You are the Ref - Another Scenario.

[Kuipers Supporters Club]

Video is in the link below.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...Wayne-Rooney-saw-ruled-Manchester-United.html

Goal or no goal? Poll to follow.

 

[bn1&bn3 Albion]

No goal. Touched the ball more than once with his foot.

 

[Triggaaar]

No goal. Touched the ball more than once with his foot.

Indeed.

I'd have said no goal anyway, as I don't think it's in the spirit of the game to be secretly taking corners, and had the defender run up and kicked the ball the attackers would have claimed they hadn't taken it yet.

 

[Sheebo]

Could be well wrong but I'm sure there was some rule about it having to leave the quadrant or do a full turn or something. Think I've made that up though.

 

[Djmiles]

Goal. If my linesman is happy that the ball is in play (I'm not so sure he has kicked the ball twice as the first looks like he is putting it in position), it's as legitimate as any other goal scored.

 

[Sheebo]

No goal. Touched the ball more than once with his foot.

Agreed although they'd argue they only took it when he touched it last. Can't have it both ways though so I think it should've been ruled out...

 

[Djmiles]

Indeed.

I'd have said no goal anyway, as I don't think it's in the spirit of the game to be secretly taking corners, and had the defender run up and kicked the ball the attackers would have claimed they hadn't taken it yet.

Not in the spirit of the game, yes I quite agree. But I'm not sure on what grounds you could disallow it if the ball is in play.

 

[Bladders]

Linesman is a clown then.

Had the oppo ran up and hoofed it out for a thrown in after that initial touch , which he did 3 times by the way , it would have been a booking.

No goal.

 

[symyjym]

His last touch was rolling his foot over it. Clumsy attempt at being clever, and lucky for him the linesman wasn't so.

 

[glasfryn]

its called gamesmanship
especially the MU one ...................................................one of the reasons I will never like them

 

[Triggaaar]

Not in the spirit of the game, yes I quite agree. But I'm not sure on what grounds you could disallow it if the ball is in play.

The ref / assistant ref decides when it's in play, and his last touch of the ball was no more kicking it than the touch before it. He was just moving it about, several times.

 

[Coldeanseagull]

Goal. If the defence could just stay focused on what's going on rather than trying to remove the oppositions shirts, they wouldn't be berating the ref or assistant/linesman. May be gamesmanship but nice to see something different

 

[dejavuatbtn]

I had erroneously thought that the ball would not be in play until it left the quadrant. Whilst technically it appears to be legitimate, one could question whether or not rolling your foot over the ball constitutes kicking it, and to be honest it does smack of seeking an unfair advantage. I would have sent them both off!

 

[Eeyore]

My instinct is that he is positioning the corner with his foot. Even if he isn't, that is the intended impression created. No goal.

 

[30209]

As above if there had been any kind of difference between the part where they claimed they were placing of the ball and the part where they claim they were taking of the corner then I'd give a goal, but there wasn't so no goal. Might as well penalise them for kicking the ball twice as award a goal. Agree with the sentiment that if a defender had hoofed the ball out they'd have claimed they hadn't taken it

 

[Everest]

Didn't the whistle go before the second player touched it? If so, that would have nullified the first player messing around.

I'd go for no goal anyway because how do the officials know which touch from the first player was the actual taking of the corner?

 

[ringmerseagulltoo]

I thought for any dead ball kick, the ball had to travel by the length of its circumference before it could be played by another member of the same side. If that is correct, it is clearly not a goal.

 

[Hampster Gull]

No goal. He touched is a few times amd the last he rolled it rather than touched

 

[BensGrandad]

No goal the ball cannot be in play as it hasnt moved it own circumference. Had it done so it would hav been outside of the quadrant, which it wasnt.

 

[30209]

No goal the ball cannot be in play as it hasnt moved it own circumference. Had it done so it would hav been outside of the quadrant, which it wasnt.

What has the circumference got to do with anything? Show me that law