I watched a play this weekend that put a curve in my back which happens when I see something that just doesnt look right. It was soome kind of MLS best goal round up........#1 was an IFK about 19 yards from the goal.....Player #1 scooped the ball up with his initial touch and #2 volleyed the ball into the goal.......Anybody else see this or have a problem with the play?
That had to be one of the sweetest free kick goals ever in an MLS match. How could there be anything wrong with it? The scoop was a touch that moved the ball. Wonerfull creativity!
Yes - Ronnie Eklund of San Jose, off a chip from Richard Mulrooney. And, No, no problem with it. Great goal - perfectly legal (FIFA ruled that way about 30 years ago after a disputed goal in an English game). This one was one of the "Goal of the Season" candidates in MLS.
Re: Re: Back problems I would say the touch was more of a lift not a chip. That is what bothered me. The contact was longer then a typical kick and it almost seemed like circumnavigating the laws of the game to allow a team to lift the ball up with thier foot. It seemed a big advantage and makes me wonder why this doesnt happen more around the 18. I would be interested to real a ruling from 30 years ago.......and hear its applicabilty to todays game. This one was one of the "Goal of the Season" candidates in MLS. [/B][/QUOTE]
Re: Re: Re: Back problems I don't see how it's circumventing anything. You're allowed one touch. Period. If said touch happens to be a scoop, then that's fine. Because it's damned difficult to do.
Re: Re: Re: Back problems You said the "magic word" yourself - TOUCH (singular). If it is ONE touch of the ball (even a "prolonged" one) that satisfies the requirements of the Law. This has come up from time to time over the years, but it has always been deemed to be legal. The reason you dont see it more (IMHO) is NOT because of any issue over legality - it just normally is not that smart a play because as soon as the "flick" is executed, the wall is free to move forward, and is normally bearing down on the "shooter" before he can strike the ball.
Not only is the wall bearing down on the shooter, but how many times do you see a player hit a sweet volley in to the upper 90 compared to the number of times that volley ends up in the 40th row. It's a low perecntage play that looks brilliant if it works, but looks ridiculous if it goes wrong.
I have seen the Spurs do something similar twice in the last few weeks. Teddy Sherringham rolls it to Jamie Redknapp who flicks it up into the air and then volleys it toward the net. The first time I saw it he scored. This weekend Cudicine made the save.
The difference is that Redknapp was not the initial touch...........He could lift the ball and juggle it in if he wants to.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Back problems I would argue that one touch of the ball does not include flipping it onto your boot and carrying it forward before releasing it........Where do you draw the line?
I know, I said it was similar -- not the same. I was just relating it because both times I was awed by the goal or near goal.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Back problems I dont necessarily disagree with you on that, Grey. HOWEVER, FIFA does disagree with you (and me?) and has ruled on it several times. IF it is one continuous touch (in the Referee's opinion) it is legal and is to be allowed.