We can't seem to agree with what the problem was with their goal so it was probably perfectly allowable. Regarding foul throws, I'd rather the lino was watching what is going on on the pitch than focusing on the exact technique of the thrower. He can probably still pick up on feet over the line but again probably best he was looking out for fouls, offsides etc.
Reported at the time by the studio that the ball went out and back in, also looks like Wood handled the ball back for the scorer, we could go on infinitum finding fault won't change anything, we got a well deserved point which was the least we deserved, so we move on..
I think it looks slightly strange because at the point he lets-go his feet are next to each other. For the most part players want one foot in front of the other to maximise stability. That the thrower didn't do this, is his loss.
I often think that moaning about throw-ins is moaning for moaning's sake anyway. Unless they put the ball in one hand and chuck it like a goalkeeper, any differences in trajectory will be negligible. If it mattered that much, linos would be instructed to turn and face the thrower for a better view. They aren't. Their job is to watch the field of play where there is far more likely to be an infringement.
As the wisest heads have already said, the important thing is to defend better. BTW, what happened to the kick-in experiment? I presume it didn't work for some reason, I didn't hear why though.
Law 15 was re-written some years ago to modify the bit about feet on or behind the touchline.
Old school was that the foot had to be on or behind the line ... no part of the foot could be in the field of play. Foul throws were repeatedly awarded if any part of the foot overstepped the line.
The re-write occurred to allow throws to be taken legally as long as part of each foot was on the line or behind. So, a slight overstep became legal.
However, in the re-write, another part of the Law became modified. Originally, the ball had to be released while the hands were behind the head. A foul throw would be awarded if the ball was released above or in front of the head.
Unintentionally (I believe), the new wording apparently allows the ball to be released at any point in the throw ("throw the ball with both hands from behind and over the head from the point where it left the field of play") as it no longer specifies the point of release. You can comply with the current Law as long as the throw starts from behind the head.
This is why so many throws now 'look wrong'.
Whether it makes any difference is a point for discussion, of course, but the new style throw has crept in as a result of poor wording during the re-write.
Was the cross in still in play? It seemed to drop over the top of the goal, at a trajectory that would suggest it went out and came back in. That was more contentious than the throw I think
If we’d have scored their goal, and they scored ours last night, then there’d be a longer thread than this on how was that not a foul on our centre half leading to the goal.
not even sure why this is a discussion. when was the last time you saw a player being pulled up for a foul throw?
Exactly, chances are good there's multiple throws like this (from all teams) in most/all games but they don't get attention as they don't result in a goal.
By the time you ensure that every single throw in is completely 100% legitimate (and the linesman has to do this while ALSO watching the pitch) it will make the whole thing take a donkey's age.
Was the cross in still in play? It seemed to drop over the top of the goal, at a trajectory that would suggest it went out and came back in. That was more contentious than the throw I think
Yes, I think this is what Gunter was saying to the ref ... "It went out."
I remember a game against Chelsea around 20 years ago. First half every single one or Mario Melchiot's throws were dodgy, most not even close to being a legal throw. Not a single one got given as a foul throw.
Second half, first throw he gets, probably closer to being legal than anything he produced first half was pulled up as a foul throw.
So thus it ever was, linos are terrible at policing foul throw.
Do away with throw ins and have it as a pass taken from the line like in 5 a side
Then it becomes a free kick?..nothing wrong with the concept of a throw in, what we need is officials who know how to interpret it and enforce it properly
Was the cross in still in play? It seemed to drop over the top of the goal, at a trajectory that would suggest it went out and came back in. That was more contentious than the throw I think
Yes, I think this is what Gunter was saying to the ref ... "It went out."
The lino originally took up position by the corner flag and would have spotted this, however the thrower got him to move down the touchline. Having said that, he would had missed it going out, as he didn't see anything all night.
If you’re walking when throwing the ball it can lead to a foul throw.
If you slo-mo someone walking you can see that for much of the time one foot would be in the air; so technically a foul throw.
Normally players either throw the ball in from where they’re standing, or they take a run up and plant their feet before throwing. You don’t often see one where they throw the ball while they’re walking. I think that’s why it looked so odd. The throw part look ok(ish) to me though, but the feet were all wrong.
The ball also almost certainly went out of play on the cross.
PS It’s good to give the ref grief as it piles on the pressure, meaning they’re more likely to make decisions if your favour. It’s just the way it is at this level.
So in summary the ball apparently didn’t go behind his head but the still from the video shows it did and one of his feet may have not been grounded but the footage on that is inconclusive at best?
absolutely nothing wrong with that - caught Charlton on the hop and they lost the plot rather than defending properly - tellingly that was the millers' only strike on target the whole first half - must do better
Curbsiders rightly had it in for the ref and the curbside lino who were both embarrassingly awful - more on which elsewhere
On a Sunday in men's football or kids football every single referee is calling that a foul throw and without over analysing it and getting into an argument it looked foul to me and a good tell is the downward trajectory of the ball as to his hands being in front of his head with his back not bent
Was the cross in still in play? It seemed to drop over the top of the goal, at a trajectory that would suggest it went out and came back in. That was more contentious than the throw I think
The ball did go out of play and come back in I was sitting in the AC stand block H had a Birdseye view of it me and my mate couldn’t believe it the Lino was rubbish all night
On a Sunday in men's football or kids football every single referee is calling that a foul throw and without over analysing it and getting into an argument it looked foul to me and a good tell is the downward trajectory of the ball as to his hands being in front of his head with his back not bent
The refs in the Sunday men's football and kids football are getting it wrong!
Comments
I often think that moaning about throw-ins is moaning for moaning's sake anyway. Unless they put the ball in one hand and chuck it like a goalkeeper, any differences in trajectory will be negligible. If it mattered that much, linos would be instructed to turn and face the thrower for a better view. They aren't. Their job is to watch the field of play where there is far more likely to be an infringement.
As the wisest heads have already said, the important thing is to defend better. BTW, what happened to the kick-in experiment? I presume it didn't work for some reason, I didn't hear why though.
Old school was that the foot had to be on or behind the line ... no part of the foot could be in the field of play. Foul throws were repeatedly awarded if any part of the foot overstepped the line.
The re-write occurred to allow throws to be taken legally as long as part of each foot was on the line or behind. So, a slight overstep became legal.
However, in the re-write, another part of the Law became modified. Originally, the ball had to be released while the hands were behind the head. A foul throw would be awarded if the ball was released above or in front of the head.
Unintentionally (I believe), the new wording apparently allows the ball to be released at any point in the throw ("throw the ball with both hands from behind and over the head from the point where it left the field of play") as it no longer specifies the point of release. You can comply with the current Law as long as the throw starts from behind the head.
This is why so many throws now 'look wrong'.
Whether it makes any difference is a point for discussion, of course, but the new style throw has crept in as a result of poor wording during the re-write.
By the time you ensure that every single throw in is completely 100% legitimate (and the linesman has to do this while ALSO watching the pitch) it will make the whole thing take a donkey's age.
Second half, first throw he gets, probably closer to being legal than anything he produced first half was pulled up as a foul throw.
So thus it ever was, linos are terrible at policing foul throw.
It’s a slightly questionable goal. We’ve all seen a lot worse than that. Get over it.
If you’re walking when throwing the ball it can lead to a foul throw.
We needed to defend the back post better and that should be the focus.
Curbsiders rightly had it in for the ref and the curbside lino who were both embarrassingly awful - more on which elsewhere