THe free kick was "indirect" so you cannot score a goal on the first touch, so you need one of you teammates to touch it first, but it also means it's now a live ball
The easiest thing to do is just pass it laterally to your teammate. I recall Salah assisting TAA with something similar just outside the box. He didn’t have to pass it but it takes part of the wall out of play
it also should have been disallowed, the white player came inside the 10 yards when the first guy ran over the ball then when the ball was touched by the second player the white shirt was like 5 yards away... re take the kick
It was an indirect in the box...rare call, can't happen from a foul. Only if the keeper drops it and and picks it back up, or if a teammate passes back to them and they pick it up, or if they hold it past the 6 seconds. So the "shove" wasn't the foul... It had to do with the goalie.
It was a bad call regardless. The kick was by DFA. SAT was clearly allowed to deflect back to their keeper. So, you're likely correct as to the reason for the call but it was a bad call anyway.
no because the restart is at the spot of the infraction, and is done near the top of the box. It's almost certain from what I saw that the call on the field was obstruction (the red player didn't let the black player attempt to play the ball), or something happened that was cut from the clip.
I'd guess the ref called time-wasting on the keeper. They only have seconds to get the ball out of their hands, and the punishment is an indirect kick at the spot where the keeper was holding the ball.
@@lunamotocrossyeah man I just finished my 4000km warmup run for my paddle 24 hour tourney and while I was doing that I saw this and laughed cause I do this every game
So you got the football play a little wrong. That was an indirect free kick, I'm not sure what for, possibly because the keeper held on too long and some of the video was cut out. The attacking play was actually kinda smart, just really badly executed. The normal idea on an indirect is to pass to the side then another player goes for goal, instead they decided to touch the top of the ball, making it in play, then the next attacker kicks for goal. They just did it way too slowly and the defender reacted very quickly
@@seantimmons5900 absolutely not, but it is poorly enforced most of the time. There are actually a few different infractions that result in an indirect free kick. The only 2 I can remember presently are the keeper handling the ball after a pass, and the keeper holding on to the ball for more than 6 seconds. But as I say, the 6 seconds rule might be the least enforced rule in the sport
The padel shot is crazy because that dude is running pretty much full speed, has to stop on a dime, and then he's got a very tiny window between the door and the net to hit that. Additionally, watch the dude on the losing side of the point! He comes very close to tipping it back up and over once it hits the net, which would be a legal play! Just because it's in the net doesn't mean you can't play it. These dudes are always ready for everything!
As roughly two dozen people have already mentioned, twasn't a PK. It was an indirect free kick, which are extremely common. It was within the 18-yard box (or "penalty area"), but not from the penalty SPOT, which likely means the keeper committed a foul at some point - usually from mishandling the ball, because keepers can't just use their hands all willy nilly-like whenever they want to. The important part is that they had fun and tried their best . . . or whatever. 😉 (Edit: After watching it again, my guess is that the foul was given because the keeper held the ball waaaay longer than 6 seconds. After unnecessarily smothering it and whispering sweet nothings into the ball's ear, he probably stood up and slowly walked to the edge of the box. I'm just guessing, though, based on the ball's position and the fact that it was the 91st minute of the match and the keeper's team was winning. Keeper was wasting time.) Paddle looks cool as hell.
God that indirect kick brought back so many memories from high school soccer. We'd come up with the dumbest plays and pitch them to coach. He told us he'd kill us if we ever tried 😂 My favorite were when me the goalie would somehow end up on offense.
As many people pointed out, the free kick was an indirect one, so the second guy to run over the ball touched it to make it live, so the third one could shoot. Problem is that one defender (illegally!) entered the exclusion zone (I'm assuming it's about 10 yards in India same as in UEFA, but I may be wrong) so he was in position to steal said life ball. The referee should have called the play dead as soon as the defender left the wall because the ball wasn't touched yet, but such indirect kicks are very rare, and Indian league 3, well. Not the best referees down there I guess. To be honest, I have no clue why the indirect kick was given in the first place. The goalie is allowed to grab a header even from his own player, it's only illegal if it's a back-pass. Again, I blame it on 3rd league quality.
Exactly correct. That goal was illegal as the Red/White player was within 10 yards when the kick was taken. Ref should have caught that as it was super obvious.
