A&H

Hearts V Celtic 1st Goal

Status
Not open for further replies.

AirdrieRef

New Member
Celtic Goal Keeper goes to take goal kick to player in left back position Boyata, Hearts Player Don Cowie reads whats happening, sprints across the penalty area (inside the Area) to close him down. Cowie more or less passing the penalty spot as the keeper hits the ball. Cowie closes down Boyata who plays ball back to Gordon who makes a hash of the clearance leading to Hearts 1st Goal.
In my opinion this should be a retake of the Goal Kick as all oposition players must be outside the Penalty area Thoughts anyone ?
 
The Referee Store
No no no no no
Yes by LOTG opposition players must be outside pen box.
But!
You cannot then pull play back just because Boyata ( who plays an upfield ball which is intercepted,Boyata DOES NOT play the ball bk to the gk as described) makes a poor pass, which even then is 35 yards from goal and on touchline.
Had Boyata pinged a ball up to say Celtic striker, by your logic, you are pulling play back because Cowie was in the box at taking of goal kick! You cant have iit both ways.
When Boyata recieves that ball from Gordon, has it at feet, all gd to go, the passage of play which WAS the goal kick, is now complete, and we move on to what happens next.
The OP appears again to be a case of knowing the LOTG, but not knowing how to apply them. There is a huge difference.
 
I have not seen the incident. I don't see where the OP says play should have been pulled back after Boyata plays the ball. It says it should have been a retake which is consistent with the law (assuming Boyata was challenged for the ball before he touched it by an opponent who was in the PA before the ball left the PA). The retake option has nothing to do with what the defender does with the ball.
1513595585660.png
 
The only reason anything comes of this is by the bad distribution of Boyata, Cowie has no influence on this. Ball at Boyatas feet, despite Cowie having been in prn area, nothing to see here, we are ready for next passage of play.
Boyata now plays a pass down touchline, which is intercepted.
Boyata could havd played the 70 yard wonder ball

There are 11 Celtic internationals on the park, nobody, not one, goes to AR or ref.

Football expects, and here, when Boyata has the ball, we have moved on

The OP could attend his training this week and ask the AR in question why he did not flag for a retake and report back to us. That would be more useful than the second guessers on here


As ever, if you wish to retake that on your pitch because the LOTG say so, great
The rest of the country will accept its a goal and move on
 
I’m now very curious to see the clip. Visual in my mind based on OP suggests an attacking player cut massively across the box during a GK to get to the LB and put him under pressure forcing a bad pass resulting in a goal. First it’s a retake based on law and second the attacker seems to gain an advantage so I don’t quite get ciley’s point...unless the attacker really had nothing to do with the bad pass and didn’t even get to the LB.
 
The pass was good. The only reason the move broke down was because of a slip 20 yards up the park by the intended receiptant of the pass.
Its akin to a phase 2 offside shout.....
 
The only reason anything comes of this is by the bad distribution of Boyata, Cowie has no influence on this. Ball at Boyatas feet, despite Cowie having been in prn area, nothing to see here, we are ready for next passage of play.
Boyata now plays a pass down touchline, which is intercepted.
Boyata could havd played the 70 yard wonder ball

There are 11 Celtic internationals on the park, nobody, not one, goes to AR or ref.

Football expects, and here, when Boyata has the ball, we have moved on

The OP could attend his training this week and ask the AR in question why he did not flag for a retake and report back to us. That would be more useful than the second guessers on here


As ever, if you wish to retake that on your pitch because the LOTG say so, great
The rest of the country will accept its a goal and move on


So you're saying ignore LOTG. Not only that but LOTG describes EXACTLY this situation and what should be done and you say ignore.

'Football expects' defensive free kicks in the penalty area to be in play as soon as ball is kicked, many don't know you can't be offside from a GK, expect throws to be penalised if takers feet are mostly on the pitch etc etc etc

I get that no one penalises GKs holding the ball for 7 seconds or throws not taken from the blade of grass the ball went out, but this is black and white, he is in the area, so its a retake.
 
