Final Score Aston Villa 1 Brentford 1 (Toney)

GuyBee

Active member
Joined
1 Apr 2006
Messages
1,898
Reaction score
196
Location
Hertfordshire
Not sure of the exact rules that qualifies a foul to become a penalty, but I only think it should be if a goal scoring opportunity has been denied (ambiguous I know). But with Wissa on the edge and running away, I don't think that should have been awarded.
the chance of it being a goal or not is totally irelvant. same rules as a direct free kick anywhere on the pitch, but if it is in the box, where it is taken from changes to the penalty spot
 

GuyBee

Active member
Joined
1 Apr 2006
Messages
1,898
Reaction score
196
Location
Hertfordshire
Don't see why there can't be free kicks awarded someway inside the penalty area, obviously some would have to be moved back from the goalmouth, but for a game won by a penalty sored from a slight trip on a player running away from goal on the edge of the box doesn't feel right.
or they could try not tripping him?
 

lanzabee

Active member
Joined
28 Feb 2009
Messages
1,078
Reaction score
581
Location
Lanzarote
Best wasn't penalised for the "contact" - it's a game of physical contact, after all - he was penalised for interfering with the gk when he (gk) was still in control of the ball.

That is, the gk must be permitted to get the ball back in play legitimately, otherwise an opponent could just stand right in front of him and impede him without needing to touch him.

Contrast Dion Dublin's goal vs Shay Given. This was allowed because SG had rolled the ball beyond his reach, so he was no longer in control of the ball:

Not about GK control apparently, the ball is only in play once GK releases it and it touches the ground (news to me too).

That's why the Dublin goal stood. The ball didnt touch ground for either Janelt or Best 'goal' - hence disallowed.

According to newspaper reports today anyway...
 

Griffingreen

Royal Oak Exile
Joined
14 Nov 2001
Messages
3,291
Reaction score
614
Location
Hampton
the chance of it being a goal or not is totally irelvant. same rules as a direct free kick anywhere on the pitch, but if it is in the box, where it is taken from changes to the penalty spot
A very probably goal from a very unprobeable opportunity, that could well win a match, doesn't seem like cricket to me.

or they could try not tripping him?
These sort of fouls often look dubious
 

hatfieldbee

Once a Bee always a Bee, but not a fake one
Joined
13 Dec 2007
Messages
5,519
Reaction score
333
Location
Hatfield, Herts
Just back from Villa after watching a thoroughly enjoyable game. I thought we just nicked the game and really could have won it.

Saman Ghoddos was outstanding.

We really deserve to be in the EPL and are proving it on the pitch - bit of a shame about off the pitch :)

Just catching up with this thread. Those planes must be very fast from Brum Airport!
 

Gee Bee

Well-known member
Joined
18 Jan 2001
Messages
23,159
Reaction score
554
Location
Rayleigh
Not about GK control apparently, the ball is only in play once GK releases it and it touches the ground (news to me too).

That's why the Dublin goal stood. The ball didnt touch ground for either Janelt or Best 'goal' - hence disallowed.

According to newspaper reports today anyway...
That doesn’t make sense. There have been goals scored where the keeper hits against someone and it goes in without touching the ground.
 

Isleworth_Bee

Well-known member
Joined
18 Jan 2005
Messages
24,016
Reaction score
3,066
Location
Basingstoke
That doesn’t make sense. There have been goals scored where the keeper hits against someone and it goes in without touching the ground.
And what if he lumps it someone flicks it on and someone volley's it without it touching the floor?
 

RAF_Patto

Active member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
1,078
Reaction score
1,318
Location
Lincoln
That doesn’t make sense. There have been goals scored where the keeper hits against someone and it goes in without touching the ground.
They've kicked it against them, where as VJ clearly moves directly for the ball with an outstretched leg, so it's slightly different in the intent.
 

Gee Bee

Well-known member
Joined
18 Jan 2001
Messages
23,159
Reaction score
554
Location
Rayleigh
They've kicked it against them, where as VJ clearly moves directly for the ball with an outstretched leg, so it's slightly different in the intent.
I’m just pointing out that goals are scored without it again touching the ground.
 

