Madrid set to make Espanyol appeal

[Citiref]

MADRID SET TO MAKE ESPANYOL APPEAL

Real Madrid are set to launch an appeal against the result of their away game against Espanyol on Sunday night.

Madrid lost 1-0 after a 67th-minute header scored by Espanyol defender Daniel Jarque.

However, Madrid believe that the goal should not have stood due to an error by referee Julian Rodriguez Santiago.

TV replays suggest Rodriguez Santiago blew his whistle as Jarque headed the ball - and before it crossed the goalline - with the intention of awarding Espanyol a penalty.

If this is the case, then Rodriguez Santiago can be considered to have made a serious error, because referees cannot play advantage in the penalty area.

"The club believes that there is an erroneous interpretation of the regulations because when the referee blows his whistle, the actions that follow are immediately left without value in the game," read a statement on the Madrid website.

Any appeal by Madrid is certain to be contested by Espanyol, who will not want to lose three points from a game they did not expect to win.

Meanwhile, Jarque appears to back up Madrid's argument that something unusual did happen.

"I don't really know what went on," he said.

"I saw the ball go in, but I got the feeling the referee had blown for something.

"I didn't hear it, but everyone looked very static."

Real are expected to announce their decision at midday tomorrow.


http://www.sportinglife.com/football/overseas/spain/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=soccer/05/09/19/SOCCER_Real_Madrid.html

[IASocFan]

MADRID SET TO MAKE ESPANYOL APPEAL

If this is the case, then Rodriguez Santiago can be considered to have made a serious error, because referees cannot play advantage in the penalty area....


There is no reason that referees cannot play advantage in the penalty area.

Usually this is not the case, because PKs are normally scored. However, if a player is about to put the ball in the net, you don't take it away from here.

It sounds like the problem here is that the referee blew his whistle. Once the whistle is blown, the ball is dead and cannot be put in the goal after the whistle.

[Englishref]

It was a terrible decision by Rodriguez Santiago. The camera angle from behind the goal clearly shows him blow his whistle as the Spanish guy tumbles, he starts point towards the spot, the ball's then headed into the goal, and he swings his arm round, still blowing the whistle, and points to the centre circle.

It's so clear what went on, I'd be amazed if the Spanish FA didn't have something to say about the match and the referee.

[njref]

Like the old saying goes, "when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging." Gesturing for a goal is the equivalent of bringing in a back-hoe.

[ussoccr]

Like the old saying goes, "when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging." Gesturing for a goal is the equivalent of bringing in a back-hoe.
Or in the immortal words of Homer Simpson, "Dig up, stupid!"

[NHRef]

This seems to be a case for "Law 18" use common sense to get the right result. Sounds like he shouldn't have blown the whistle so quick, but once he did, he realized the mistake and saw the ball head into the net, declared advantage and in "mid-whistle and signal" rotated it around to signal goal/kickoff.

Technically 100% wrong, play should be dead second he decides to blow the whistle. Reality and common sense and fairness? Goal.

[refontherun]

I've seen it happen several times in my own games. I remember one game specifically. U-16B where attacker #1 with the ball is tripped inside the PA. The ball rolls forward a few feet when attacker #2 runs through full speed and slams the ball into the net.

In the meantime, however, the center (I was AR) has already blown the whistle for the trip just as attacker #2 is about to make contact with the ball.

Pull the ball out of the net and award the PK. There is no option here.

As was said earlier in the thread, the ball was dead when the referee decided to blow the whistle. The whistle may have been blown as the ball entered the goal, but the ball was dead a second or two before that.

[IASocFan]

...As was said earlier in the thread, the ball was dead when the referee decided to blow the whistle. The whistle may have been blown as the ball entered the goal, but the ball was dead a second or two before that.

Actually the ball is dead when the referee actually blows the whistle. After he decides to blow the whistle, he can legally change his mind until he actually blows the whistle. If the referee chooses, he can back up the time the ball is dead - like to call back a goal because of an offensive foul or offside.

[IASocFan]

According to a post in the Spain forum, Real will not pursue a protest.

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=246626

[macheath]

Actually the ball is dead when the referee actually blows the whistle. After he decides to blow the whistle, he can legally change his mind until he actually blows the whistle. If the referee chooses, he can back up the time the ball is dead - like to call back a goal because of an offensive foul or offside.

