DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 33822--------------------------------------------------
To Drop or not to drop? That is the question.
DIR By: Toprefm
Date: June 24, 2021, 8:24 am
---------------------------------------------------------
HTML https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/57595937
Nestor Pitana in the Copa America. Brazil on a promising attack
ball hits him and goes to a Brazilian player. Should a drop ball
have been awarded?
If the ball touches the referee or another match official and
goes into the goal, or results in a change of possession or a
promising attack, a dropped ball will be awarded.
Looking at the above wording. Goal bit not applicable. No change
of possession. So that leaves the promising attack element.
Brazil were on a promising attack which imo would have probably
stopped until ball hit the referee. Then definitely a promising
attack continued. I think should have been a drop ball. Thought?
#Post#: 33823--------------------------------------------------
Re: To Drop or not to drop? That is the question.
DIR By: Leggy
Date: June 24, 2021, 9:04 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Agree. Its a safety net, he should have used it.
Or he could have not been in the way in the first place, but I
have already had a rant about that on the Euros section ....
#Post#: 33824--------------------------------------------------
Re: To Drop or not to drop? That is the question.
DIR By: Vissla7
Date: June 24, 2021, 9:09 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Vassago link ---
>
> This is from Copa America Brazil vs Colombia game just minutes
ago .
>
> Brazil scores a goal after two passes earlier the ball hit the
referee (Nestor Pitana no less!). Play goes on, Brazil keeps
possession and scores. Colombian players are furious why there
was no ball drop. VAR check. Goal stands. Colombians argue with
Pitana for like three minutes around mid-field (including keeper
Ospina). No cards are given for dissent. Play resumes four
minutes after the goal was scored.
>
> That was crazy even for South American standards. And it's
disappointing to see Pitana being involved in such a
controversy.
>
--- End Quote ---
Funnily enough this was discussed as part of a topic I raised in
the Euro 2020 chat.
Personally I believe it ticks the promising attack box.
A drop-ball is the safe refereeing option here and whilst Brazil
may complain for a few minutes it'd soon be forgotten about.
The reporters/commentators should have been talking about the
fantastic Columbian bicycle kick but instead an avoidable
controversial moment like this takes the limelight
#Post#: 33829--------------------------------------------------
Re: To Drop or not to drop? That is the question.
DIR By: rustyref
Date: June 24, 2021, 10:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Don't think that created a promising attack as the law change
was intended. It has hit him and gone back pretty much to where
it came from, I think they really intended to be used if it hit
the referee and bounced to someone who immediately scored. I
saw one when I was on the line when a player tried to play the
ball into the area, hit the referee on the edge of the box,
rebounded to the attacker's right foot and he hammered it
straight in the top corner. That's the sort of thing it was
intended for in my opinion.
#Post#: 33836--------------------------------------------------
Re: To Drop or not to drop? That is the question.
DIR By: Vissla7
Date: June 24, 2021, 12:20 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: rustyref link ---
>
> Don't think that created a promising attack as the law change
was intended. It has hit him and gone back pretty much to where
it came from, I think they really intended to be used if it hit
the referee and bounced to someone who immediately scored. I
saw one when I was on the line when a player tried to play the
ball into the area, hit the referee on the edge of the box,
rebounded to the attacker's right foot and he hammered it
straight in the top corner. That's the sort of thing it was
intended for in my opinion.
>
--- End Quote ---
Sadly as it's not explicitly defined in the LOTG this leaves it
open to interpretation here on what constitutes a "promising
attack".
The ball immediately after striking the referee is played out to
the left wing(3 seconds after), which is subsequently crossed in
and resulting in the goal (6 seconds after).
If the rules stated it had to be a clear and obvious goal
scoring opportunity I'd say playing on was correct however for
me this satisfies my criteria for a promising attack and as such
safe refereeing would prevail i.e. drop-ball awarded.
Don't think putting the whistle to his lips helped the situation
either but as the old saying goes... "play to the whistle"
[attachimg=1]
[attachimg=2]
[attachimg=3]
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 1