StevieSteve

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2015
Messages
395
Reaction score
297
If you go back to the rule, you'll see that it says GK has control while ball is between hands and another surface eg ground, body
So once he's kicked it, it's between boot and rest of planet I.e. not between hands, so therefore he doesn't have control of it.
 

lanzabee

Active member
Joined
28 Feb 2009
Messages
1,078
Reaction score
581
Location
Lanzarote
That doesn’t make sense. There have been goals scored where the keeper hits against someone and it goes in without touching the ground.
I know, just relating the explanation given for it being disallowed in the Mail match report.
 

RAF_Patto

Active member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
1,078
Reaction score
1,318
Location
Lincoln
If you go back to the rule, you'll see that it says GK has control while ball is between hands and another surface eg ground, body
So once he's kicked it, it's between boot and rest of planet I.e. not between hands, so therefore he doesn't have control of it.
He hadn't kicked it yesterday, Vitaly nabbed it from him when it was between his hands and either the ground or his foot. But this would seem to state IF he had just kicked it against Vitaly then it would be legal.
 

Wooburn Bee

Active member
Joined
22 Feb 2006
Messages
3,407
Reaction score
557
Not about GK control apparently, the ball is only in play once GK releases it and it touches the ground (news to me too).

That's why the Dublin goal stood. The ball didnt touch ground for either Janelt or Best 'goal' - hence disallowed.

According to newspaper reports today anyway...
Makes sense as otherwise would have a couple of players surrounding goalie making almost impossible for them to release the ball.
 

Mr Tree

President of the PBSA
Joined
28 Apr 2000
Messages
35,004
Reaction score
613
Location
Czech Republic
On the George Best v banks discussion, my failing memory tells me GB did it against another keeper that season and it was allowed.
Which GB? 🤔

For the record, I'm slightly staggered so many grown adults seem to be having a serious discussion on this. It's obviously not on and never has been...
 

hairman

Active member
Joined
19 Mar 2008
Messages
5,800
Reaction score
860
That doesn’t make sense. There have been goals scored where the keeper hits against someone and it goes in without touching the ground.
You mean like the goalkeeper's clearance that hit Lloyd Owusu on the arse and went back over goalie into the goal? Even though Lloyd was running away from the goal it was disallowed. Can't remember the match but certain it happened at GP.
 

AB

Well-known member
Joined
12 Apr 2000
Messages
14,304
Reaction score
4,957
Location
'Sunny' Leeds
You mean like the goalkeeper's clearance that hit Lloyd Owusu on the arse and went back over goalie into the goal? Even though Lloyd was running away from the goal it was disallowed. Can't remember the match but certain it happened at GP.
Darren Powell wasn’t it?
 

hairman

Active member
Joined
19 Mar 2008
Messages
5,800
Reaction score
860
Darren Powell wasn’t it?
I say Lloyd Owusu but perhaps someone could ask him. Not sure of the opposition but pretty certain it was at Ealing Road end.
 

Sandybee

Member
Joined
23 Jul 2020
Messages
382
Reaction score
219
Don't see why there can't be free kicks awarded someway inside the penalty area, obviously some would have to be moved back from the goalmouth, but for a game won by a penalty sored from a slight trip on a player running away from goal on the edge of the box doesn't feel right.
You’ve made a good point there. Do you remember the penalty we were awarded against Wycombe last year, when Sergei Canos nicked the ball from the Wycombe bloke at the last second, and the Wycombe bloke caught Sergei instead of the ball. They were both moving away from the goal at the time! It was a penalty in the eyes of the rules, but very unfortunate for Wycombe. They ended up losing the game 7-2, but were drawing at the time of the penalty. I think the rules should be reviewed so that the punishment fits the crime.
 
Joined
23 May 2000
Messages
18,323
Reaction score
1,509
You mean like the goalkeeper's clearance that hit Lloyd Owusu on the arse and went back over goalie into the goal? Even though Lloyd was running away from the goal it was disallowed. Can't remember the match but certain it happened at GP.
Peterborough away in 2001/2
 

hairman

Active member
Joined
19 Mar 2008
Messages
5,800
Reaction score
860
Peterborough away in 2001/2
Peterborough don't have an Ealing Road end. Jeez, I must have done loads of acid and hallucinated the entire scene. I guess that I must been at London Road then. Hey kids, don't do LSD, it messes with your brain. It was Lloyd Owusu though, wasn't it? Please tell me it was so.
 
