Stuart Attwell

[TBM]

Just simply playing Devil's Advocate here (I haven't read the entire thread so apologies if it's already been mentioned), but say if Turner picked up the ball then and threw it back to the keeper rather than kicked it - as players sometimes do when leaving it for the keeper to take the kick - do you really think that Atwell would have blown up for handball?

The rules of the game state that Atwell was correct to let the goal stand, but if you don't let common sense apply you'd end up with 100s of these incidents every week, with referees giving penalties for pushing every time a corner kick is taken, and goalkeepers being penalised about 3 times per game for holding on to the ball for 6.1 seconds.

Thing is the ref didn't see Turner kick it back.....he spoke to the lino, who probably said it as it was "yes the player touched the ball"

[Svlad Cjelli]

Just simply playing Devil's Advocate here (I haven't read the entire thread so apologies if it's already been mentioned), but say if Turner picked up the ball then and threw it back to the keeper rather than kicked it - as players sometimes do when leaving it for the keeper to take the kick - do you really think that Atwell would have blown up for handball?

The rules of the game state that Atwell was correct to let the goal stand, but if you don't let common sense apply you'd end up with 100s of these incidents every week, with referees giving penalties for pushing every time a corner kick is taken, and goalkeepers being penalised about 3 times per game for holding on to the ball for 6.1 seconds.

Whoa!!! So how decides which laws are applied strictly and which ones the ref can turn a blind eye to? Just where do you draw the line on these things when everything can be applied differently by each ref?

There are enough complaints about lack of consistency as it is.

[Stranded]

Just simply playing Devil's Advocate here (I haven't read the entire thread so apologies if it's already been mentioned), but say if Turner picked up the ball then and threw it back to the keeper rather than kicked it - as players sometimes do when leaving it for the keeper to take the kick - do you really think that Atwell would have blown up for handball?

The rules of the game state that Atwell was correct to let the goal stand, but if you don't let common sense apply you'd end up with 100s of these incidents every week, with referees giving penalties for pushing every time a corner kick is taken, and goalkeepers being penalised about 3 times per game for holding on to the ball for 6.1 seconds.

Yes but by the same token, you'll end up with people trying things on to gain an advantage. There's probably a middle ground, but in this instance Turner screwed up, he had absolutely no reason to kick the ball but did. As soon as he had done that you leave yourself open to an incident like this happening.

The ball was in the right spot, if he didn't want to take it, he should have left it.

[3 veesinarow]

Doesn't do the game any harm, surely, to have incidents such as this crop up from time to time which help to sharpen up players and the way they act? If they think there's a chance this'll happen again, won't they make bloody sure next time? The millions of tugs you see in penalty areas get punished every time out on the pitch, why not penalise a few more inside the box and see what happens?

[Y21_Royal]

I'm not reading the whole four pages so apologies if this has been said before.

In my opinion this is exactly the kind of decision that would be so much easier to take if the referee was allowed to talk to the press after the game. If Attwell was able to come out and say "IMO Turner was playing the ball back to the keeper and therefore I deemed the free kick taken and the ball live" it would defuse the situation some what and a lot of this talk would be redundant. Instead we are left to debate amongst ourselves what his thought process was and at the end of it his abilities are questioned and his authority undermined.

Why the FA can't wake up to this fact I don't know. My respect for Howard Webb went up enormously after reading his interview about the world cup final. He explains his decisions and admits culpability where there were errors.

[Wycombe Royal]

but say if Turner picked up the ball then and threw it back to the keeper rather than kicked it - as players sometimes do when leaving it for the keeper to take the kick - do you really think that Atwell would have blown up for handball?

No he wouldn't have done because the ball isn't back in play until it is KICKED, therefore he could pick the ball up and throw it back to the keeper. By kicking it Turner had restarted play, whether that was his intention or not.

I'm not saying it is right, but in the laws of the game the ref made the right decision.

What would annoy me more if I was a Sunderland fan, player or official, is the actions Torres. In my view what he did is no different to not giving the ball back to the opposition after the ball has been kicked out for an injury. It was not in the spirit of the game.

[3 veesinarow]

Trouble is, the "spirit" of the game implies there is a certain level of gentlemanly behaviour, courtesy and decency in the modern professional game - which there ain't, so how managers and players get away with saying it was against the spirit of football when diving, feigning injury, reckless challenges and out-and-out malice is so prevalent in the game leaves me speechless. They don't deserve to be treated with "spirit", so let occasions such as this be the karma from which they suffer.

