, it is bound to hit someone and that's all it needs isn't it? |
Yea that’s the point allowing them to close it down from 6 yards. Wasn’t that worried at the time. | |
| |
| That is simply wrong on 20:33 - Apr 5 with 460 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| That is simply wrong on 15:49 - Apr 5 by redrickstuhaart |
Nope. If he touched it, he's not picking up a backpass, hes picking up something he touched last. You cant deliberately set yourself up to pick it up. But a mistake like that is not setting yourself up. |
This must be one of the most clueless posts on here! | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
