Football : Season 2009/2010 - Page 49

**Damien** · 17-10-2009, 16:59

Very unfair on Liverpool. They are quite a way of the pace now though! United for them next. A loss there should confirm they won't be title contenders.

Bulky · 17-10-2009, 17:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niles Crane

It did: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSOorkAqSqw

Should it be disallowed though? Is there a rule to legislate for this? If it's unfair on Liverpool to allow it, surely it's unfair on Sunderland not to? It's not as if the shot wasn't on target and if there's a bump etc in the grass, goals don't get disallowed.

As far as i can see, the referee had no choice but to allow it. I'd be surprised if any Liverpool player argued otherwise too.

If i remember rightly , when this happened to Man City it was deemed it was the goalkeepers responsibility to clear the box ??

Shadow Demon UK · 17-10-2009, 17:06

It shouldn't have been given, it was a comfortable save for Reina before it hit the ball. From what i've heard though Sunderland fully deserved the win and it could have been 3 or 4 nil.

Niles Crane · 17-10-2009, 17:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by bulkylad

If i remember rightly , when this happened to Man City it was deemed it was the goalkeepers responsibility to clear the box ??

Well it certainly seems standard practice for goalkeepers to clear balloons etc from their area. It'll be interesting to watch the highlights later, to see how long it was actually on the pitch.

It seems it was actually a beachball, not a balloon.

---------- Post added at 17:10 ---------- Previous post was at 17:08 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow Demon UK

It shouldn't have been given, it was a comfortable save for Reina before it hit the ball. From what i've heard though Sunderland fully deserved the win and it could have been 3 or 4 nil.

No it wasn't. It probably would have been - big difference. For all you or i know, Reina would have made a complete howler and missed it. The same reason the last man gets sent off instead of the last man gets sent off and the opposing team is awarded a goal, even if a goal was almost certainly going to be scored.

Like i said earlier, goals don't get disallowed for erroneous and poor pitches.

kingbuxton · 17-10-2009, 17:13

Classic! Just when you think Liverpool loosing can't be beat, life finds a way.

Another good game at OT, despite BWFC kicking lumps out of us, who knew Ronaldo leaving would make us more entertaining?

Bulky · 17-10-2009, 17:14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5V0w...layer_embedded

think this is a better version

Niles Crane · 17-10-2009, 17:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by bulkylad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5V0w...layer_embedded

think this is a better version

That kid is going to have a few sleepless nights.

TheDaddy · 17-10-2009, 17:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niles Crane

It did: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSOorkAqSqw

Should it be disallowed though? Is there a rule to legislate for this? If it's unfair on Liverpool to allow it, surely it's unfair on Sunderland not to? It's not as if the shot wasn't on target and if there's a bump etc in the grass, goals don't get disallowed.

As far as i can see, the referee had no choice but to allow it. I'd be surprised if any Liverpool player argued otherwise too.

Yes there is a rule regarding foreign objects on the pitch, the match should have been stopped and a drop ball taken where the incident occured, the ref should be in a bit of trouble over this.

Shadow Demon UK · 17-10-2009, 17:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niles Crane

No it wasn't. It probably would have been - big difference. For all you or i know, Reina would have made a complete howler and missed it. The same reason the last man gets sent off instead of the last man gets sent off and the opposing team is awarded a goal, even if a goal was almost certainly going to be scored.

Like i said earlier, goals don't get disallowed for erroneous and poor pitches.

I understand what your saying, but surely the ref can use some common sense and see that the ball being on the pitch gave Sunderland a huge advantage. It's not the same as a poor pitch, as that's something that is constant throughout the whole game for both sides, not like a ball that's on the pitch for a minute infront of one teams goal. It will be intresting to see how long it was on the pitch and if Liverpool had a chance to get rid of it though.

Bulky · 17-10-2009, 17:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niles Crane

That kid is going to have a few sleepless nights.

poor lad has to go to school as well

Niles Crane · 17-10-2009, 17:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadow Demon UK

I understand what your saying, but surely the ref can use some common sense and see that the ball being on the pitch gave Sunderland a huge advantage. It's not the same as a poor pitch, as that's something that is constant throughout the whole game for both sides, not like a ball that's on the pitch for a minute infront of one teams goal. It will be intresting to see how long it was on the pitch and if Liverpool had a chance to get rid of it though.

Common sense would also suggest Sunderland's advantage was pure luck, so why should they be punished for it instead of Liverpool?

A bump in the grass is not a constant. The amount of times a goal has been scored due to a random bump on the grass is endless. Not only are they not all over the pitch, but they're then usually repaired once the damage has been done.

Is Liverpool's strength in depth really so poor, without Gerrard and Torres, even a beachball can beat them? New lows.

kingbuxton · 17-10-2009, 17:28

They got 97 mins to score, should be enough.

TheDaddy · 17-10-2009, 17:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Niles Crane

Common sense would also suggest Sunderland's advantage was pure luck, so why should they be punished for it instead of Liverpool?

A bump in the grass is not a constant. The amount of times a goal has been scored due to a random bump on the grass is endless. Not only are they not all over the pitch, but they're then usually repaired once the damage has been done.

Is Liverpool's strength in depth really so poor, without Gerrard and Torres, even a beachball can beat them? New lows.

A bump on the grass isn't a foreign object is it. It's shocking that after all the publicity surrounding refs at the moment, this one cant even get the basic rules correct.

Niles Crane · 17-10-2009, 17:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

A bump on the grass isn't a foreign object is it. It's shocking that after all the publicity surrounding refs at the moment, this one cant even get the basic rules correct.

These are the official laws of the game: http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/RulesandR...ameen_0910.pdf

Can you please point out the exact ruling regarding foreign objects, which you refer to? As the only reference to objects i can find is regarding players throwing or using them in some way. Thanks.

---------- Post added at 17:45 ---------- Previous post was at 17:41 ----------

DocDutch · 17-10-2009, 17:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by kingbuxton

They got 97 mins to score, should be enough.

thought that was only the case when Manure play they get an extra 7 mins to score when it looks like they are losing.