A&H

Columbia v Argentina Dropped Ball

G

Goldfish

Well-Known Member
Hi
Near the end of the game last few minutes the ball hit the referee from a kick by a Columbian which then went to another Columbian player off the deflection. Ref stopped the game and when the camera panned back it looked like the DB was given to Argentina? See 1.42.50 on the video
Surely it should have been given to Columbia? Columbia last touched the ball.
 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
He stopped play because he felt it started a promising attack after hitting him.

I suspect he dropped the ball to Colombia when the camera panned away and for whatever reason they kicked it back to Argentina.
 
Hi
I get why he stopped it. Not sure Columbia gave it back and I think he gave it to Argentina from the way play restarted and maybe not? The ball does not now have to given back as the last team to touch has possession. IFAB do not want teams to give the ball back any more or manufacture a restart such as a TI deep in the corner or going all the way back to the GK
 
Yes I understand how and why the law works, but the players in this match may not. I still suspect he dropped the ball to James Rodriguez who decided on his own to kick it back to Argentina.
 
@cweary you remind me of Baghdad Bob (in terms of denial), steadfastly yet amiably defending FIFA referees for reasons that can only be disingenuous (I haven't watched the clip btw as I know you'd defend the ref regardless)
 
Big Cat said:
@cweary you remind me of Baghdad Bob (in terms of denial), steadfastly yet amiably defending FIFA referees for reasons that can only be disingenuous (I haven't watched the clip btw as I know you'd defend the ref regardless)
Click to expand...

So you didn't even watch the clip before dropping your typical accusatory BS against me? What a surprise.

At 92:20 the ref is holding the ball standing next to a Colombian player. Six seconds later the ball is 12 yards away from the referee who is still standing between three Colombian players. So yes I have deduced that the referee has dropped the ball to the Colombian player he was standing next to and continues to stand next to in the five seconds the camera cut away.

But sure, continue to spout your typical bull**** against me.
 
Early preventative warning, play nicely folks.

Given it is the Copa America, which in effect started a couple of years ago, could it be they are using the old laws rather than the new ones? Just like the Nations League finals used the old laws?
 
RustyRef said:
Early preventative warning, play nicely folks.

Given it is the Copa America, which in effect started a couple of years ago, could it be they are using the old laws rather than the new ones? Just like the Nations League finals used the old laws?
Click to expand...

But under the old Laws, play should not stop if it hits the ref.
 
Hi
There is the possibility of Columbia giving the ball back yet if they did why not to the GK? Also the whole basis behind the new law is to prevent the need to give it back which the referee has to manage.
Personally I think the referee knew the ball was given away by Columbia and that had it not hit the ref it would have gone to Argentina so he decided to give the ball back to them.
Anyway the learning principle is that the ball should have gone to Columbia not matter the possible outcome of the last kick before it hit the ref.
 
Learning point for me:
The law changed to achieve a fair outcome on dropped ball without relying on player sportsmanship. While it does so in more common scenarios , it still has to rely on players on some other ones. OP is one, other scenarios when there is a deflection of the ball prior to hitting the referee is another.

So the the law has some way to go before becoming 'complete'.

Begs the question (already asked by other forumites) that why did they introduce a change like this without trialing it.
 
RustyRef said:
Given it is the Copa America, which in effect started a couple of years ago, could it be they are using the old laws rather than the new ones? Just like the Nations League finals used the old laws?
Click to expand...
They transitioned to the new Laws for this. You can tell, because about 15s before it hits the referee, the GK takes a goal kick that is played by a teammate inside the area.
 
cwyeary said:
So you didn't even watch the clip before dropping your typical accusatory BS against me? What a surprise.

At 92:20 the ref is holding the ball standing next to a Colombian player. Six seconds later the ball is 12 yards away from the referee who is still standing between three Colombian players. So yes I have deduced that the referee has dropped the ball to the Colombian player he was standing next to and continues to stand next to in the five seconds the camera cut away.

But sure, continue to spout your typical bull**** against me.
Click to expand...
Apologies for this comment. It was flippant at best. Good that you put me back in my cage!
 
Goldfish said:
Hi
There is the possibility of Columbia giving the ball back yet if they did why not to the GK? Also the whole basis behind the new law is to prevent the need to give it back which the referee has to manage.
Personally I think the referee knew the ball was given away by Columbia and that had it not hit the ref it would have gone to Argentina so he decided to give the ball back to them.
Anyway the learning principle is that the ball should have gone to Columbia not matter the possible outcome of the last kick before it hit the ref.
Click to expand...

There was never a need to give the ball back to the opposition after a dropped ball.

The change a couple of seasons ago that specifically forbade match officials from managing the dropped ball tried to stop this, but failed, and that is why we now have to drop the ball to the team that last touched the ball.

If players want to pass it back to the opposition after that then that is up to them.
 
Was used correctly in Eng v Japan last night, although clearly England player hadn't read new laws as she wanted to kick the ball back to Japan, who were disadvantaged by the ball hitting the ref. Ref told her to move away and she dropped ball at Japan players feet and on we went.
 
zarathustra said:
If players want to pass it back to the opposition after that then that is up to them
Click to expand...
True, but the IFAB has made it clear (and in writing) that they don't want this to happen. So that's why I think that, until the players get used to this, referees might be doing everyone a favour by explaining the new procedure to the players before they drop the ball - as all the referees at the WWC are doing, as far as I have observed.
 
Peter Grove said:
True, but the IFAB has made it clear (and in writing) that they don't want this to happen. So that's why I think that, until the players get used to this, referees might be doing everyone a favour by explaining the new procedure to the players before they drop the ball - as all the referees at the WWC are doing, as far as I have observed.
Click to expand...

Well IFAB want lots of things, I'm happy to tell a player they don't have to kick the ball back to their opponents after an injury etc, but I'm not going to tell them they can't, it's entirely up to them, unless IFAB make it an offence there's little else we can do
 
zarathustra said:
Well IFAB want lots of things, I'm happy to tell a player they don't have to kick the ball back to their opponents after an injury etc, but I'm not going to tell them they can't, it's entirely up to them, unless IFAB make it an offence there's little else we can do
Click to expand...
That's true but I'm fairly sure that if it's explained sufficiently clearly to a player and they have understood that the ball does not have to be given back because the ball was in their team's possession when play was stopped and that the new law is that they should keep the ball and play on from there, I can't think of any reason why a player would choose to give their ball possession back to the opponent. However if they do, well .....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top