Pk added on time, last kick. Of all time. Ever

one said:

I have been getting $600 annual insurance for my car 10 years in row now, cost me $6000 and I haven't got a single $ back. But you know what I'll get it again next year because if I have an accident with a $50K damage bill, I wont have to pay anything. Doing the right thing at a PK is a little short term pain but it covers your a$$ for that one time (next game or 10 years down the track) when the ball is till on the move after a rebound and you have not wrongly stopped a defender from saving it.

On a separate note, I'll leave this here. Goal or no goal? (ignore the rest of the WTF stuff)

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1665027426934881

Click to expand...

Not sure I agree with your analogy. Insurance is always a 'bad bet', that's why the Insurance Companies make money. It's just that most people can't afford the cost should the worst come to the worst (and therefore MUST take the 'bad bet' and pay the premium). As referees, this is not the same as being thorough with the 'minor' considerations. Any ref who doesn't bother to insure against the little things (good bets), will soon discover the inevitability of consequential bigger problems
Whilst the ref in the township clip seems to be indicating a goal, maybe he ought to have thought about the proximity of the spectators!

Ciley Myrus said:

ok do the actual laws help you then, which say

• The kick is completed when the ball stops moving, goes out of play or the referee stops play for any infringement of the Laws

keeper throwing it in, goal

so, maybe its time to digest some online clips, as, they have it right, whereas based on your post, you, don't.

Click to expand...

The laws on this particular subject actually say....
When additional time is allowed,
the penalty kick is completed when, after the kick has been taken, the ball
stops moving, goes out of play, is played by any player (including the kicker)
other than the defending goalkeeper, or the referee stops play for an offence by
the kicker or the kicker’s team

So the argument here is whether you think that the keeper has control of the ball and it has stopped moving, rather than he has played it.
I'd argue that he has control enough of it for his action to be deemed as a throw, which imo would be a deliberate act to be described as such, then the ball has stopped and therefore penalty over.

JamesL said:

So the argument here is whether you think that the keeper has control of the ball and it has stopped moving, rather than he has played it.
I'd argue that he has control enough of it for his action to be deemed as a throw, which imo would be a deliberate act to be described as such, then the ball has stopped and therefore penalty over.

Click to expand...

In that clip the ball is clearly moving all the the GK is handling it. With "deliberate act" you are introducing something from another law that is not in this law.

In this example it's also a quite fluid motion by the GK, rather than separate catch and attempt to throw.

I think this is easy to give as a goal. No need to save the GK here

JamesL said:

The laws on this particular subject actually say....
When additional time is allowed,
the penalty kick is completed when, after the kick has been taken, the ball
stops moving, goes out of play, is played by any player (including the kicker)
other than the defending goalkeeper, or the referee stops play for an offence by
the kicker or the kicker’s team

So the argument here is whether you think that the keeper has control of the ball and it has stopped moving, rather than he has played it.
I'd argue that he has control enough of it for his action to be deemed as a throw, which imo would be a deliberate act to be described as such, then the ball has stopped and therefore penalty over.

Click to expand...

my post was with regard to kicks from the pen mark as way of determining outcome..... not the time related debate,

santa sangria said:

In that clip the ball is clearly moving all the the GK is handling it. With "deliberate act" you are introducing something from another law that is not in this law.

In this example it's also a quite fluid motion by the GK, rather than separate catch and attempt to throw.

I think this is easy to give as a goal. No need to save the GK here

Click to expand...

I am not referring to a video. Just what is written. And assuming that Cileys post was to do with the OP and title of thread.

santa sangria said:

In that clip the ball is clearly moving all the the GK is handling it. With "deliberate act" you are introducing something from another law that is not in this law.

In this example it's also a quite fluid motion by the GK, rather than separate catch and attempt to throw.

I think this is easy to give as a goal. No need to save the GK here

Click to expand...

In the clip the keeper fumbles it in. Easy goal. But that wasnt what I was responding to.

Ciley Myrus said:

bit closer to home, also a goal ( I dont mean, goal, as in, its given as a goal in the clip), but, a perfectly valid goal in KFTPM

Click to expand...

Well, of course. But that isn't remotely like the GK catching the ball and then throwing it into the goal.

So long as the ball is loose and moving like in this video, this is as easy as a call gets--goal.

Ganajin said:

The game ends as soon as the defender touches it. No goal. Spirit of the game is not to be invoked just to save the referee from making the hard decisions he or she is paid to make. This is why I fully endorse explaining the situation to the players before the kick is taken.

Click to expand...

My reference to SOTG had nothing to do with avoiding hard decisions but to pointing out the oddity here. I think this is an unintended effect of the way the law is written that is at odds with the SOTG. It's more that a bit crazy that a defender can save a goal by kicking it into the goal before it scores.

IMO, this is another example of where IFAB's attempt to move from concepts (PK is over when R decides it is) to micro-legislation creates perverse results (if the bizarre play were ever to happen in the real world).

Ciley Myrus said:

Second hand story, but even if its no 100% accurate, am sure its happened somewhere, maybe you have even done it
Vital game (not that any game is not important, but lets say its a final, relegation decider etc)
Pk in 6th min added on time, i.e, the last kick of the ball

Story goes on Tues night, a ref said to the kicker "this is the last kick, no rebounds"

Would you?
Good communication?
Being proactive should it indeed rebound and scored and there is you saying games over
Extra pressure on kicker on an already pressure kick?

Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely be proactive. Otherwise, what are you going to do if an attacker follows the kick through?

If you don't advise it's the last kick, you can't possible sell disallowing the goal if there's a follow-up.

one said:

Disagree. If you read my post, there actually is a reason for defenders to legally follow the ball and save a goal. If you stop them form doing it and a winning goal is scored because of it, in all likelihood the entire game would have to be replayed.

Click to expand...

True, but saying no rebounds isn't the same as instructing players not to follow it through.

You're basing your approach on

1) The very unlikely scenario that a defender clears the ball off the goal line when the keeper couldn't, and
2) that the defender who could have done that misinterprets the comment to mean he can't defender.

That all seems to be extremely, extremely unlikely that such a comment is going to have any influence.

Much, much, much more likely that players of both teams follow it in if you don't say anything, and you're faced with the possibility of a foul as players are running in, the 2nd attacker scoring, all sorts of things.

Worth noting, of course, that even if the defender kicks the ball into the goal it's no goal!!

one said:

I have been getting $600 annual insurance for my car 10 years in row now, cost me $6000 and I haven't got a single $ back. But you know what I'll get it again next year because if I have an accident with a $50K damage bill, I wont have to pay anything. Doing the right thing at a PK is a little short term pain but it covers your a$$ for that one time (next game or 10 years down the track) when the ball is till on the move after a rebound and you have not wrongly stopped a defender from saving it.

On a separate note, I'll leave this here. Goal or no goal? (ignore the rest of the WTF stuff)

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1665027426934881

Click to expand...

No goal for me. It's stopped, keeper kicks it in.

Having said that, in real time I first thought it was all one movement, which would be goal.

It's the sort of situation where an idiotic player has put you on the spot where you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Ciley Myrus said:

bit closer to home, also a goal ( I dont mean, goal, as in, its given as a goal in the clip), but, a perfectly valid goal in KFTPM

Click to expand...

Perfectly valid in an extended time PK too