Agreed. Defender got juked initially so he was off his line when the second player actually touched it. Jomboy is right that the second player's touch "activated" the defender but what got activated with his ability to have left the line, not just been eligible to touch the ball.
Generally that doesn't get called in soccer unless you complain to the ref about it, and then it's just a warning usually. It's that way so you can ignore players cheating forward if they aren't going to impact your play. That said, they probably should have stopped and called him on it here.
@@RyanEglitis It's called all the time. Refs will stop the kicker to readjust the defense if they encroach. The rule is there specifically to prevent players from cheating forward...so what do you mean "it's that way so they can ignore" it? Also, no ref calls penalties only when a team complains about it. That's ridiculous. Your comment is absolutely absurd bro 😂
Three things about the football video. 1) What was the indirect free kick offence? 2) There was no player from either team in the location of where the referee placed the ball for the free kick, so why is the kick to be taken from that location?. 3) Once the first player ran over the ball the defender ran forward about 5 yards. He should have retreated back to his original position. Once the second player touched the top of the ball the ball is in play but the defender was 5 yards away. Once the defender ran towards the ball from a position he should not be in then the referee should have blown his whistle to stop play, either warned the defender or shown him a yellow card, and ordered the indirect free kick to be retaken.
I just posted a big explanation on this as a comment, but briefly here, the referee awarded the indirect free kick for "impeding the progress of an opponent" on defender #3, who blocked the path of attacker #23 towards the goalkeeper (presumably to receive the header from #25). You can see in the side-view replay how #23 practically jumped up the back on the defender to get around him. The referee placed the ball where he did because (in his judgement) that's where #23 was when the obstruction began. I would have put it closer to the penalty spot, but I won't give the ref grief over a few yards. As for your third point, 100% that should have been blown dead when the defender ran in to take the ball. I personally wouldn't have carded him, because he only ran in as a result of some trickery by the attackers (the first player leaping over the ball), but the free kick should have been retaken. For reference, speaking as a referee myself, typically a yellow is given to a defender encroaching on the 10 yard distance for "Delaying the restart". In this case, yeah the defender ran in early, but there wasn't anything unsporting about it. Just blow it dead and let everyone line back up again. Easy peasy.
1. It is not a Penalty Kick. 2. It is an Indirect Free Kick, which means that a goal cannot be scored direct from the free kick. It must be touched by another player (attacker or defender) after it has been kicked to count as a goal. Defenders must be at least 10 yards from the ball until it is played unless they are on their own goal line. However they cannot move forward of the goal line until the ball is played. 3. The idea of the multiple attackers over-running the ball is to make the defenders move and thus break up the defensive line. However, until the ball is actually played, the defenders still cannot move closer to the ball. 4. The 1st attacker does it right by not touching the ball and there is movement in the defensive line, with an end defender illegally moving within the 10 yards limit. At this point the referee should have stopped the play and ordered a restart because of the defender having moved closer to the ball before it is played. 5. The 2nd defender touches the ball, bringing it into play. However the defender is well within the 10 yard limit and should not have been allowed by the referee to "steal" the ball. 6. The "goal" scored should not have been allowed and the referee should have ordered a retake of the free kick. 7. The 2nd attacker did err by bringing the ball into play contrary to the plan but the major mistake was made by the referee in allowing play to go on.
We’ve missed something on the indirect free kick. I’m going to guess the keeper was wandering around where the kick was taken and took too long to release the ball
That soccer clip is a nightmare mess. There was no dive, it wasn't involved with the call, the call was baffling (it's like not awarding an extra point to a team that kicks the extra point. It would be inexplicable), and the comments about it are even more inexplicable. Also, Forgotten Rotten got robbed by that early celebration nonsense. JS. E: Like others have said, it was probably an illegal back pass that got clipped out for some reason.
