The Walk-In Goal
wolvesdavid
Posts: 10,895 Forum Member
✭✭
I do not like it.
Just to explain briefly what this is, for those that do not know, it is when a team allows the opposition straight from kickoff to walk-in the ball into the goal, without a challenge.
It happened on Saturday in the Doncaster Rovers v Bury League 1 match. The Bury goalkeeper had put the ball out for a throw-in to allow a player who was injured to get treatment. When Doncaster returned the ball to the goalkeeper the ball was lobbed over the Bury goalkeeper (by accident) and went into the net. This then led to the walk-in goal.
The incident (and the goals) are reported in the Independent newspaper, if you have not already seen and read about it. The link is here: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/football-league/doncaster-rovers-let-bury-walk-ball-into-the-net-for-injurytime-equaliser-in-great-show-of-sportsmanship-in-league-one-10447183.html
It has been called an act of sportsmanship by some.
But in my mind there can be nothing worst than just seeing a team allow the opposition to score a goal in that way.
In fact there was a directive a few years ago that it was up to the referee (and only the referee) to stop play for injury, and this whole thing of players kicking the ball out of play, and then the opposition would return it to them, would be stopped. Whatever happened to it? I would like it to actually be returned and be in common use.
And certainly if I was a Doncaster Rovers fan, I would not be happy they allowed a team to score a goal in that way. In fact the Doncaster Rovers fans were booing as Bury scored the goal.
The solution to this: Simple, it existed for almost 100 years, let the referee decide to stop play or not, and if so, re-start the game with a CONTESTED DROP BALL. (A contested drop ball, almost seems to have been fotgotten about in the game nowadays.)
Final thought, imagine if Doncaster Rovers miss out on promotion by a point, or something.
Just to explain briefly what this is, for those that do not know, it is when a team allows the opposition straight from kickoff to walk-in the ball into the goal, without a challenge.
It happened on Saturday in the Doncaster Rovers v Bury League 1 match. The Bury goalkeeper had put the ball out for a throw-in to allow a player who was injured to get treatment. When Doncaster returned the ball to the goalkeeper the ball was lobbed over the Bury goalkeeper (by accident) and went into the net. This then led to the walk-in goal.
The incident (and the goals) are reported in the Independent newspaper, if you have not already seen and read about it. The link is here: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/football-league/doncaster-rovers-let-bury-walk-ball-into-the-net-for-injurytime-equaliser-in-great-show-of-sportsmanship-in-league-one-10447183.html
It has been called an act of sportsmanship by some.
But in my mind there can be nothing worst than just seeing a team allow the opposition to score a goal in that way.
In fact there was a directive a few years ago that it was up to the referee (and only the referee) to stop play for injury, and this whole thing of players kicking the ball out of play, and then the opposition would return it to them, would be stopped. Whatever happened to it? I would like it to actually be returned and be in common use.
And certainly if I was a Doncaster Rovers fan, I would not be happy they allowed a team to score a goal in that way. In fact the Doncaster Rovers fans were booing as Bury scored the goal.
The solution to this: Simple, it existed for almost 100 years, let the referee decide to stop play or not, and if so, re-start the game with a CONTESTED DROP BALL. (A contested drop ball, almost seems to have been fotgotten about in the game nowadays.)
Final thought, imagine if Doncaster Rovers miss out on promotion by a point, or something.
0
Comments
According to the laws of the game, a goal had being scored. It is not the referees job to disallow goals for made up reasons.
You can not seriously say that a referee should just be making up things as he goes along are you?
I don't really like the sceptre of throwing the ball out to allow physios on and then it being returned, but I think introducing some rule to deal with the issue is unnecessary for the number of instances where it occurs.
The issue is that he could not have been certain that the player didn't intend to score.
That's why it was left to Paul Dickov to instruct his players to allow the equaliser.
Sticks in the throat that if the match is abandoned any Yellow & Red cards stand. whilst goals are declared void in Spain they just play the remainder of the match on another day with the scores standing from the abandoned game. A couple of years ago Tranmere v Notts County was abandoned but Tranmere reduced the ticket prices for the rearranged game to £5 on the night free if bought in advance.
Perfectly fair thing to do, one of those things which the player was passing back to the oppositions keeper but misjudged the pass & scored, their manager told them to let the other side score.
Steve Bruce would be wanting the game replayed if he was the manager of the team who conceded the goal.:D
Yeah I was at both the abandoned and rearranged game. County were winning 1-0 when the match was abandoned and won the rematch 1-0 too
It could also affect League positions if it comes down to 'Goals scored' at the end of the season
If Bury get in the plays offs by virtue of having the same goal difference but having scored one more goal than someone else.........someone will remember this first game !
No. You cannot be offside if the ball is played by the opponent.
Imagine the furore if the referee had blown for time as the Bury player was on the edge of the box...
Then they should have played better the whole season, not just blaming one game. I see nothing wrong with allowing a walk in goal in this instance, the player was passing back to the keeper that was the intention, an unfortunate pass led to a goal, when it should have been 0-0.
In what possible way could that have been offside?
Good point. I see no reason why the League could not void both goals.