Aguero's penalty

[SamTheGuru]

Re: Agueros penalty

Dubious Goal Panel will rule it as Aguero's goal as it was initially on target.

Micah Richards anybody?

It really is as simple as the above people...

 

[Bobbins]

Re: Agueros penalty

It's because the ball was saved onto the post, then came back out and hit Howard. Unfortunayely has to go down as an own goal, because it wouldn't have gone in if it hadnt hit Howard again.

Yes it would kun would have followed it up and smashed it in lol !!

 

[East Level 2]

Re: Agueros penalty

When does the panel sit? At the moment the official site, BBC Sport and Sky Sport all show it as an OG.

 

[BluessinceHydeRoad]

Re: Agueros penalty

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nhvqIjgQ04[/youtube]

No, they backed the referee up and made the rule less ambiguous:

The Scottish FA, as a member of the IFAB asked for clarification. At the time the rule stated:
"The game shall terminate immediately the ball rebounds from the goalkeeper, the cross-bar or the goal-post".

You could argue both ways saying that once it hit the post the ball was dead. (then what of a ball that hits the post and goes in, that should be dead too). You could also say that a rebound covers when the ball comes out and away from the goal (But what about a ball that then goes on to spin back?)

Listen to Motty & Jimmy Chin's debate, both have valid points. 4 min in, Bruno Bellone penalty. You might also enjoy Michel Platinis ;-)

The rule was changed to:
"When a penalty kick is being taken during the normal course of play, or when time has been extended at half-time or full-time to allow a penalty-kick to be taken or retaken, a goal shall not be nullified if, before passing between the posts and under the cross-bar, the ball touches either or both of the goalposts, or the cross-bar, or the goalkeeper, or any combination of these agencies, providing that no other infringement has occurred."

The rule was changed again in the 97-98 season to reflect the spirit of the game to:
"No matter how many combinations of goalpost, crossbar, goalkeeper's body parts etc. are involved, if the ball ends up in the goal because of the energy imparted onto it by the kicker's boot, a goal should be allowed."

So this now reinforces that the penalty is not over until the ball is not going to cross the line. However, don't forget, the penalty is over when the referee says so.

As for credit for Aguero/ O.g. initially I thought o.g. but now I'm not so sure because deflections off the goalkeeper may not count.

I had no idea that it had all got so technical as a result! Another incident I remember concerning penalties took place at WHL, some time in the late 50s. City had the lead as Spurs pressed for the equaliser, and right at the end of the first half they got a penalty. The ref was seen to be having rather a long chat with Bert Trautman and Jones the penalty kicker. In the end Jones ran in and placed his kick at fair pace just inside the post but not well enough to beat Bert's full length dive. Bert saved the kick but Jones followed up to smash the rebound home. When the Spurs crowd stopped cheering and waving their scarves and rattles (!) they found that the "goal" had not been allowed - the ref's chat with the players concerned had been to explain that there was only time left to take the penalty kick and that the half would end as soon as the ball went in or did not. Fat lot of good it did us - we still lost 5-1!

Funny how time can change perception, I thought in that match Spuds were on a record number of wins at the beginning of a season. Bert saved the penalty and we held on for the draw. Perhaps in my mind I prefer that scenario, City the perennial underdogs stopping the top team in that era from thrashing them.

Well, there's ample (and mounting!) evidence that my memory doesn't work as well as it used to (or even well at all! I think (!) the 1-1 draw with Spuds that ended their record run of wins was a midweek match, which I certainly wouldn't have gone to? But great memories of a club with no 'istry or tradition!

 

[hgblue]

Re: Agueros penalty

Again, how would it be any different if Howard parried it back into play, and the shot was on target, and it hit an Everton defender and went in?

This would involve another phase of play and another player.

 

[han]

Re: Agueros penalty

apart from the controversy on whether or not it was an OG, I get the feeling that Aguero should not take penalty as he is too predictable. Same goes for Dzeko who has missed 2(if i'm correct) already. Ever since Balotelli's departure, City have a headache who should be the taker. IMO, Negredo would be a good choice as he is a striker(every body likes to score but especially strikers crave more) and I've seen his past takings and he was calm, confident.

 

[pudge]

Re: Agueros penalty

Again, how would it be any different if Howard parried it back into play, and the shot was on target, and it hit an Everton defender and went in?

This would involve another phase of play and another player.

The second it hits the post it's back in play and in your words, another phase of play.

Obviously the panel are now inclined to credit the striker and not blemish a keeper for something he had no control over but those saying it's not an O.G or that they see no reason for it to be are wearing blue tinted specs.

 

[Tricky_Trev]

Re: Agueros penalty

It's a penalty miss (or 'save' rather) and an own goal. Simples.

 

[gingerprince]

Re: Agueros penalty

what would it be, if it had it hit the post directly [eg without howard touching it]

then the ball in some peoples eyes is in the second phase of course and ball is

moving away from the goal then hits the referee and rebounds into the goal

without anyone else touching it................


surely that cannot be an own goal as the last person before the referee to contact

is aguero.

and off course agueros initial shot is technically off target for the dubious goals

panel, so normally they cannot give it him as would never have gone in..................


great thread by the way.....

 

[6one]

Re: Agueros penalty

I'm certain that it will count as Aguero's goal.

I don't understand the logic of those who have said because he saved it, it is an own goal. That's even more reason why it should be Aguero's goal as if he hadn't saved it initially, the shot wouldn't have been on target.

Regardless, the precedent has been set that it will count as Aguero's goal.

Richards header v Arsenal in 2009 hit the post, hit Almunia and went in. - Here you see the shot wasn't even on target but it counted as a Richards goal.

This season, yaya's free-kick v hull was discussed by the panel and given to yaya. Though, I don't see how this ever was up for debate.

But how about the goal from Dzeko last season against Norwich? The keeper saved it but the ball got in anyway. But was counted as an OG

Rules have changed

They have not changed.

And Dzeko's goal from last year was NOT saved before it hit the post. The shot was OFF-TARGET.

Aguero's penalty was ON-TARGET and that is the difference.

Fact.
Discussion over.