Joined
23 May 2000
Messages
18,323
Reaction score
1,509
Peterborough don't have an Ealing Road end. Jeez, I must have done loads of acid and hallucinated the entire scene. I guess that I must been at London Road then. Hey kids, don't do LSD, it messes with your brain. It was Lloyd Owusu though, wasn't it? Please tell me it was so.
Sorry mate. It was Powell
 

Houghton Bee

Well-known member
Joined
10 Jul 2001
Messages
14,030
Reaction score
1,120
Location
Houghton Regis
Peterborough don't have an Ealing Road end. Jeez, I must have done loads of acid and hallucinated the entire scene. I guess that I must been at London Road then. Hey kids, don't do LSD, it messes with your brain. It was Lloyd Owusu though, wasn't it? Please tell me it was so.

Cant remember who it was against but that 100% happened to Lloyd at a home game.

The disallowed goal, not the acid. To my knowledge at least.
 

SE5Bee

Member
Joined
25 Sep 2007
Messages
260
Reaction score
162
And what if he lumps it someone flicks it on and someone volley's it without it touching the floor?
Think the goal keeper kick also takes it out of his control. That what appears to be in the information posted earlier. 🤔
 

hairman

Active member
Joined
19 Mar 2008
Messages
5,800
Reaction score
860
Cant remember who it was against but that 100% happened to Lloyd at a home game.

The disallowed goal, not the acid. To my knowledge at least.
Thank you. Or you shared my hallucination?
 

abellbee

Member
Joined
30 Jul 2011
Messages
476
Reaction score
84
Location
walton on thames
He let go of the ball. That law is complete bullshit.
Totally ridiculous, if you take that to the extreme - if a goalkeeper throws a ball to a defender is he still in control till the defender touches it. !!!!! - as soon as he releases the ball from his hands it's in play. How is it i've seen when a goalkeeper rolls the ball along the floor & a player comes from behind him & takes the ball it's allowed. No Difference.
 

Isleworth_Bee

Well-known member
Joined
18 Jan 2005
Messages
24,016
Reaction score
3,066
Location
Basingstoke
You’ve made a good point there. Do you remember the penalty we were awarded against Wycombe last year, when Sergei Canos nicked the ball from the Wycombe bloke at the last second, and the Wycombe bloke caught Sergei instead of the ball. They were both moving away from the goal at the time! It was a penalty in the eyes of the rules, but very unfortunate for Wycombe. They ended up losing the game 7-2, but were drawing at the time of the penalty. I think the rules should be reviewed so that the punishment fits the crime.

Na not for me. Its a foul in the box its a pen. Players know not to dangle a leg. You would leave it far to open for discussion.
 

AB

Well-known member
Joined
12 Apr 2000
Messages
14,304
Reaction score
4,957
Location
'Sunny' Leeds
Na not for me. Its a foul in the box its a pen. Players know not to dangle a leg. You would leave it far to open for discussion.
Yes- do that and it’ll be a nailed on penalty for the big clubs and an indirect free kick or a card for diving for us.
 

looneytunes

Member
Joined
19 Oct 2013
Messages
545
Reaction score
36
You mean like the goalkeeper's clearance that hit Lloyd Owusu on the arse and went back over goalie into the goal? Even though Lloyd was running away from the goal it was disallowed. Can't remember the match but certain it happened at GP.

Southend I think may have been his hat trick goal on the night
 

Beeswaxnees

Member
Joined
15 Apr 2017
Messages
475
Reaction score
95
Buendia had way too much time before he scored. He was totally free inside our penalty area, and our defenders (Pinnock and Henry being the closest to Buendia) were all around 12 yard from our goal, so I am not sure about clever. Both Pinnock and Henry were, for whatever reason, totally missing to mark Buendia on the edge of penalty area. And the only really clever thing with their goal was Matty Cash's forward run which made Henry run like a "headless chicken" before Buendia's kick.

Liked the match a lot. Very entertaining, some really unclever tackles from both sides, some nasty tricks both sides. Personally, I think we failed too many diagonal passes, kicked too many long passes to Toney hoping for the best because even if it is Premier League, I know we have ability to play faster from defense and not "just" kick high balls forward when we first passed ten times sideways between our defenders and Raya. Aston Villa blocked six of our shots, so we need to adjust and speed up our attacking a little.
Why a headless chicken? It is in Rico too naturally track the wider man, yea In hindsight he simply should have closed him down but doesn't mean he would have prevented the goal or stop Buendia laying the ball off to Matty Cash who would have been free to score. The problem was both Ethan & Rico should have sorted it out who was going to pick up Buendia before the ball came to him.
 

