Comments for "Awesome save by... Wait a minute! Who???" Video at VideoSift.com

By antonye

antonye (http://www.videosift.com/member/antonye) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:29:03 -0700

"What? What? What did I do?"

LOL!

By deedub81

deedub81 (http://www.videosift.com/member/deedub81) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:30:52 -0700

Pwned!

By rychan

rychan (http://www.videosift.com/member/rychan) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:38:40 -0700

Upvoted. Now can someone explain to me who this guy was?

By Psychologic

Psychologic (http://www.videosift.com/member/Psychologic) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:46:30 -0700

>> ^rychan:
Upvoted. Now can someone explain to me who this guy was?

Just some dead guy.

By maatc

maatc (http://maatc.videosift.com) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:47:09 -0700

>> ^rychan:
Upvoted. Now can someone explain to me who this guy was?

His name is Jan Maas, and he was the assistant for "De Treffers Kegro Deuren", the dutch 3rd league team that played first leaguer NEC Nijmegen in this cup game.

Treffers lost 1:5, and amazingly the goal he prevented was not counted, since the rules say that if a so called "third person" enters the field, the play has to be interrupted, the person has to leave, and the game commences with a "dropped-Ball" in the same spot the ball was when the interfering person entered the pitch.

By gorillaman

gorillaman (http://www.videosift.com/member/gorillaman) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:50:34 -0700

>> ^maatc:
the rules say that if a so called "third person" enters the field, the play has to be interrupted, the person has to leave, and the game commences with a "referee ball" in the same spot the ball was when the interfering person entered the pitch.

In the air, a foot away from and moving towards the goal?

By maatc

maatc (http://maatc.videosift.com) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:53:20 -0700

>> ^gorillaman:
>> ^maatc:
the rules say that if a so called "third person" enters the field, the play has to be interrupted, the person has to leave, and the game commences with a "referee ball" in the same spot the ball was when the interfering person entered the pitch.

In the air, a foot away from and moving towards the goal?

I just did some research and it´s actually called a "dropped-Ball" (edited it into my original comment) Not sure how exactly this was executed in this case, but I guess it did not result in a score, otherwise I am sure it would have been mentioned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dropped-ball

By rychan

rychan (http://www.videosift.com/member/rychan) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:16:52 -0700

That's freaking BS that the goal wasn't counted.

Two things - doesn't a referee have the ability to assume that the play had continued without the penalty? For example -- a defender catching a shot on goal with his hands. Can't the ref just red card the guy and assign the goal without the need to take a penalty kick?

Second, this guy should be banned from the league for a stunt like this.

By ElJardinero

ElJardinero (http://www.videosift.com/member/ElJardinero) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:49:12 -0700

Ofcourse referees shouldn't be given the power to assume. Imagine all the abuse available.

By hueco_tanks

hueco_tanks (http://www.videosift.com/member/hueco_tanks) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 19:03:09 -0700

Reminds me of
this excellent American
football substitution.

By 8369

8369 (http://www.videosift.com/member/8369) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 20:51:16 -0700

And who says cheaters never win... oh yah, they ended up losing... well at least cheaters try.

By robbersdog49

robbersdog49 (http://www.videosift.com/member/robbersdog49) — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:45:19 -0700

>> ^rychan:
For example -- a defender catching a shot on goal with his hands. Can't the ref just red card the guy and assign the goal without the need to take a penalty kick?

Nope, and rightly so. The best way to prove the ball was gong between the posts is to see it go between the posts. Anything else is just guesswork.

By maatc

maatc (http://maatc.videosift.com) — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 08:43:12 -0700

Found one where the exact opposite happens. A ballboy puts the ball in the net and the goal was awarded. Crazy.

http://www.videosift.com/video/Ball-boy-scores-goal-is-counted

By jimnms

jimnms (http://www.videosift.com/member/jimnms) — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 14:50:49 -0700

It looked to me like the ball was about to go out of bounds not in the goal.

By MINK

MINK (http://www.videosift.com/member/MINK) — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:46:58 -0700

hahahahahaha get a new job mate! made me smile before bedtime, good on ya.

By 13203

13203 (http://www.videosift.com/member/13203) — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 15:11:07 -0700

Outstanding cover!

By Quboid

Quboid (http://www.videosift.com/member/Quboid) — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 05:32:23 -0700

Great defensive work!

Football works like this, what the ref thinks happened is considered to have happened. If the ref doesn't think the ball cross the line, it's not a goal (when a 3rd party interferes, it's a drop ball). In this case, the defending team shouldn't contest the drop ball and whoever was about to score should tap it in, but that rarely happens.

It has happened on occasion, last season in a minor English game a player had heart failure at half-time and the match was called off with his team (Leicester I think) losing 1-0 to Forest. When they replayed the whole match a few weeks later, his team stood still while the opposition goalkeeper walked the ball into their net to restore the score. Great sportsmanship, but it also shows how the ref has his hands tied in such matters. He can't demand this, he can't just say it's a goal, but if the two teams sort something out on the pitch, he won't stop them (unless it's some sort of match fixing, but I don't think this counted!)

There was an opposite incident last week, Reading "scored" against Watford according to the ref, however no one except the officials saw it. What happened is that the ball was in the box, near the goal (about where the inner, 6-yard box meets the goal line, if you know your stuff) on the assistant referee's side (assistant referee = linesman). For some reason this linesman thought it had crossed the goal line (it hadn't) between the posts (not even that close) and the ref, who's view may have been blocked, took his advice and awarded the goal. It was a hideous decision but it stands. In fact it went down as an Own Goal for some poor Watford defender who happened to have touched it last.

At a guess half the fans were confused until about 4 hours after the match when the news reports came through. The players must have been confused too, certainly no Reading player celebrated until after the ref had talked to his linesman and I'm sure all 11 of them would immediately admit it wasn't fair. They offered to replay the match but the FA said no, ref's decision is final. The ref got into a bit of trouble I believe, although the linesman who screwed up was running a Premiership line the next week so he's OK. The buck stops at the ref.

By rychan

rychan (http://www.videosift.com/member/rychan) — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 10:22:20 -0700

Here's the event that Quboid is talking about. Not sifting it because it's going to be taken down by youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usfqW3WgFsQ

By EDD

EDD (http://www.videosift.com/member/EDD) — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:43:54 -0800

*dead

By siftbot

siftbot (http://siftbot.videosift.com) — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 06:43:54 -0800

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by EDD.