Umm..well, you could change your mind and not blow the whistle, but the Advice to Referees says:

"9.1 BALL OUT OF PLAY"

...However, while it is the signal of the referee that announces a decision, play is stopped when the decision is made, not when the decision is announced."

But, allowing for the whistle, it also says...

"The referee is the sole judge of when he has decided to stop play."

So in your example, a ball goes into the net, (you say "call back a goal") because of a foul or offside, what has happened is that the foul or offside preceeds the goal, and you decided that the foul or offside had taken place before the ball entered the net. Even if you blow the whistle after the ball enters the net, the key is when you decided that a foul had taken place, play stops, and anything that happens after that is a dead ball situation (unless there's advantage.)

The Advice is mostly concerned with this type of situation--something has happened that would negate subsequent play, so even if the whistle hasn't blown, the play is effectively stopped, and anything following isn't with a ball in play. It's precisely for the type of situation you cite--you saw an offside or foul, ball quickly enters the net, but no goal, because you stopped play before that.

[gosellit]

I've seen it happen several times in my own games. I remember one game specifically. U-16B where attacker #1 with the ball is tripped inside the PA. The ball rolls forward a few feet when attacker #2 runs through full speed and slams the ball into the net.

In the meantime, however, the center (I was AR) has already blown the whistle for the trip just as attacker #2 is about to make contact with the ball.

Pull the ball out of the net and award the PK. There is no option here.

As was said earlier in the thread, the ball was dead when the referee decided to blow the whistle. The whistle may have been blown as the ball entered the goal, but the ball was dead a second or two before that.

OK, I understand what the ATR says about decision versus announcement of decision.

Lets say in the above scenario the referee decides there is a foul. He also decides to blow the whistle. He then decides at the last instant to swallow hard and does not actually blow the whistle because he sees attacker #2 about to put the ball in the net. Ball goes in.


Would this be any different if the ref decided to blow the whistle but was just slow to get it up to his mouth and blew the whistle AFTER the ball entered the net.

Is one a goal and other not?

[jkdd77]

If the refereee in the second instance were to award a goal, how would anyone know he (or she) had decided to blow the whistle beforehand? :confused:

To me, admittedly not a qualified referee, the fairest thing to do would be to award the goal (assuming, of course, the initial foul was against the attacking team), on the basis of having played advantage, albeit unintentionally.

A referee could always say he (or she) blew the whistle after the ball had entered the net with the purpose of awarding the goal.

[Wreave]

the referee decides there is a foul. He also decides to blow the whistle. He then decides at the last instant to swallow hard and does not actually blow the whistle because he sees attacker #2 about to put the ball in the net. Ball goes in.


Would this be any different if the ref decided to blow the whistle but was just slow to get it up to his mouth and blew the whistle AFTER the ball entered the net.

Is one a goal and other not?

As long as the whistle wasn't blown, they're both goals.

This whole thing kinda reminds me of what I tell my youth ARs: think fast, flag slow.

[ref47]

i feel this guys pain. in a recent game, team a leading 4-1, team b has a dfk about 25 yds from goal with less than 1 minute left. team b gets qute. one player overruns ball. second player over runs ball and draws 2 defenders well within the 10 yards. i have bf and blow whistle, intending to yc a defender, just as 3rd player kicks ball and it sails into the net. immediately know i should pull goal back and do the card and retake kick. but... decide keeper was not disadvantaged and that goal will not change the outcome of the match. so... count goal; kickoff and end match.

i will remember this for a long time to come. and, hopefully, will slow those snap responses.

[macheath]

i feel this guys pain. in a recent game, team a leading 4-1, team b has a dfk about 25 yds from goal with less than 1 minute left. team b gets qute. one player overruns ball. second player over runs ball and draws 2 defenders well within the 10 yards. i have bf and blow whistle, intending to yc a defender, just as 3rd player kicks ball and it sails into the net. immediately know i should pull goal back and do the card and retake kick. but... decide keeper was not disadvantaged and that goal will not change the outcome of the match. so... count goal; kickoff and end match.

i will remember this for a long time to come. and, hopefully, will slow those snap responses.

