DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 54352--------------------------------------------------
Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: bruntyboy
Date: October 27, 2022, 7:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
As the penalty at the end of added time was awarded after the
the referee had blown for full time why was play seemingly
allowed to continue after the penalty was saved (with a header
against the bar and a further shot blocked on the line)? Surely
the game should have finished immediately the next player after
the goalkeeper touches the ball.
#Post#: 54355--------------------------------------------------
Re: Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: Toprefm
Date: October 28, 2022, 2:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Additional time is allowed for a penalty kick to be taken and
completed at the end of each half of the match or extra time.
When additional time is allowed, the penalty kick is completed
when, after the kick has been taken, the ball stops moving, goes
out of play, is played by any player (including the kicker)
other than the defending goalkeeper, or the referee stops play
for an offence by the kicker or the kicker's team. If a
defending team player (including the goalkeeper) commits an
offence and the penalty is missed/saved, the penalty is retaken.
That is the Law. From your post it would seem it shouldn't have
gone that far
#Post#: 54363--------------------------------------------------
Re: Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: guest644
Date: October 28, 2022, 7:23 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I think Turpin was very lucky that the rebound didn’t go in.
That would create some controverse, after he allowed the rebound
to be taken in the first place. Call it a lack of awareness, a
short circuit or whatsoever. I’m actually curious what Team Ref
would’ve done if that rebound went in. But we’ll never know…
🙂
#Post#: 54367--------------------------------------------------
Re: Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: rustyref
Date: October 28, 2022, 9:22 am
---------------------------------------------------------
It is a bit of a grey area. Full time had been blown, but the
penalty happened before full time, so there is a justification
to say that you go back to the point of the penalty when there
was time left to play. I didn't watch the game so I don't know
how much time was left on the clock when the penalty incident
occurred.
#Post#: 54368--------------------------------------------------
Re: Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: jacksamuel21
Date: October 28, 2022, 10:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Personally a rebound should be allowed as had the penalty been
given on pitch then the rebound would have been allowed.
#Post#: 54369--------------------------------------------------
Re: Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: dave26
Date: October 28, 2022, 10:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
IIRC didn’t Chris Kavanagh do the same thing in the PL of a
Brighton vs Man Utd match two or three seasons ago
#Post#: 54376--------------------------------------------------
Re: Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: October 28, 2022, 7:13 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
It would be good to get some clarity on this, in relation to VAR
protocols.
I do acknowledge the principle that if the penalty was given in
real time it seems very unlikely a referee would insist on no
rebound. I'm not sure I ever remember it being applied at the
top level at least although presumably it must have been
somewhere.
But then I suppose it is always true that the offence must have
taken place before the end of the match occurs. I'm not sure if
the full time whistle itself is of relevance here in law when it
comes to VAR? What would the VAR protocol be if say it was a red
card offence on the edge of the penalty area being reviewed just
before the final whistle had been blown?
To put it bluntly, I do wonder if the wording of the law is
really necessary I can understand them clarifying that if you've
awarded a penalty you shouldn't immediately blow for full time
before allowing the kick because that would obviously be absurd.
But all the stuff about not allowing rebounds seems to go
against the general convention that referees follow whereby they
will only end a half when the ball is in a neutral area. If the
defending team hadn't committed an offence and the attacking
team had a shot saved and the ball remained in the penalty area
for a rebound on goal, I don't think anyone would expect or
suggest the referee should have blown for full time in the
interim.
#Post#: 54541--------------------------------------------------
Re: Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: Readingfan
Date: November 1, 2022, 5:13 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I contacted the good people at IFAB to advise what should happen
in scenarios such as this or a hypothetical red card for
something like DOGSO on edge of area. They suggested referee
should proceed as they would have done if awarding offence
originally in terms of restart and timing so whether or not
referee has subsequently blown full time whistle is not of
relevance. The referee can allow a rebound from a penalty if
they would have done so if awarding penalty in real time and
they can allow free kick to be taken after DOGSO red card, again
assuming they would have allowed this at the time.
#Post#: 54550--------------------------------------------------
Re: Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: Ref Watcher
Date: November 1, 2022, 7:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Readingfan link ---
>
> I contacted the good people at IFAB to advise what should
happen in scenarios such as this or a hypothetical red card for
something like DOGSO on edge of area. They suggested referee
should proceed as they would have done if awarding offence
originally in terms of restart and timing so whether or not
referee has subsequently blown full time whistle is not of
relevance. The referee can allow a rebound from a penalty if
they would have done so if awarding penalty in real time and
they can allow free kick to be taken after DOGSO red card, again
assuming they would have allowed this at the time.
>
--- End Quote ---
While that seems like common sense it is at odds with the
general policy of timing for VAR incidents. In cases where play
continues but the VAR subsequently recommends a change of
decision or a review, time is not wound back to the point where
the offence took place. The time played in the interim is just
lost.
#Post#: 54565--------------------------------------------------
Re: Atletico Madrid v Bayer Leverkusen - Clement Turpin
DIR By: Leggy
Date: November 1, 2022, 1:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref Watcher link ---
>
> [quote author=Readingfan link=topic=4116.msg54541#msg54541
date=1667297635]
> I contacted the good people at IFAB to advise what should
happen in scenarios such as this or a hypothetical red card for
something like DOGSO on edge of area. They suggested referee
should proceed as they would have done if awarding offence
originally in terms of restart and timing so whether or not
referee has subsequently blown full time whistle is not of
relevance. The referee can allow a rebound from a penalty if
they would have done so if awarding penalty in real time and
they can allow free kick to be taken after DOGSO red card, again
assuming they would have allowed this at the time.
>
--- End Quote ---
While that seems like common sense it is at odds with the
general policy of timing for VAR incidents. In cases where play
continues but the VAR subsequently recommends a change of
decision or a review, time is not wound back to the point where
the offence took place. The time played in the interim is just
lost.
[/quote]
Agree. In American Football, the referee announces the decision
"after review" to the stadium (worth a try??) but can also be
heard asking for the "game clock" to be reset to a certain time.
*****************************************************
Page 1 of 2
DIR Next Page