www.altyfans.co.uk
General Category => Altrincham FC First Team => Topic started by: Hamilton on June 12, 2015, 06:35:13 PM
-
Goal or not a goal?
http://edinburgh.stv.tv/articles/1322872-penalty-shootout-at-edinburgh-u14s-youth-cup-final-sparks-controversy/?fromstreampost=231677
I say goal! (so does the ref!)
-
Have to agree.
-
No question. Definitely a goal.
-
100% goal
-
No doubt about it.....GOAL
Who won??????
-
Not sure why there is a debate. That's a goal all day, every day.
-
No question. Same as throwing a catch at cricket up in the air, then missing it on the way down.
"The keeper won't want to see that again tonight Gary......"
-
As the Archbishop says, there's not really any room for debate. But dan't someone disagree just to liven it up a bit? ATS? Catherine Street?
Regards
Bored of Bury😵
-
It's a goal in law and in fact - no debate needed
-
As the Archbishop says, there's not really any room for debate. But dan't someone disagree just to liven it up a bit? ATS? Catherine Street?
Regards
Bored of Bury😵
Well, I've had a further think about this and it's not a goal. The keeper put the ball in the back of the net for safe keeping as is clear for all to see. As a gentleman he didn't want the next penalty to be delayed by the ball being blown away by a sudden gust of wind. The players whose penalty was saved should be thoroughly ashamed of his ungentlemanly and unsporting conduct.
There is no doubt in my mind - no goal, and the penalty taker should be booked for ungentlemanly conduct.
-
No control of the ball, GOAL!!!😀😀😀😀
-
As the Archbishop says, there's not really any room for debate. But dan't someone disagree just to liven it up a bit? ATS? Catherine Street?
Regards
Bored of Bury😵
Well, I've had a further think about this and it's not a goal. The keeper put the ball in the back of the net for safe keeping as is clear for all to see. As a gentleman he didn't want the next penalty to be delayed by the ball being blown away by a sudden gust of wind. The players whose penalty was saved should be thoroughly ashamed of his ungentlemanly and unsporting conduct.
There is no doubt in my mind - no goal, and the penalty taker should be booked for ungentlemanly conduct.
Call yourself an Archbishop? What sort of Archbishop can't see the fkn obvious? You should be defrocked. Or is it debriefed?
-
As the Archbishop says, there's not really any room for debate. But dan't someone disagree just to liven it up a bit? ATS? Catherine Street?
Regards
Bored of Bury😵
Well, I've had a further think about this and it's not a goal. The keeper put the ball in the back of the net for safe keeping as is clear for all to see. As a gentleman he didn't want the next penalty to be delayed by the ball being blown away by a sudden gust of wind. The players whose penalty was saved should be thoroughly ashamed of his ungentlemanly and unsporting conduct.
There is no doubt in my mind - no goal, and the penalty taker should be booked for ungentlemanly conduct.
Call yourself an Archbishop? What sort of Archbishop can't see the fkn obvious? You should be defrocked. Or is it debriefed?
What goes on in my frock is my business.
I see you are resorting to abuse as you simply cannot refute my claims to that being not being a goal. :D
NO GOAL. ;D
-
As the Archbishop says, there's not really any room for debate. But dan't someone disagree just to liven it up a bit? ATS? Catherine Street?
Regards
Bored of Bury😵
Well, I've had a further think about this and it's not a goal. The keeper put the ball in the back of the net for safe keeping as is clear for all to see. As a gentleman he didn't want the next penalty to be delayed by the ball being blown away by a sudden gust of wind. The players whose penalty was saved should be thoroughly ashamed of his ungentlemanly and unsporting conduct.
There is no doubt in my mind - no goal, and the penalty taker should be booked for ungentlemanly conduct.
Call yourself an Archbishop? What sort of Archbishop can't see the fkn obvious? You should be defrocked. Or is it debriefed?
What goes on in my frock is my business.
I see you are resorting to abuse as you simply cannot refute my claims to that being not being a goal. :D
NO GOAL. ;D
I'm sure he'll kick up a fuss about this as well, but, leave his briefs alone!
-
Seems a bit unfair. If the ball had rebounded out the taker doesn't get a second chance. So at what point is the 'penalty' over?
-
Seems a bit unfair. If the ball had rebounded out the taker doesn't get a second chance. So at what point is the 'penalty' over?
When the ref says it is. I don't think the keeper ever really had the ball under control.
-
Seems a bit unfair. If the ball had rebounded out the taker doesn't get a second chance. So at what point is the 'penalty' over?
The striker can shoot again if it comes back off the keeper, just not if it hits the woodwork. Another player must touch the ball first.
-
in normal play he can, but not in a penalty shoot out like this
-
in normal play he can, but not in a penalty shoot out like this
Yes. That's my point.
I guess it's like Hamilton says. It's over whenever the ref judges it's over.
It looks like the keeper could probably have got control but didn't bother as he thought it was over once he'd made the initial save.
Another case of players thinking they know the rules but not actually knowing.