- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,792
WTF?
[Albion] Drop Ball
- Thread starter WATFORD zero
- Start date
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
BT Sport mentioned some sort of new rule that means it had to be uncontested. Maupay did contest it, and was booked as a result.
seagull1970
New member
- Apr 7, 2019
- 41
And was told about 3 times by the ref not to contest it !!!
Garage_Doors
Originally the Swankers
When was this rule implemented? i always thought this was a gentlemanly thing to not contest it when it was put out for injury ect, this was for a burst ball. seems strange for the ref to decide it was to be uncontested. Even then Maupay allows the them to touch it first before he becomes competitive, weird decision by the ref in my opinion.
But having just looked up the laws, the referee has no power to do this. If both players agree, it’s fine. But Maupay clearly hadn’t agreed.
“The wording makes it clear that the referee has no authority to decide who can challenge for a dropped ball and/or where the dropped ball is to be kicked.
If, for ‘fair play’ reasons, the players agree who will kick the ball and where they will kick it, the referee can agree but it must come from the players – it can not be an instruction from the referee as the referee has no authority to do so as a dropped ball is a ‘neutral’ restart which is supposed to be ‘fair’ for both teams.”
http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...l-11-11/law-8---the-start-and-restart-of-play
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,031
Maupay was arguing before the drop, i think he was expecting a free kick and saw a uncontested drop as effective free kick to them.
Was a very weird situation and if the new rule is that it must be uncontested, you can just have the ref drop the ball and just not touch it until the game ends. Not likely to happen but it's a flawed rule.
Impressive how the ref had no hard decisions to do, made no major errors and yet everyone on the pitch seemed to despise him.
Impressive how the ref had no hard decisions to do, made no major errors and yet everyone on the pitch seemed to despise him.
Suspect that may not be current. From - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/48382254
Drop balls can no longer be contested, but the change is more positive than it sounds.
If play is stopped, the ball will be dropped to a player on the team that last touched the ball - and where they touched it. All other players must be 4.5 yards (4m) away.
What that means is if a team's attack is stopped, they will get the ball back in that position - instead of the opponents booting the ball down the field.
However, any play stopped in a penalty area will be returned to the goalkeeper, even if the attacking team had the ball.
Another big change now sees a drop ball awarded if the ball hits the referee and goes to the other team as a result, or if the referee accidentally scores a goal (as happened in the Dutch fourth division a week before the law change).
If play is stopped, the ball will be dropped to a player on the team that last touched the ball - and where they touched it. All other players must be 4.5 yards (4m) away.
What that means is if a team's attack is stopped, they will get the ball back in that position - instead of the opponents booting the ball down the field.
However, any play stopped in a penalty area will be returned to the goalkeeper, even if the attacking team had the ball.
Another big change now sees a drop ball awarded if the ball hits the referee and goes to the other team as a result, or if the referee accidentally scores a goal (as happened in the Dutch fourth division a week before the law change).
Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo
I believe in Joe Hendry
- Oct 4, 2003
- 12,109
New rule for this season. Below is taken from BBC website.
Drop balls
Drop balls can no longer be contested, but the change is more positive than it sounds.
If play is stopped, the ball will be dropped to a player on the team that last touched the ball - and where they touched it. All other players must be 4.5 yards (4m) away.
What that means is if a team's attack is stopped, they will get the ball back in that position - instead of the opponents booting the ball down the field.
However, any play stopped in a penalty area will be returned to the goalkeeper, even if the attacking team had the ball.
Another big change now sees a drop ball awarded if the ball hits the referee and goes to the other team as a result, or if the referee accidentally scores a goal
All the above is nonsense. It was made clear at the start of the season that if the referee stops the game, that it will resume uncontested with the team in possession of the ball restarting with the ball in the position that they were in when the game was stopped
The FA link I provided clearly states “IFAB Laws of the Game 2019-20” at the top of the page? But the BBC link is rather detailed and specific ie it doesn’t seem to be a misinterpretation , I wonder what the source was? I’m confused.
Wardy's twin
Well-known member
- Oct 21, 2014
- 8,876
So it's not really a drop ball it is literally and actually a free kick.
Maupay arguing - are you sure.
What is it with us a chippy forwards at the moment, I whole heartedly approve.
The BBC article links to this IFAB document: http://static-3eb8.kxcdn.com/documents/786/111531_110319_IFAB_LoG_at_a_Glance.pdf
This is part of it:
As an aside, the FA law website also states arms and hands cannot be considered for offsides.....but they are. The FA website seems to we woefully out of synch with the game.
Fair enough.
They can't, can they?
Recent VAR offside rulings have largely involved armpits/shoulders, ie the edge of the torso.
seagullwedgee
Well-known member
- Aug 9, 2005
- 3,072
Not quite. The opposing player only has to be 4.5 yards away (not 10), and the player who receives the ball from the ref can touch it more than once, and dribble it away if he wishes.
Are they? I've not seen any. The ones over the weekend were armpits, the inside of which is the side of your torso, not your arm. I know because there are have been flailing arms in the pictures some people looking at them have claimed arms were what was judged, but the lines in the VAR pictures I saw weren't at arms or hands.
I thought Burn’s disallowed goal was incorrectly due to his upper arm? In the thread about this I think someone gave another example of an arm being used as well. My memory is a bit sketchy on this though. I guess it could come down to where one believes the arm ends and the shoulder begins.