A&H

Oxford v Bradford Goal Kick

Ciley Myrus said:
Am in this camp. Happy to be corrected but, play has not restarted if the restart is null and void.
Toughie
Click to expand...
It's all hypothetical anyway. Any team of officials disallowing a goal to go back up the other end to award a PK that occurred half hour ago, probably want to locate the nearest stadium exit before doing so (unless they're sitting in the VAR room, in which case such behaviour would not be unheard of)
 
The Referee Store
Big Cat said:
I agree, but if the teammate received the ball in the PA, is it the case that play was never restarted because the ball did not become 'in play'? Therefore theoretically, the officials could have gone back to something which occurred before the GK (the penalty shout)?
Not for a moment suggesting this would have been a good idea
Click to expand...
Totally agree with this.
 
Big Cat said:
I agree, but if the teammate received the ball in the PA, is it the case that play was never restarted because the ball did not become 'in play'? Therefore theoretically, the officials could have gone back to something which occurred before the GK (the penalty shout)?
Not for a moment suggesting this would have been a good idea
Click to expand...

A career as a lawyer awaits you. >.>

I suppose you're right technically.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Ciley Myrus said:
Am in this camp. Happy to be corrected but, play has not restarted if the restart is null and void.
Toughie
Click to expand...

Yep, which means that they can go back for the penalty as the restart (goal kick) didn't complete as the ball wasn't legally in play.

That's what I don't understand. If AR2 said penalty they should have gone back for it, if he said the ball didn't leave the area the GK should have been retaken. Whether the referee was signalling PK or GK it was definitely one of those scenarios, so I can't see how they got to Oxford goal out of it.
 
RustyRef said:
Yep, which means that they can go back for the penalty as the restart (goal kick) didn't complete as the ball wasn't legally in play.

That's what I don't understand. If AR2 said penalty they should have gone back for it, if he said the ball didn't leave the area the GK should have been retaken. Whether the referee was signalling PK or GK it was definitely one of those scenarios, so I can't see how they got to Oxford goal out of it.
Click to expand...
The ref definitely indicates goal kick and starts running backwards. If he was signing a penalty he would not be doing this.
 
RustyRef said:
Yep, which means that they can go back for the penalty as the restart (goal kick) didn't complete as the ball wasn't legally in play.

That's what I don't understand. If AR2 said penalty they should have gone back for it, if he said the ball didn't leave the area the GK should have been retaken. Whether the referee was signalling PK or GK it was definitely one of those scenarios, so I can't see how they got to Oxford goal out of it.
Click to expand...

Yes of the 3 things it should be, the Oxford goal is 4th in the list !!!

I cant work out the input of AR1. He should not be getting involved in A> the potential pk call in the other box, and B> have anything to do with whether or not the ball came out the box at the goal kick.
Certainly not credible.

and surely most obvious of all, if the AR2 has issue with ball not going out of the box, you raise flag there and then!!!
 
Last edited:
update, as per Oxford United own website...

when the goal kick was taken there were players from both sides in the box but nobody touches the ball until it goes out of the box, and nobody was influencing the goal kick.
After the goal, the ref consults AR2 who says the goal kick might not have been legal. The ref points to the area (but not pointing for a pk to Bradford) and then consults AR1 who confirms none of the players who were in the box at the goal kick were active.


So from that, AR2 has caused the confusion by not recognising the ball was actually legally in play.
 
Whether it’s a retake of the goal kick or a penalty, what on Earth was AR2 and the ref doing between that and the goal? Either AR2 didn’t bother to flag/buzz/speak down the comms or he did, and the referee just ignored it.
 
I spoke with inactive Ar1 as hes a good friend, the confusion is all about the legality of the GK, active AR2 chirps up and says hes not sure the gk was taken correctly.The ref goes into meltdown, now doubting himself, however inactive ar1 and 4th are clarifying that the lack off challenge at the gk allows play to continue in law.
 
Even if the play was not properly restarted via the GK, the time to deal with it has long since past when the ball hits the net down tother end
 
Big Cat said:
Even if the play was not properly restarted via the GK, the time to deal with it has long since past when the ball hits the net down tother end
Click to expand...
Exactly. Not one person had questioned that free kick so why make a huge deal out of it that late on, and why was AR2 not screaming down the Comms or smashing the buzzer
 
So after reading all this and it looks like A) no penalty was correct and B) the goal kick did leave the penalty area, is the outcome of a goal the correct result ?
 
spuddy1878 said:
So after reading all this and it looks like A) no penalty was correct and B) the goal kick did leave the penalty area, is the outcome of a goal the correct result ?
Click to expand...

Apparently the penalty bit was just the Bradford players misconstruing the ref’s initial signal for a goal kick (before he went to consult AR1 and 4th). Bradford local paper yesterday suggests officials confirmed a pen was never a consideration.

If the ball left the area before the Oxford player touched it, which was apparently very close (not caught on video), then yes - goal for Oxford was ultimately the correct outcome.

As others have said, seems like the active AR has somewhat sold the ref down the river on this one - looks like him raising the issue was almost an afterthought?
 
Ciley Myrus said:
Yes of the 3 things it should be, the Oxford goal is 4th in the list !!!

I cant work out the input of AR1. He should not be getting involved in A> the potential pk call in the other box, and B> have anything to do with whether or not the ball came out the box at the goal kick.
Certainly not credible.

and surely most obvious of all, if the AR2 has issue with ball not going out of the box, you raise flag there and then!!!
Click to expand...
The only reason I can think AR1 got involved is an error in law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top