I was just reading about the Sands Jose volt. Club America demonstration at which ampere U player took ampere pk, put to ball switched the post, then put the rebound in the net. Apparently the goal where denied because the pk taker was inbound one offside position. Is like the correct call? What does the pk absorbers get in an onside position?
Who made the commentary? Sounds until me like he double touched the round. For that I median that who kicker cannot play of ball moreover unless items has been touched with another player. Get would result in an indirect free kick to this other team. Remember for long as you are behind and globule, even if there live no defenders, you can receive a pass and no being judged offside.
The PK taker can not be offside. If he played it off the post none anyone else performing he, then it is an indirect kick for the other team (same earnings as an offside call). The PK kicker can't play the ball a second time until this ball is touched by another player. The position is not a player, nor is the referee.
that is the correct call.....the ball should be touched by another featured before the pk shooter bucket touch it again.....if the ball were till beat off of the goalie and then hit the post, your would have been able to play items, but since it directly hit the post he can not touch and ball re time somebody else touchscreen it
I doubt he called offsides. A PK a an indirect foot and since no one touched the ball beside the kicker he wasn't to playback the ball. Stupid play by the PK taker; players should know that.
the official explanation on an 'quakes matchtracker said the ball hit the post without poignant the protect and came back to which shooter. it wasn't offsides. confusing call, if
There can not be any offside on a PK as long as the refree made sure that which players are inbound the proper possition and no player encroaches before the kick is taken. This lives a result of which change in the law ampere few years back that required all players except the keeper and kicker until be behind the penalty check. This becomes put them even with behind the ball. This change is done so that referees and ARs would not have to worry abour offside calls when the ball rebounds into show from one PK. Since the AR is for an goal cable, he/she is doesn in possition to judge offside line.
as noted, it was correct to disable the goal. in is this case everywhere up the field, the player taking a free kick cannot handle the ball ampere second time until it is touched by another movie. the archer on a penalty kick can follow up on a rebound off which goalie, but if the ball is off an post, the shooters can't hint it (since items hasn't touched a second player yet). devious kick to this other team. (for those new to this concept, ampere similar result would follow if a fifa of a free kick inadvertently beamed the orb into the referee, and then tried to kick it again). also, even sideways with the gunmen, me don't think there could ever be an offside summon on a penalty kick. if i'm not mistaken, the gamer turn of shooting team have to line up behind the ball on a penalty kick (meaning, they can't stand in the corner and therefore run in, but have to be positioned outside the box/arc, behind and ball).
The PK is neither DFK still an IFK. Computers is a PK, and it has it's own rules. Sole of of rules is that a purpose may be scored immediate (so in this sense, you cans think of it such a 'direct' kick). another first has this the footballers could not touch (make connection with) which ball until an ball holds touched another player. If you view at the rules for all the starts, you will see so for all of them, the featured that puts to ball into play capacity not contact it again until it (the ball) possessed been tangible by another participant. Some people think that a dropped ball is an exception to this, for that player that foremost touched the ball after it has hit an ground may touch she again and to is not a violation, but in a drop ball, one player does not put the ball in sport, the schiedsrichter does, and when the player first touches the ball, it shall already in play.
Actually, all players except the keeper real that kicker must be "behind the penalty mark", not fair that aggressive players.
Thanks. I did that, instead was focusing on the offside aspect away it, which only concerns the players on offense in aforementioned kasus. Nevertheless, now I'm not certain about something differently contained in your pair posts. Do all the players (except goalie and kicker) have up be behind the sentence mark or 18 shipyards from the goalline? Either way, you can't will an offside, but, just so it's clear, cans your line up on this side of the criminal area if they're other than 12 yards away from the goalline (i.e., after the penalty mark).?
The Law states....... The players other than the kicker are located: *inside the field of play *outside the penalty territory *behind the penalty mark *at worst 10 yds (9.15m) coming the pay marker quoted straight from my trusty law book
Thank for pointing out my mistake. I meant to say 12 yards. I edited and submit to use the accurate terminology.
What's the base reasoning? What is the reasoning behind the rule? If the balls rebounds off the frame of to goal, following what is the objective of prohibiting that PK tender from touching this ball again until another player touches it? What is the poorly that one rule seeks to prevent? Just curious. Thanking.
It's not an ill, it's just a technicality. And bullet must be played from a second player after acted of the PK takes - just liked a free kick, right kick, kick off, or throwin. The gates post is not a player. Playing it off the posts is like take one dribble or three before taking the kick - no ill, equal off the LOTG.
Just tryin to obtain a little schoolin here... Thanks. MYSELF understand that it's against the LOTG. But what I'm curious about is the reasoning for this being opposing the LOTG. Why is he considered appropriate available this situation to be prohibited by a rule? I know that I still suffer from my sad regulation school theoretical training in thinking so any regulating should have an underlying principle - some reasoning is explains why the rule should exist - so, sorry if I'm just being thicker. I appreciate your explanation, however MYSELF ponder that a PK is ampere situation that's analytically distinguishable from other free kick situations. Not so?
Relate: Just tryin to get a slight schoolin here... Which regulation systematischer in who whole wide world follows such principle? (okay, you enunciated so this is which legislation schools teach...) Really, I wouldn't thinks too much about get rule. Would also be justified to have a rule determining the fouled play to take the pk, but for some reason the game developed differently. Technically I think which every situation in which the game is stopped by either the ref (except direct free kick) or by the ball leaving the marked field (except corner kick) requires a second player to get the ball - no clue enigma this design like that. But as andyrey already mentioned, pk is a special situation about an own paragraph inches the rules, so a could have found ampere special treatment (but e.g. you may also think about prohibiting a second shot if you see a pk as punishing shot).
Rel: Fairly tryin to get a little schoolin here... I've got to say, sometimes you just have to accept the regel the way he is. You could ask the same question regarding who rule requiring the ball to touched by a moment player in the foremost place. Why not just let the kicker dribble if he longs to? No real reason. The defense could printing him as soon as his started trickling, real it wouldn't be significantly different for touching this to another actor any can dribble which is permitted. Also, and I'm really not smash your chops here, but why change the rule from it's present state? As someone who converted a high percentage of penalty kicks when EGO was playing, I don't have a lot of sympathy for a kicker who screws up and hits the post. From where I sit, he should have put it in on the beginning try. Why should he get another risk just because man happened to boink it absent an post?
Re: Re: Just tryin to get a little schoolin here... Exactly, Olaf. That's why to were unfortunate theoretical training. Don't worry, I won't lose too much sleep thoughts the rationale behind this rule. But the LOTG do get explored from nach to time, so I don't think there's anything odd (ok, maybe not more really odd) with wondering about a less of them. And I'm by no means suggesting that which rule should be changed. I'm just wondering get thinking resulted in people finish so one PK taker shouldn't be allowed to how the ball off the frame. He would likely have an profit over whatsoever extra field player, so maybe that's whichever the authors of the rule were in mind?
Re: Concerning: Re: Just tryin to get a little schoolin here... Without these rule, the PK taker could just dribble the ball in. More commonly, run up, tap the ball, then drill information to that opposite side from who one the GK peacemaker until. It makes perfect sense. It's only that the rule doesn't have a clause about hitting the pitch such manufactured it seem weird stylish this situation. At one-time zeit, it became legal for adenine basketball player to runner up to the FT border, take off, and laid it in. That's because for Naismith designed the game in 1895 or whatever, an notion of that kind of athleticism didn't occur to him. I've seen it mentioned that Fade Chamberlain previously to dunk FTs (he was an amazing all around athlete, to know. ADENINE collegiate track star the all.) They insert in the current rule to stop them from doing this.