Soccer referee here. The foul was NOT called on the players going up and #25 flopping to the ground. As an indirect free kick and the placement of it, the only call I can think of would be #23 for the offence being impeded by defender #3. The defender moved into the path of the attacker trying to get to the headed ball before the goalkeeper grabbed it, causing him to have to run around him. When the ball isn't within playing distance of the defender, that's illegal. Because the defender didn't make contact with the attacker, that's why it's indirect instead of direct (which would have been a penalty kick). For basketball fans, you can think of it this way: If the ball isn't close enough that you can reach out and touch it, you're not allow to move into an opponent's path for a pick. You can stand your ground, or continue in the straight line you're already moving (even if it crosses someone else's path), but you can't veer in the way of someone else when the ball isn't nearby. For (American) football fans, it's kind of similar to an illegal contact call on a cornerback, in that it's a foul on the defender for illegally blocking the receiver from running their path to where the ball will be. The difference in this case is that soccer's rule includes a non-contact version of that impedance, which is what was called here. In summary, an indirect free kick was awarded for "Impeding the Progress of an Opponent" on the defender in the middle of the box, when he ran in front of #23 and forced him to change his path towards the ball in flight. EDIT: Now that I've watched the rest of the video, this 100% should have been called back, because the defender who ran in to get the ball was well within the 10 yards at the time the free kick was taken (by the second player, who tapped it backwards). Since it was the result of trickery by the first player jumping over the ball, I don't think you give the defender a yellow for delaying the restart (which is typically what you do if someone doesn't respect the distance), but the ref should have blown it dead immediately so the free kick could be retaken. So, out of the two decisions the ref made, I have the exact opposite take as Jimmy here. The initial free kick was properly awarded, but the ref failed to call the defender who encroached on the free kick.
Thank you! I was so confused watching that! I don't think I've ever seen a FK awarded for that in 20+ years of watching football. I was like, wait if that was a foul (on #25), that has to be a penalty. What on earth was the indirect FK awarded for?
To follow up on Greg's spot-on analysis, indirect free kicks in the PA do happen, they're often the result of playing the ball back to the keeper and they pick it up. The rule pick is like basketball, you can do a pick if you don't move (it's useful in indoor, but moving makes it obstruction). It has to be an infraction (minor), but not a foul (handball, illegal contact), which would give a penalty kick (from the 12 yard spot, everybody outside the box (the keeper has to stand on the line). The goal area is 6 yards out, the penalty area is 18. You normally have to give 10 yards for any kick, so for the kick on the edge of the area, they should've been within 1-2 yards (or meters) of the goal area. They weren't. The cool ones are the ones that occur in the goal area. The defenders outside the field of play, in the goal behind the goal line, so you have 11 people in the goal, while the attacking team has to pass it and shoot it while the defenders run out. It's like pinball sometimes. But not a PK.
@@patrickvolk7031 like this analysis. As a referee though, I still don't understand why he would place the ball like 17 yards from goal when the 'impedance' (which I think was suuuper soft anyway, i mean just look at the lack of reaction from all the players, like nothing even happened; the guy was never gonna challenge for the ball anyway) occurred maybe only 7-8 yards out. at that point, like you said, you just have to move the wall to one side of the goal or the other to maintain 10yds distance which is when it gets weird lol
How is it legal? In (almost?) every net-divided sport, once you cross to the other teams' side you're in violation. If not that, how does spiking it into their side of the net work?
He wasn't in their territory though, he was outside of the field of play altogether. I assume if he went on the opponents territory that would be illegal, but what he did was like receiving a serve in tennis from outside the lines. Nothing wrong with that.
@@griffithd05 In certain leagues of volleyball you can play it from there, but you have to hit it back to a teammate to hit it over the net in between the antennas
I find the whole thing very confusing (I've never even heard of this sport). How can he play he ball on the opponents side of the net and attack from the side hitting it into their side of the net. Looks like it should be illegal. (Not saying it is, as I know nothing about this sport).
Obstruction is also an indirect free kick. Based on the location of the foul, my guess is that 5 obstructed 23 from running in for the cross. It wasn't in frame but it's the only thing that makes sense.
Some of these odd sports they play in other parts of the world remind me of games we would make up as kids in our neighborhood when we didn't have enough kids to play baseball or when it was the middle of winter and we had to play in the basement.
Been a long time since I played Soccer but I'm sure that kick would have gone back as the defender cut down the distance between himself and the ball before it was touched.
