What’s wrong with online debates?

What’s wrong with online debates? They allow you to demonstrate your lack of knowledge of spelling, grammar and the LOTG

The Original Post • A goalkeeper use his shinguard throw to a ball, which this ball is obvious goal scoring opportunity. What's the right decision referee should do to this GK? This happening in penalty area.What'd different will be if the goal are scored or not?

The first “answer” • Adam Mitchell Throwing an object is an extension of the hand. So if this was in the PK area, then there cannot be a send off because he did not handle illegally. You can show him a caution for Unsporting Behavior (attempting to circumvent the laws by using artificial implements) and give an IFK at the point where the shinguard touched the ball. If the ball entered the goal, then apply advantage and show the caution once play is stopped. If it did not score, give the IFK.

The dissenting opinion • Steve Wiggins if he keeps the ball from scoring it would be an ejection and a pk.

The wisdom continues • Steve Wiggins that is a good question, Steven, for as Adam notes throwing an object is considered an extension of the hands, so technically it can't be for handling the ball, but he did prevent a goal scoring opportunity. I guess you can be technically right and do as Adam and Conner state, but i would err to justice and go with an ejection and pk and let God sort it out. I'd Just call it preventing a goal scoring opportunity. Keep somebody from kicking the goalies ass after play resumed.

The one who asked the question …. • Steven Whalen I more like the pk decision. lol, Steve like you said, we need a fair game. And God would like be fair!

And this exchange … • Conner Curnick However we cannot force something to be fair because we feel like it, all of our decisions need to be at least based in the LOTG, and then interpreted and bent from there. • Steve Wiggins I disagree Conner - there is law 18 and letting the goalie get away with such is very much not in the spirit of the game.

And thn … • Conner Curnick If you sent off a player for this you would be missing a game critical incident, and would fail an assessment. You cannot simply make something up because you feel it is the right thing to do, when it specifically says the opposite. • Steve Wiggins sometimes you got to take a hit when you are right.

The logic behind the magic … • Steve Wigginsconner, I care about the game, and I would justify it under common sense. If you and the rest of the world disagree, too bad. Just don't wonder why it would become a common occurance after the first incidence on tv and goalies find they can prevent goals at the cost of a yellow card.

After a lengthy, accurate explanation based on the LOTG … • Steve Wiggins disagree - law is wrong in this instance - when considering common sense and the spirit of the game.

“Quoting” the Laws • Steve Wiggins well, I am glad we had this discussion. I have come up with a solution - violent conduct - for throwing dangerous objects on the field of play - eject the goalie.

Offering “interpretation” of the Laws • Michael Smith If he prevents the ball from entering the goal, I vote send off. DOGSO-F applies to any act which denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity and results in a free kick, either direct or indirect. If he throws his shin guard or shoe and it denies the goal, results in an indirect kick, sounds like a DOGSO-F to me! “… denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offense punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick"

A GK isn’t “just” a player "... denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within his ownpenalty area)." • Shawaan Daniels Yes Austin he (GK) is special but the law say if a player uses his shingaurds, that makes him also a player........the same with the offside law, it doesnt specify who second last player must be because the GK is also clasified as a player

So what’s the answer? • If the ball did not go into the goal: • Caution the GK for unsporting behavior • Restart with an IFK to the opponent at the location where the shinguard struck the ball • If the ball did go into the goal • Apply Advantage and allow the goal • Caution the GK for unsporting behavior – or give verbal admonishment if referee chooses • Restart with a kickoff to the GK’s team

Now some random “What ifs ….” These are not things that are “likely” to happen. They are fictional “fact patterns” intended to generate analysis of the Laws of the Game

Now some random “What ifs ….” IN THE OPINION OF THE REFEREE: • A player is dribbling toward the goal and the GK throws a shinguard at the player, striking the player and disrupting the play

Now some random “What ifs ….” IN THE OPINION OF THE REFEREE: • A player is dribbling toward the goal and the GK throws a shinguard at the player, missing the player and disrupting the play

Now some random “What ifs ….” IN THE OPINION OF THE REFEREE: • A player is dribbling toward the goal and the GK throws a shinguard at the ball, striking the player and disrupting the play

So what do we do here?

What’s wrong with online debates?