Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Indoor Umpiring Questions' started by MKochar, Nov 30, 2016.
Hard to tell from that angle, if there was one touch on the ball then the player was up. The more interesting thing for me is whether it's a hit or not. Borderline. Saying that if it had been on the forehand I would have said it was alright.
So goal.. but with reservations ;-)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you run it frame by frame then he's in the air when he plays the ball, so that's fine. It does look like a borderline hit to me... However, there's enough doubt there for me to say I think that I would have awarded the goal.
In realtime I would have gone with hit, in the slowmo I'm not as sure...
From playing the video at normal speed, there's a case for the attacker backing into the gk. As well as the spin he actually takes a step into the gk. Also IMHO its a hit.. Now whether he's in the air when contact with the ball is made or is actually on the floor is hard to tell. On the grounds it is better to disallow the 'illegal goal' than to erroneously award one. I'd go with fpd.
No goal. He backed into the GK and pushed him with his butt. Maybe another angle would show something else?
That is not a hit though or you would also have to call half the transfers made in international mens games hits.
On the day the umpires were happy with it so lucky him
I would have not called that a hit. Close? Sure but, 50/50 call at best and that it does not involve danger, I'm not going to be that picky. On the forehand side I don't think it would have even be a thought that it was a hit.
I would have gone with the exceptional use of the glutes. long before that possible hit became an issue.
Looks good to me
No contact with the gluts, keeper isn't close enough
I don't agree with the spinning rules nowadays but that is for another thread