RAF_Patto

Active member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
1,078
Reaction score
1,318
Location
Lincoln
Totally ridiculous, if you take that to the extreme - if a goalkeeper throws a ball to a defender is he still in control till the defender touches it. !!!!! - as soon as he releases the ball from his hands it's in play. How is it i've seen when a goalkeeper rolls the ball along the floor & a player comes from behind him & takes the ball it's allowed. No Difference.
Because its touched the ground. Once it hits the ground or any other part of the keeper (ie their foot) its no longer under their "control".
 

badgerbee

Mafeking Avenue........gets you there!!!!
Joined
28 Jan 2008
Messages
17,839
Reaction score
4,137
Location
Langport, Somerset
Because its touched the ground. Once it hits the ground or any other part of the keeper (ie their foot) its no longer under their "control".
Agree with your answer.
But I think abelbee asks a valid question about a throw from the keeper to a defender......at what point is it OK for a forward to "legally" touch the ball under those circumstances?? Surely he doesn't have to with until the defender has touched it.....??......
 

RAF_Patto

Active member
Joined
16 Jun 2020
Messages
1,078
Reaction score
1,318
Location
Lincoln
Agree with your answer.
But I think abelbee asks a valid question about a throw from the keeper to a defender......at what point is it OK for a forward to "legally" touch the ball under those circumstances?? Surely he doesn't have to with until the defender has touched it.....??......
One would expect that a throw is a fairly obvious movement, so therefore the ball is legally in play from the moment the GK releases it? As its clearly enroute to another player.

That is my interpretation, but it would appear it is one of those areas that would be down to subjectivity.

That being said, I'm sure we can all see that irrelevant of these scenarios, JV's "goal" was correctly chalked off.
 

red_and_white

Active member
Joined
2 Mar 2004
Messages
1,611
Reaction score
206
Location
South-West London
I might be wrong, but I feel there aren't as many lengthy match reports on these threads any more.

A product of the twitter era of brevity?; more people being able to watch games so less need for it? Or my imagination?
 
Last edited:

Banana

Very, very seldomly incorrect
Joined
7 Apr 2000
Messages
78,746
Reaction score
11,392
Location
London
Agree with your answer.
But I think abelbee asks a valid question about a throw from the keeper to a defender......at what point is it OK for a forward to "legally" touch the ball under those circumstances?? Surely he doesn't have to with until the defender has touched it.....??......
When he does not have possession of the ball anymore. Clearly between dropping the ball and kicking it, he is in possession of the ball.
 

badgerbee

Mafeking Avenue........gets you there!!!!
Joined
28 Jan 2008
Messages
17,839
Reaction score
4,137
Location
Langport, Somerset
When he does not have possession of the ball anymore. Clearly between dropping the ball and kicking it, he is in possession of the ball.
Agree with bolded comment. (And totally agree that VJ's 'goal' was correctly chalked off).
Still reckon (as per Patto's comment) there could be room for interpretation about if the keeper is deliberately releasing the ball as part of a throw out to one of his teammates.....
 

StevieSteve

Member
Joined
5 Feb 2015
Messages
395
Reaction score
297
The nub of the Law is that the GK can't be challenged while he has control.

So after the GK has thrown the ball and it's in flight he can't be challenged. That doesn't stop the ball from being intercepted halfway down the pitch, but does stop a volleyball style block by someone standing right in front of the keeper
 

SE5Bee

Member
Joined
25 Sep 2007
Messages
260
Reaction score
162
The nub of the Law is that the GK can't be challenged while he has control.

So after the GK has thrown the ball and it's in flight he can't be challenged. That doesn't stop the ball from being intercepted halfway down the pitch, but does stop a volleyball style block by someone standing right in front of the keeper
The opponent cannot impede the release of the ball whether release is though kicking or throwing. Bouncing or putting the ball down is different. So the question is how close can the opponent be to the keeper before it’s impeding. 🤔
 
Top Bottom