Can i ask at what point you are stopping the game and ordering a retake? Gordon, the Celtic keeper, is happy to play his short goal kick (which is what Celtic do), knowing Cowie is there. Do we stop it then?
The ball then goes to its target, Boyata, who has ball at feet and is looking up the line for his pass (which is what he does) Do we stop it here?
Bear in mind, nobody, Gordon, Boyata, Celtic coaches, nobody, is concerned at all about Cowie
The ball THEN is played by Boyata 30 yards up the line to its target, the target however slips and Hearts get the ball. Are we now stopping the game?
If you are serious saying you are stopping it on the celtic player slipping 30 yards from goal line, out on the touchline, then, enjoy your riot police protection.
If its black and white, ok, Gordon rolls to Boyata, with Cowie in the box, but Boyatas pass is 60 yards up park and Celtic are through on goal. Buy hey lets pull it back because Cowie was in the box?

There is no problem here, unless you go looking for one.
 
Last edited:
Clip 1. Everybody, ref, AR, Gordon, can see Cowie in the box. You dont simply stop the game because an opponent is in the box

Clip 2. Boyata, quite comfy with ball at feet and plays his pass, we move on


Clip 3. It so happens the target of the pass has slipped. Thats the way it goes sometimes. Cowie, whilst the LOTG say he should not be in the box, has less than nothing to do with the play.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5324.JPG
    IMG_5324.JPG
    760.1 KB · Views: 24
  • IMG_5325.JPG
    IMG_5325.JPG
    708.6 KB · Views: 25
  • IMG_5326.JPG
    IMG_5326.JPG
    799.9 KB · Views: 21
Based on those images, yes. Bring it back and play it again.

The defender was being pressured by the opponent, who had been in the penalty area, and was actively challenging the defender, who actually managed to make a decent play (but was also very limited in his options).

This isn't a "gotcha" situation.
 
The highlights suggest that the Hearts attacker was a yard away from the left back when he played the ball, and the only reason he was in that position is that he ran across the penalty area to get there. The attacker was challenging for the ball before the opponent had played it after running across the penalty area, so the play should have been stopped and goal kick retaken as soon as Cowie challenged for the ball. It looks like the left back rushes his pass because he is being challenged.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/scotland/42386699

If the play had been stopped as soon as Cowie challenged, as required by Law, then riot police would not have been necessary because the slip and subsequent play would not have occurred. In addition. the player may actually have learned something!
 
I never read the press but there was a scabby paper lying around at work. Not for one moment am i saying whats in the press counts, but six pages of coverage of this game, not a single mention of a goal kick retake
There is no issue, dont cause one.
 
Apart from the record games run and Gazzas time there i dont think I could name more than a couple of current players in the whole Scottish League.

More interest in Salford City this season than up'n north!!!
 
I never read the press but there was a scabby paper lying around at work. Not for one moment am i saying whats in the press counts, but six pages of coverage of this game, not a single mention of a goal kick retake
There is no issue, dont cause one.
Most of the players don't know/understand the Laws, the commentators don't have a clue, why on earth would you think that the papers would know anything?
 
I guarantee you Craig Gordon knows the laws and also he knows Cowie is in the box. As does our Elite ref and his european travel buddy.
Its a non story. Well, clearly not on here as we cant seem to accept a goal without seeing if a boot was high, slippers were worn, two touches were taken at a fk or whatever the hot topic is.

As with most things, if you wish to retake in your game, then thats fine
Am playing on.
 
Clip 1. Everybody, ref, AR, Gordon, can see Cowie in the box. You dont simply stop the game because an opponent is in the box
Not simply opponent in the box but you DO if he is challenging for the ball and in clip 1 its clear that he is. What happens after that (clip2 and clip 3) is completely irrelevant. The game should have been stopped right then.

In post #3 you said the OP knows the law but doesn't know when to apply it. This law is in the good book for a reason:
1513667307770.png
Given that your post implies you know the law and know when to apply it, can you give me an example of when you would apply it?
 
Last edited:
On another note since the phrase “what would football want/expect?” I have seen it used out of context so frequently. It only applies for situations where there is no direct provision in the Laws.
1513668357330.png
As pointed out earlier there are many subtle laws that the masses don't know about but the referees are expected to know and apply.
 
Cowie imo has no influence on Boyata, so little influence that the gk, despite knowing Cowie is there, still plays the ball to him. Usual Celtic is this short goal kick then ball up line. Same as they do ten times a game. Only this one went pear shaped due to a loss of footing some 30 35 yards from the goal line, nearly touching the touchline
As said, if anyone is going back to the restart with a goal kick, thats up to them
Am playing on. Same as the very elite of our country did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top