We've all been there. As others have said, we all need to stop for just one or two seconds before blowing the whistle and think. If there are ARs, make eye contact with them. Even if players and sidelines are screaming, if we take a short pause to be sure, we'll have a chance of avoiding these situations.

[Statesman]

It's a catch-22 for the referee. Call the foul, award the penalty, be technically correct but chastised for not having the vision to apply advantage. Or, in the process of calling the foul you do what happened in this scenario, and be chastised for an improper application of the law.

Either way, in a game at that level you made a pretty bad mistake. The only difference is if you do the latter you are making two pretty bad mistakes. Referee needs to stick to his guns when he blows for the foul and pull the ball out of the net. He wouldn't have been the first one!

[gildarkevin]

i feel this guys pain. in a recent game, team a leading 4-1, team b has a dfk about 25 yds from goal with less than 1 minute left. team b gets qute. one player overruns ball. second player over runs ball and draws 2 defenders well within the 10 yards. i have bf and blow whistle, intending to yc a defender, just as 3rd player kicks ball and it sails into the net. immediately know i should pull goal back and do the card and retake kick. but... decide keeper was not disadvantaged and that goal will not change the outcome of the match. so... count goal; kickoff and end match.

i will remember this for a long time to come. and, hopefully, will slow those snap responses.

LOL -- I thought you were going to post another, more recent, scenario in here, ref47...

[ref47]

ok kev - team a takes hard shot on goal from 30yds out. team b player (standing just outside of pa) sticks out hand and contacts ball, cr blows whistle almost immediately, but ball continues to cross goal line, into lower left corner of net.

what do you do? technically, pull ball out of net and give fk. but, what about the defender who touched the ball? was his play dgh? we know the ball would have gone into the net, it did, but, by blowing the play too early, did the cr cause the dgh? should it be called? had the cr waited for the advantage the defender would not have denied the goal. then, maybe a yc for the attempt, but not rc.

cr and i confered. we decided that pulling the goal required that dgh be invoked and rc the defender. by the way, fk taken and missed.

decision for me was either count the goal (not by the book but the shot was hard and we could argue that it was in the goal before the whistle and that the whistle did not effect play), or, do what we decided; pull the goal rc the defender for dgh.

any thoughts?

[MassachusettsRef]

I'd say that just because the ball went into the net, it doesn't mean that the original foul then suddenly rises to the misconduct level of denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. Quite clearly, the denial wasn't "obvious" to the referee at the time he determined there was handling. In effect, the referee failing to play advantage denied the opportunity (which was never obvious, anyway), rather than the player's actions. He did, however, deliberately stop an attacking opportunity.

I'd say you pull the ball out of the net and give a yellow card. Giving the goal is wrong, no matter how just it might seem (even if it wasn't possible in this case, there's always the issue that the goalie might have reacted differently had he not heard the whistle). And, in my eyes at least, giving a red card seems like grasping at straws in an effort to offset the mistake of blowing the whistle too early.

[njref]

I'd say that just because the ball went into the net, it doesn't mean that the original foul then suddenly rises to the misconduct level of denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. Quite clearly, the denial wasn't "obvious" to the referee at the time he determined there was handling. In effect, the referee failing to play advantage denied the opportunity (which was never obvious, anyway), rather than the player's actions. He did, however, deliberately stop an attacking opportunity.

I'd say you pull the ball out of the net and give a yellow card. Giving the goal is wrong, no matter how just it might seem (even if it wasn't possible in this case, there's always the issue that the goalie might have reacted differently had he not heard the whistle). And, in my eyes at least, giving a red card seems like grasping at straws in an effort to offset the mistake of blowing the whistle too early.

To some extent this is a YHTBT. But if a strong shot is going towards the goal and no one is in the way (I assume this fact because the shot in fact went in even after being touched, but YHTBT) it sounds very much like an obvious gso, about as obvious as you can get, because no attacker has to make a further play for a goal to occur. One could argue the 4th D (distance), but I recollect that the 4 Ds do not apply to handling, only other penal fouls.

Assuming that the whistle was blown before the ball entered the net, I agree you can't allow the goal, so it appears that you are stuck with a RC.