A&H

GoalKick

Status
Not open for further replies.
Because the over riding issue is the ball has been played twice by same player, thus technically the other team cannot be "given" a goal.
They can however be given the advantage to score a goal, sorry my words are not always typed as I mean them !
 
The Referee Store
So we are all agreed, it has been confirmed that you CAN play advantage from a technical offence. But, in the incident described by the OP you could not play advantage and award a goal
 
I'm sure that both Ciley Myrus and Zarathustra are both correct. However I do not understand why and I can't find anything in the LOTG 17/18 to support it. For the record my gut feeling has always been IDFK. However I would like to know beyond doubt that this is the case. Thank you for your continued patience.
 
Grasshopper said:
I'm sure that both Ciley Myrus and Zarathustra are both correct. However I do not understand why and I can't find anything in the LOTG 17/18 to support it. For the record my gut feeling has always been IDFK. However I would like to know beyond doubt that this is the case. Thank you for your continued patience.
Click to expand...

In this instance the keeper touches the ball twice (before another player does) so it would be an IDFK. You can't score an own goal directly from a goal kick as it would need to be played by another player. In the OP it doesn't touch another player, it touches the same player twice, so no goal.
 
zarathustra said:
In this instance the keeper touches the ball twice (before another player does) so it would be an IDFK. You can't score an own goal directly from a goal kick as it would need to be played by another player. In the OP it doesn't touch another player, it touches the same player twice, so no goal.
Click to expand...
The penny drops! Thank you kind sir. I bow to you superior appreciation of the moment.
 
Peter Grove said:
I have to say I'm at a bit of a loss here. Perhaps I've lost my ability to parse the meaning of phrases but I totally fail to see how my post would constitute an attack on you as a person. Perhaps you could explain what exact words or phrases in my post you feel were calculated to impugn your integrity (as opposed to criticising the accuracy of and logic behind your statements, which it did indeed do).

Yes, the site is about education, learning and experience but that is not an excuse for ignoring erroneous or misleading statements such as the one you made implying that David Elleray's response somehow backed up your position on playing the advantage when it actually did the exact opposite. In fact if anything, challenging erroneous statements can be seen as part of an educational process.

Incidentally you are now compounding your error in terms of implying David Elleray proves you right since you are still saying it should be an IFK when his response says it is a corner kick. So despite him saying you are wrong on both counts - firstly on whether advantage is applicable on second touch offences (he says it is) and secondly on the decision in this scenario (which he says is a corner not an IFK) you are still somehow trying to claim you were "100% correct" when you are not.

Once again, none of this is a personal attack on you - it is just a criticism of your stated positions in regard to points of law.
Click to expand...


**Or you could find the correct answer in this post. Oh actually wait..... come to think of it...you wont !!!! (yes childish but its bizarre that this gentleman got likes for his point when its totally incorrect ! Anyways, yes, OP scenario appears to be done and dusted and we move on ! **
 
Miley Cyrus, it really seems to me that your only reason for continually posting is a rather desperate attempt to claim that you were right all along, and to denigrate those who actually are trying to learn. It can be hard to admit that we make mistakes...I for one will cheerfully admit that I was in favour of allowing a goal here, and have changed my opinion on reading and thinking over what we heard from David E. Now you DID say IFK from the beginning - right answer, but let us remember you gave utterly wrong reasoning: you were arguing forcibly (and wrongly) that advantage cannot be given if an offence was "against the LOTG". Which is now clearly wrong. Why not have the humility to admit this?

For those who might have ended up getting confused by all Mr Cyrus's smokescreens: to summarize what we have learned:

1 Advantage can be given for offsides or two touch offences as well as fouls.
2 In this particular case, though advantage can be played, a goal cannot be given because the Law about not scoring against yourself at restarts supercedes.
3 So a ref has the choice of playing advantage and giving a corner, or not playing advantage and giving an IFK for the double touch. As the IFK is actually the greater benefit to the team that did not offend, that is the best way to go.

++Please note Mr Cyrus, a corner is not "totally incorrect" just less advantageous than an IFK++

Huge thanks to David E and posters like Peter Grove who are clearly aiming to learn and teach rather than making cheap "I was right" points.
 
Last edited:
Incidentally you are now compounding your error in terms of implying David Elleray proves you right since you are still saying it should be an IFK when his response says it is a corner kick. So despite him saying you are wrong on both counts - firstly on whether advantage is applicable on second touch offences (he says it is) and secondly on the decision in this scenario (which he says is a corner not an IFK) you are still somehow trying to claim you were "100% correct" when you are not


Sorry but I don't think its right to be "corrected" and publically called out for getting something wrong, when indeed I was/am right.
The gentleman I have quoted even quotes Mr E as saying I am wrong, which is not correct, the said gentleman does not and did not know the correct restart (IDFK), which is fine, however to comprehend his lack of knowledge by then saying I have still got it wrong as per Mr E (and not through the poster himself) is condescending and if you read his post, you would consider a corner kick to be correct
If we are all here to learn, then, lets learn with the correct answers, not the ones that are written the best, or written by a poster who you can bow down to and sprinkle rose petals at the feet of, In the OP scenario, an IDFK is correct. Hopefully now on the 0.5% chance this happens as any of our games, we know now what to do. Anything else just seems be getting personal for no reason other than just cause.
No doubt am setting myself up for some kind of other remarks but hey ho, chances of, say, Mr G saying "sorry Ciley you were right its an IDFK" are as slim as, a Stay Puff Marshmallow man, clearly a masters degree in English is needed here other than just referee experience and knowledge.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top