[soggy biscuit]

Trouble is, the "spirit" of the game implies there is a certain level of gentlemanly behaviour

I think you are mixing up 2010 with 1910

[PlasticRoyale]

I'm finding it harder to watch football now with the constant grief directed at officials - working class scum

[weybridgewanderer]

First idea - referee's should be progressively promoted based on whether the clubs they have refereed in the previous season think they can make a step up.

I have heard of leagues where this, or something similar is done.
I have heard of occasions when teams get fed up with a crap referee in their league so they all join together to say he is fantastic and get promoted out of their league. That way they never see him again.

[handbags_harris]

First idea - referee's should be progressively promoted based on whether the clubs they have refereed in the previous season think they can make a step up.

I have heard of leagues where this, or something similar is done.
I have heard of occasions when teams get fed up with a crap referee in their league so they all join together to say he is fantastic and get promoted out of their league. That way they never see him again.

Of course, but on the contrary the referee should be relegated if he gets consistent substandard reports.

[Franchise FC]

So you know the truth and Steve Bruce is in the dark?

Steve Bruce thought that Turner's 'backheel' was 25 yards from the spot of the original incident.

I'd say he is most definitely in the dark.

[Franchise FC]

Everyone "knows" that Turner didn't think he was taking the free-kick and didn't mean to kick the ball like that...but he did.
We all remember Pires trying to be a smart-arse with that sideways penalty - he didn't mean to mistouch it like that...but he did. He couldn't play it again, he wasn't given another dab at it simply because he didn't mean to do it and the game continued. So it was then , so it is now. It was highly unusual, but the goal should stand.

The two incidents highlighted:

1) The corner - a deliberately taken corner to try to deceive the opposition. Fair play, deliberate touch. Whoever took the corner intended to take it in that manner.

2) The penalty - Robert Pires intended to take the kick sideways. That is his fault that he misplaced the pass from the penalty.

The free kick on Saturday - Michael Turner was giving the ball back to his keeper to take the kick. He didn't take the kick himself. The intention wasn't there, and for that reason in my mind the game should have been called back once Torres stole the ball and ran through.

Hang on - maybe Chelsea did win the Champions League. John Terry did not deliberately kick the ball with his left foot just as he was trying to kick it with his right. It was clearly a mis-kick and therefore should have been retaken.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

So you know the truth and Steve Bruce is in the dark?

Steve Bruce thought that Turner's 'backheel' was 25 yards from the spot of the original incident.

I'd say he is most definitely in the dark.

Steve Bruce is a total cock.

Ive watched the incident once. Whoever the Referee was, he did nothing wrong. Whatsover. Managers call for consistency all the time. For this incident they got it, you cant get more consistent than applying the letter of the law.

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

Steve Bruce is a total cock.

Ive watched the incident once. Whoever the Referee was, he did nothing wrong. Whatsover. Managers call for consistency all the time. For this incident they got it, you cant get more consistent than applying the letter of the law.

Totally agree. Here is a man who has learnt bully-boy tactics from his former master. A man who, to me, always looks like he's itching for a fight. Remember his exemplary behaviour when manager of Wigan during the play-off semi?

[3 veesinarow]

Trouble is, the "spirit" of the game implies there is a certain level of gentlemanly behaviour

I think you are mixing up 2010 with 1910

Er, no, I'm not. The only phrase I've heard all the time since this incident from managers, pundits, forum-posters and fans is that it was a technically correct decision, but that it goes against the spirit of the game and was therefore wrong. My point is that modern football doesn't have a spirit. It has no soul, why should these people bleat on about something that doesn't exist anymore?

[Royal Rother]

Well said.

[BR2]

Well said.

+1
See also the thread in General Sport about cheating in cricket.

[gazzer, loyal royal]

Well said.

+1
See also the thread in General Sport about cheating in cricket.

these people are paid to make decisions. Morality went from the game during the bodyline series.

Anyway back to Turner. Firstly, he tried to take the freekick quickly and Atwell ordered it to be taken from the right spot. Turner brought the ball back to where Atwell wanted the freekick to be taken. Why on earth did Turner feel he had to pass it back to the keeper. Turner has to take his fair share of the blame here as well. Ok, Atwell wasn't looking but the ball was played from the spot he asked it to be taken from so if the ball is played from that spot, you can see why he thought the ball was live.

[Royal Rother]

A lone voice I may be, but I remain of the opinion that Turner was aware of the fact that he had taken the free-kick. He just didn't hit his backheel hard enough. If a ref has repositioned the ball where he wants the free kick taken you wouldn't then reposition it again - that's risking a yellow card at a dead ball and in a moment of relative calm in the match.

His apparent nonchalance as Torres sprinted past him was not a natural instinctive reaction in that situation (you would at least twitch your head in a tiny moment of panic) it was born of a guilty conscience that he had fcuked up.