Idaknow... ball is pretty clearly behind his head at this point of the throw... Further behind than most throw-ins in fact. And before anyone else says it, he's facing the field of play by the time the throw-in is being taken. And yes, his butt is off the ground, both feet on the ground.
Throw is with both hands from behind and over the head, both feet are on the ground outside touchline. I think you can disallow this throw because he is not facing the field of play though, more like facing the sky. At least with a flip throw you tend to be more vertical when the ball is released. Edit: Sulfur beat me to the punch by a few seconds - but I disagree that he is facing the field.
I watched this as a video and he ends up on his bum. I don't remember when the ball is actually released though.
Watch carefully when a flip throw is released. Often it's well before the thrower is vertical. But with this, I think that you're seriously nitpicking. He's facing in the direction of the FOP, just over it when the throw is actually made. That's still in the direction of. The only thing on the ground when the ball is thrown are his two feet. Though it's hard to tell, and I suspect that's why the referee of the match called it back.
At the moment of release the player must "face the field of play". I won't argue that this is not picky, it is. I would argue that it is not clear that this requirement is met. I don't know that I would actually call anything here, because it doesn't seem to violate the spirit of the law, but I think there are grounds within the law to disallow it.
A flip throw deemed legal from a couple of years back... and the position of release is almost identical to that from the video above... Note also the direction the player is facing/etc. Personally, I have zero problem with the throw-in, as the ball comes from behind the head, over the head, both hands, only the feet are on the ground at the time of the throw, and the player's facing the field of play (although, up in the air over it... but still in that direction).
Let me get out my protractor... Looks like she's facing even further away from the field than he is...ok fine I'm convinced.
I think that all of the nits that are being picked with this throw are the very definition of trifling. I would allow it.
This looks to be in the same class as the old trick corner. If you dont tell the CR or AR it may happen, you run the risk of them being caught off guard and it being blown dead or flagged "just because". Not because of a reason, "just because".
I mean a full-grown man that close to the goal line should be able to put the ball on the spot anyway, why even bother with this foolishness
And I'm sure that had nothing to do with the referee's decision. . . . On the merits, I can go I ether way. The comparison to a flip throw is pretty compelling. The difference , I suppose, is that he doesn't come up -- live and unexpected it may well have looked to the ref like he was sitting at the moment of the throw. (And as long as this took, im guessing the ref had already told him to get on with it and wasn't really up for nonsense.)
So the only possible issue I'm hearing is that he wasn't facing the field of play because he was looking up and not "at" it. So you're telling me that if a throw is taken with the player looking at his shoes or with his head tilted back it would be illegal?