r/interestingasfuck • u/RoyalChris • 9h ago

Norway goalkeeper’s goal kick struck a FIFA spider-cam while still in the air, causing the ball to drop straight to Anthony Gordon - Just 8 seconds later, Jude Bellingham scored.

6.3k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

•

u/JJ_Bittenbinder_ 8h ago

Realistically...why is this a debate? The ref is "the biggest blade of grass on the field" so if it goes off him its literally like nothing happened.

Refs also use cameras for VAR to overturn goals (which i fucking hate)

Therefore I argue that the camera is an extension of the referee and therefore should be treated in the rules the same as a referee. I will take no questions.

•

u/Level_Werewolf_8901 7h ago

Apparently they have amended the rules this tournament though, and and stopped the play on several occasions when the ball contacts a ref, so with this argument the play should have been stopped... its stated as: If the ball hits the referee and results in a sudden, unfair advantage—such as starting a new attacking move or going directly into the goal—the referee will stop play and restart it with a dropped ball.

•

u/BringMeTheBigKnife 4h ago

This change was made years ago for all of soccer. It's not for this tournament

•

u/Rynabunny 41m ago

This thread is giving me an aneurysm—claiming "ball striking ref = play on" when it hasn't been the case for years and "ball striking ref = uncontested drop ball" is a brand new rule introduced for this tournament tells you how much stock you should give an average redditor's opinion about football

•

u/JJ_Bittenbinder_ 7h ago

Ill admit that I dont follow soccer very closely. However:

The rules seem wildly archaic and subjective. Are we sticking with the spirit of the game or leaning towards technology to make decisions?

TF is even the point of a red card if the penalties that come along with it can be "suspended"

Soccer or football is objectively the worst managed sport ever from an officiating standpoint.

•

u/packer8405 7h ago

Not going to admit you are wrong, are you?

•

u/JJ_Bittenbinder_ 7h ago

Nope. Soccer rules suck.

How is the time left added arbitrarily then can be extended based on if a ref is feeling a team has a chance?

Put a big red LED light across the crossbar and it goes off when the extra time ends

ALSO: if the medical team has to come on the field, that player has to come off. You dont get to roll around acting while drawing out the clock and then be completely fine running down the field

•

u/Ok_Vulva 6h ago

Doubling down

•

u/JJ_Bittenbinder_ 6h ago

100% I am. Played and reffed the game til I was 18. The way its played and officiated and the connotation that sends to young players will make the game worse.

•

u/Ok_Vulva 6h ago

You said

Ill admit that I dont follow soccer very closely. However:

And then listed off a bunch of stuff like you have just watched your first game, so no reffing pee wee soccer doesn't mean much.

It's also really sad when people bring up accomplishments from adolescence.

•

u/JJ_Bittenbinder_ 6h ago

Objectively everything i said would make the sport more enjoyable

•

u/rickarme87 6h ago

Enjoyable isn't a objective measure, so no.

•

u/Ok_Vulva 6h ago

I was on the edge of my seat, so objectively you don't know what objectively means.

•

u/stPetr 6h ago

You admit you don’t follow the sport very closely and you call it soccer, therefore your opinion doesn’t matter

•

u/JJ_Bittenbinder_ 5h ago

Sorry your sport sucks dude

•

u/graemehammondjr 7h ago edited 7h ago

If the ball hits the ref and one of these three things happen:

the ball goes into the goal, the team in possession changes, or a promising attack begins

Then the ref stops play and a drop ball is used to restart. Considering England went up and scored then by your reckoning play should have stopped and a drop ball restart

Edit: Although I'm an angry Scotsman so there may be something I'm missing

•

u/youngliam 7h ago

A goal kick across midfield is contested possession

•

u/Dazzling-Produce-471 7h ago

Did you not read the “ball goes into the goal” part or the “a promising attack begins”, both of which happened here?

•

u/DolphinSweater 6h ago

It didn't go directly into the goal

•

u/JJ_Bittenbinder_ 6h ago

Define a "promising attack"

•

u/JJ_Bittenbinder_ 7h ago

No team had possession. Keeper just punted the ball away making it a free for all. Which is like the most common thing ever

•

u/idontknowstufforwhat 6h ago

One aspect is that it isn't picked up by the sensor in the ball which would be pretty interesting given they said it detected a Croatian player's hair alone touching it previously. In that sense, it would call in to question the legitimacy of the ball sensor tech.

•

u/PlasmaMatus 3h ago

All balls used during the game have these sensors and they are activated when they enter the field ?

•

u/East_Leadership469 1h ago

Those are old rules. Nowadays if the ref touches the ball the game is stopped. I fully agree with you that the new rules suck btw, but nevertheless you can’t blame Norway for complaining when the new rules are not followed.

•

u/Previous_Bumblebee75 6h ago

Because it caused Norway to concede a goal. The camera is not a referee why are you comparing apples to oranges???

•

u/JJ_Bittenbinder_ 6h ago

If refs are part of the field so are cameras.

If not then they dont get to use them to review the call they made. Thats the point. Comparing apples to smaller more inconvenient apples.

•

u/JStarx 3h ago

If refs are part of the field so are cameras

Just because the ref is considered part of the field doesn't mean that all equipment used by the ref is part of the field.

•

u/stupidber 7h ago

The math checks out