Women's Football World Cup

[Peter]

Thanks, farfetched.  I'd have to see a re-run but I don't think the goalie was anywhere near fulfilling that requirement.  Certainly agree that the better team won.  They seemed to have a very effective plan for dealing with James.

[Wowbagger]

I read somewhere that the winner gets Gibraltar.

[farfetched]

I think she just about stayed on the line with one foot, keepers know the rules and practice a lot I believe. VAR are also very keen on this.

[Peter]

I think she just about stayed on the line with one foot, keepers know the rules and practice a lot I believe. VAR are also very keen on this.

Have a look at this and stop it at 55 sec.  She's about a yard in front, which is closer than I thought but still no cigar!  Great anticipation though!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/av/football/66562980

[Wowbagger]

I'd say that at the instant the ball was kicked, the goalie's right foot was on the line.

[Peter]

I read somewhere that the winner gets Gibraltar.

Fool! 

[Jaded]

I'd say that at the instant the ball was kicked, the goalie's right foot was on the line.

Yup.

Football seems to be getting to a state where gaining advantage is more important than playing. The ball was placed as far forward as it possibly could be for the kick. Just put it on the spot, for goodness sake.

As for all of them walikng down the touchline to take a throw in. 

[Peter]

No. If you put it at 54 and click incrementally you will see (if using non-nationalistic eyes!) that at the last moment that Earps's right foot is in contact with the line, the kicker's (kicking left) foot is clearly still behind her.  As she strikes the ball, Earp's left foot is about a yard in front of the line and her right foot is well in the air.  These are true facts and may not be altered. 

[Peter]

@ Jaded.  Definitely agree with you on the advantage thing and especially the throw-ins.  I understand that the law on corners has been changed so that the outside of the ball (not the contact point) only has to lie over the arc.  Seriously stupid meddling.  Just give a free kick against for breaking the roolz.

[Jaded]

No. If you put it at 54 and click incrementally you will see (if using non-nationalistic eyes!) that at the last moment that Earps's right foot is in contact with the line, the kicker's (kicking left) foot is clearly still behind her.  As she strikes the ball, Earp's left foot is about a yard in front of the line and her right foot is well in the air.  These are true facts and may not be altered. 

Except that angle is from behind. Different perspective. When the ball is kicked the keeper has to have one foot in line.

(See it as a Russian Linesperson would  )

[Peter]

Nice Try!  I understand the rule and she breaks it.  If her foot is off the ground while the kicker's is still behind her, she is not fulfilling the rules.  But, yes, I'm old enough to have seen the Russian Linesman live!

EDIT  I see I have MISINTERPRETED "in line" as "on line", in which case, it is certainly difficult to tell from front or back whether Earps's foot was "above" the line as opposed to being "on" it, which it certainly wasn't.  If it was above, but in line, that would be ok.  But consider ye this from The Roolz:-

Once the ball has been kicked, the goalie may dive slightly forwards as they plunge to either side and this can help narrow the angle. 

She is well in front of the line by the time the ball is kicked.  I have to admit that my case is not helped by the fact that VAR did not query it and the Spanish players did not protest.  But I think that makes all of them wrong, too.  Truth is not a democracy!
 Have another look - is she moving forward before the ball is kicked?  And does it matter?  Please keep your answers brief and on one side of the screen only.

[Wowbagger]

Maybe you can provide a screenshot to prove your point? The video I watched, combined with my undoubted lack of mouse kicking skills, gave me the impression that Mary Earps complied with the rules.

But I would be the first to admit that when I searched for highlights of matches by the simple expedient of searching for [team name] [team name] highlights, I often found myself looking at a totally different match with teams with different names, because some shyster or other had placed them”out there” for whatever clickbaity nefarious purpose.

[farfetched]

The VAR has goalline cameras and will have had much better material to make the call.

[citoyen]

I think she just about stayed on the line with one foot, keepers know the rules and practice a lot I believe. VAR are also very keen on this.

Yeah, to me, it looked like she still had one foot on the line but I haven't spent any time worrying about it or forensically analysing the video.

I do share Peter's confusion with how the law is interpreted - not just yesterday but pretty much every time I've seen a penalty on Match of the Day for the last few years. What Earps did seems to be in line with how other keepers play penalties these days, and whatever the law is, it seems to be applied reasonably consistently. I'm sure VAR would have had something to say if there had been an infringement.

Anyway, that aside, it was a damn good save, even if it was a weak shot.

It was a game of few really good chances and not many mistakes were made, I thought Walsh was off the pace and Earps kept England in the game.

That looks a pretty sound assessment to me. I thought Walsh had a stinker. Bright also. And Hemp wasn't nearly as effective as she was against Australia. I did wonder how much of it was England not playing well and how much was down to Spain forcing them into making mistakes - all those short and/or misplaced passes could in part be due to Spain just not giving them any space to play. (Peter - England were actually much better in the second half. Kelly and James made a big difference when they came on.)

Olga Carmona was superb. Read this morning that she learned after the game that her dad died - news came through during the game. That's going to take the edge off her celebrations. Sad.

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

Olga Carmona was superb. Read this morning that she learned after the game that her dad died - news came through during the game. That's going to take the edge off her celebrations. Sad.

That is sad, and it looks like Mod fixed the wrong bit of the quotation.

Nobody died. Now we're going to be plastered with
nine months or so of premier league soccer.

(Quotation fixed by Mod)

...

[De Sisti]

It's interesting reading the comments by the armchair generals quarterbacks referees
dissecting the penalty save by the England goalie.

[Peter]

Happy to give you something to comment about from your armchair!

[Peter]

Maybe you can provide a screenshot to prove your point? The video I watched, combined with my undoubted lack of mouse kicking skills, gave me the impression that Mary Earps complied with the rules.

But I would be the first to admit that when I searched for highlights of matches by the simple expedient of searching for [team name] [team name] highlights, I often found myself looking at a totally different match with teams with different names, because some shyster or other had placed them”out there” for whatever clickbaity nefarious purpose.

Wow, I haven't got the fu to get a screenshot onto here - but that's lots of stuff on the internet.  There are several in this report, although by clicking I was able to get far clearer evidence of where Earps was when the kicker still had her kicking foot behind her.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/football/world-cup/not-allowed-england-get-away-with-murder-as-spain-robbed-by-world-cup-nocall/news-story/89889e49d89977f5a058c81662ab3d37

[Jaded]

Haven't got fast internet at the moment, but the screenshot from above isn't in line with the goal line and the photo is from some time after the penalty was kicked.

Reading that Aussie article I am struck that maybe England should forfeit the World Cup and give it to Spain?

[farfetched]

By not releasing the 'evidence' - FIFA are once again shooting themselves in the foot. They are lucky it didn't decide the game.
For every offside we get clearly rendered images of the situation, they could have done the same for this. (they still can).

[Peter]

Agreed.

[Jaded]

We noted that they didn’t TV replay Mary Earp’s shout up field after the save.

Our resident lipreader said it was a loud swear 

[Wowbagger]

Even I could lipread that one.

[De Sisti]

Happy to give you something to comment about from your armchair!

Peter, calm down now. Don't take things too seriously FFS.

[Peter]

It was a joke (FFS)!