Cox rebound miss - would it have counted?

[Tony Le Mesmer]

One for any aspiring Referees.

Would/should his rebound effort have counted if he's scored?

My understanding of the laws of the game are this:

If time is up between a penalty being awarded and it being taken, you still get time to take the penalty. Unlike a corner or a free kick. Once the penalty has been taken, it either scored or missed. No extra time is allowed for any further play.

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-gov ... nalty-kick

A minimum of 5 mins were shown, penalty awarded after 96 mins and taken after 97.

So, I think that it wouldn't have counted anyway. Did the ref blow immediately?

[PeterReadingborn59]

If Cox had directed the whole ball over the goal line and into the goal it would have been a goal.

The referee had extended time to allow for substitutions and the time taken to take the penalty. This is shown as the Birmingham keeper retrieved the ball for a goal kick as Cox had in fact steered the ball wide of the far post and off the pitch.

[wiggso]

If I remember correctly the ref didn't blow up until after the goal kick had been taken...but I might be wrong

[Nameless]

If the ref had extended play to allow the kick to be taken I would have expected him to have made that clear to the players and not allowed them to line up around the box for a follow up that was not going to happen. It would have been like a penalty shoot out . If he allowed the players to line up as for a normal pen then time was not up and the rebound would of counted. Ref would have created a pointless controversy by trying to blow for time in the few seconds between the kick and the rebound.

[Forbury Lion]

What constitutes taking a penalty? - I assume the ref should wait until the ball is kicked and either goes out of play (miss), hits the woodwork (miss), hits the keeper (miss) or the back of the net (goal)....... but, what if the keeper gets a hand to it but only manages to send it rolling slowly towards the corner of the goal where it will surely cross the line, by the letter of the law, should the ref blow for full time or keep play going until the ball crosses the line and class this as part of the allowed time for taking a penalty?

[dm77]

I don't know if anyone else has pointed out in other threads but within the laws of the game I would have thought the penalty should have been retaken. Watching back the replay, the Birmingham player is almost a country mile inside the box as Sa is striking the ball. I was under the impression that this is encroaching, unless I'm very much mistaken of course!

[Tony Le Mesmer]

What constitutes taking a penalty? - I assume the ref should wait until the ball is kicked and either goes out of play (miss), hits the woodwork (miss), hits the keeper (miss) or the back of the net (goal)....... but, what if the keeper gets a hand to it but only manages to send it rolling slowly towards the corner of the goal where it will surely cross the line, by the letter of the law, should the ref blow for full time or keep play going until the ball crosses the line and class this as part of the allowed time for taking a penalty?

The law states that "The referee decides when a penalty kick has been completed". But the keeper making a save and parrying away from goal is pretty much that.

Looks to me in this instance that the referee would have given the goal, but under the laws of the game he shouldn't have. Unless there were actually 2mins of further stoppages in injury time prior to the pen being awarded and time wasn't actually 'up'.

[loyalroyal4life]

Shocking miss

[Ian Royal]

Shocking miss

Looked like there wasn't much of the corner to aim at, but a horrible drag wide and should have just lifted it over the keeper IMO. The angle from the highlights may not have given a good view though.

[Nameless]

What constitutes taking a penalty? - I assume the ref should wait until the ball is kicked and either goes out of play (miss), hits the woodwork (miss), hits the keeper (miss) or the back of the net (goal)....... but, what if the keeper gets a hand to it but only manages to send it rolling slowly towards the corner of the goal where it will surely cross the line, by the letter of the law, should the ref blow for full time or keep play going until the ball crosses the line and class this as part of the allowed time for taking a penalty?

The law states that "The referee decides when a penalty kick has been completed". But the keeper making a save and parrying away from goal is pretty much that.

Looks to me in this instance that the referee would have given the goal, but under the laws of the game he shouldn't have. Unless there were actually 2mins of further stoppages in injury time prior to the pen being awarded and time wasn't actually 'up'.

So under the laws of the game he should have, because as he hadn't blown for time then time clearly wasn't up.
Bear in mind you have no idea how much additional time is being played. There is a minimum number added at 90 minutes and then any extra on top of that.

[poohs pure]

Utterly pointless question.

[RoyallyFcuked]

Even if it should have been retaken I doubt they would have noticed, nor that they would have risked being wrong at that time in the game. I'm sure it would have counted but we'll never know so it doesn't really matter.

[bcubed]

Utterly pointless question.

Seen worse

[Nameless]

Which is the worst question ever posed on HNA (team board only) ?

[Forbury Lion]

Utterly pointless question.

Utterly pointless response.

[Forbury Lion]

Which is the worst question ever posed on HNA (team board only) ?

This one ^

[paultheroyal]

Utterly pointless question.

Bit harsh.

[Royal Ginger]

TBF, most of the worst stuff on the team board is statements presented as fact rather than questions.