I have no words for this level of ineptitude

http://www.skysports.com/watch/video/sp ... rce=Direct

Yet Sky will probably come up with a referee that says he got it right.
You couldn't make it up.

He did get it right.

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/ ... alty-gaffe" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Professional Game Match Officials Limited apologise for mistake.

Under the new rules he got it completely wrong

No Ney Never wrote:He did get it right.

How? looked an awful decision, simply no explanation and I'm struggling to find a theory behind the decision, maybe you could explain.

No Ney Never wrote:He did get it right.

Explain...

It was a newcastle player who infringed, therefore an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposition.

No Ney Never wrote:It was a newcastle player who infringed, therefore an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposition.

You'd be correct if Matt Ritchie had missed the penalty. But he didn't, he scored it and the rules state if an attacking player encroaches and the penalty is scored then the penalty is retaken.

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdevel ... 14_559.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No Ney Never wrote:It was a newcastle player who infringed, therefore an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposition.

Only if the kick is missed. If scored it's retaken.

Its Newcastle, its not really an issue is it?

HendricksHair wrote:You'd be correct if Matt Ritchie had missed the penalty. But he didn't, he scored it and the rules state if an attacking player encroaches and the penalty is scored then the penalty is retaken.

If the penalty was scored then you are correct.

Not having a good time isn't Keith Stroud - he's the card man of English football (173 already this season) and missed two clear reds in the Reading v Leeds game. One of the players was retrospectively banned yesterday for six games for a stamp. Now this, an absolute shocker of a decision but how on earth not one of the four officials can get it right is beyond me.

Have to say, the indirect free kick for encroachment isn't one I was really aware of, but it's an interesting one. I guess if the penalty is missed wide or is in the keepers hands then there's no need for the ref to give the free kick. But if the keeper pushes it for a corner or the rebound is scored the the rule really comes into play. Which makes me wonder why I've never seen it enacted. It'd be interesting to look at Hazard's penalty from last night to see if any Chelsea players had stepped into the box before the penalty was struck (as often happens) as if they did then City should have had an indirect free kick and the goal not stood (that's my reading of the rule anyway).

he got it wrong but he interpreted it how it should really be.

the rule should be simple:

defender encroaches and penalty missed; retake penalty.
attacker encroaches; free kick to defending team, whatever the outcome of the pen.

sorted.

Stroud may have opened a can of worms here. Look at Hazard's penalty last night and clearly there were three Chelsea players encroaching in the box as he made contact with the ball. Therefore once the keeper had saved the pen the referee should have blown for an indirect free-kick for City before Hazard put the rebound into the net.

As for the Newcastle game, two questions for me......Did Stroud not even know the rules or was it just an almighty cock-up? and secondly what might have happened if the game had ended 0-0?

Several players encroached from both sides. Retake is the correct decision, as the goal was scored.

But it wasn't scored, the keeper saved the initial shot.

Royboyclaret wrote:But it wasn't scored, the keeper saved the initial shot.

Ritchie sent the goalkeeper the wrong way and it went straight in

Sorry CT, not making myself clear. I'm referring to Hazard's penalty at Stamford Bridge which was saved by Caballero before Hazard followed up to score.

My take on it was that he realised he'd made a mistake giving the pen and was looking for an excuse to get out of it without overturning his earlier decision. Made a right mess of it but that I think was his intention. Made himself look a complete idiot in the process.

elwaclaret wrote:My take on it was that he realised he'd made a mistake giving the pen and was looking for an excuse to get out of it without overturning his earlier decision. Made a right mess of it but that I think was his intention. Made himself look a complete idiot in the process.

He's already clarified that he got the decision wrong - that he should have ordered a re-take. No way on earth would he do this to try and overturn an earlier decision, right or wrong.

He's been dropped from a League One game at Gillingham on Saturday.

I think it's excellent that he has apologised personally. I wish more refs would look back at games with less arrogance and admit when they make mistakes. The problem with encroachment has been going on for ages. It's a pity it's taken a mistake like this for the subject to to be brought up again. I do wonder if those players encroaching for penalties should also be booked like when the wall for free kicks doesn't get back or closes down too soon

quoonbeatz wrote:he got it wrong but he interpreted it how it should really be.

the rule should be simple:

defender encroaches and penalty missed; retake penalty.
attacker encroaches; free kick to defending team, whatever the outcome of the pen.

sorted.

Not really. What happens if players from both sides encroach???

Leisure wrote:Not really. What happens if players from both sides encroach???

Probably a goal is given but the score stays 0 - 0

Unfortunately, most referees have been ignoring encroachment throughout the season, therefore the question has never arisen. Needless to say, most fans will be watching closely from now

Leisure wrote:Not really. What happens if players from both sides encroach???

then the result of the pen stands.

if players from both sides encroach its a retake regardless of conversion or not

if players from both sides encroach its a retake regardless of conversion or not

Are goalkeppers still "allowed" to leave their line before the ball is hit?