Every match it can happen. Hence why they train for this situation like they train for smashes. It was a mediocre smash, at high levels they spike the ball so fast they can just aim for the ball to rebound to their own side.
They didn’t call a dive. It was the goalie who messed up. Which made it an indirect kick. You can’t kick indirect kicks into the goal. It has to touch another player first.
I hate it when people try to be cheeky with an indirect free kick. If i understand the rule correctly one of them has to touch the ball but it has to move to actually play it. A little spin or half spin suffice, but the ball didnt move. 90% of the time it doesnt get called, in this case calling it would've save them.
i have to imagine Ura is in contention for some things you missed award but i can't remember anything particularly crazy by him so far this year (next basho starts nov 10th though!)
The other thing that impressed me with the padel ball clip is that, when the guy got injured, it was the other team over there helping him out. There was, apparently, no medical staff at the event, and even the guy's own teammate just stood there watching while the other team helps him stretch out the cramp. GREAT sportsmanship, but maybe they wont ever do that again? =^D
Paddleball seems like a game you’d play when you were a kid where you can make up a new rule in the middle of the game as long as you haven’t hit the ball yet.
I imagine the play on the free kick was supposed to be first guy fakes and runs right, second guy rolls it back, third guy passes to the first guy who is now free on the right.
That's a free kick as others have no doubt indicated. The referee has also indicated by his arm that it is indirect so there must be two touches. So, it does require a more complicated approach than a penalty kick of even direct free kick. I was also already 2 nil in the 92nd minute so not really a dramatic situation (unlike the handball highlight). Paris Saint Germain or PSG is pronounced Par-ee Saaa-uh Germeh, with the Saaa using a soft 'a'. That's as close as I can come. He does get my vote for the three big saves.
The red/white has to remain 10 yards from the ball until it's touched, so this should have been retaken. Probably why black took a second to react - they thought it would get blown dead. Easy for the center ref to miss but the linesman should never miss it
First time seeing paddle. Looks like an amazing mesh of tennis and racquetball. What a play to leave the court!! Also, every time I see a video about handball the more lame it seems.
They should replace the definition of "Keep it Simple Stupid" with a video of that free kick gone sideways. Absolute textbook example of an overly complicated play that backfires.
Although the ball was made live by the second runner touching it, the guy who intercepted was technically too close to the ball when it was played at, therefore the goal shouldn’t of stood.
I feel like the free kick should have been retaken. You can see that when the first black player jumps over the ball, the white player runs in, takes a step back, and when the ball is finally touched he goes in to get it. He should have been 10 yards away from the ball when it was first touched, but because he ran in, he was closer and stole it. Bad job by the referee, I have seen this play be effective when the defenders stay 10 yards back
don't want to be anti-climactic but i played handball for some time myself up to a semi-pro level and things like that happen at least in 1 out of 10 games ;-)
never thought to see a PSG player in a Jomboy video, cheers, Allez Paris ! 🔴🔵 By the way not a penalty, but an indirect free kick for some obscure reason
The handball would've just been a tie as it's the group stage right now. Basically the rules are the same as UEFA champions league in terms of ties and tiebreakers, knockout rounds are home and away, away goals tiebreaker, extra time, and penalties
Poor refereeing on that indirect kick as when the ball was first touched the defender had encroached within ten yards and should’ve received a yellow card and black team gets to take again.
That last play wasn't a PK but an indirect free kick. Not sure why it was called for cause it's very rare for it to be called. Anyway, "indirect" means you can't go for goal right away, someone needs to touch it beforehand (vs direct free kick, like the "normal" free kick, where you can go for goal right away). That indirect free kick should've been called back cause the player who takes the ball away is way too close. The fake out brings him in and he's unfairly close. Terrible play all around.
I’m guessing the indirect kick was because the goalie held the ball too long. Also, the opposing player was inside 10 yards so that score should’ve never happened.
That's an indirect kick: means you can't score directly, you have to pass the ball. It's given for minor infractions inside the penalty area, that don't warrant a penalty kick, and they're very hard to score from. So that dive you showed wasn't called a foul. The indirect free kick was given for something else that happened. Something you don't show in the video. Most likely, the keeper walked out to the edge of the penalty box with the ball in hand, and held on to the ball for longer than the 6 seconds he's allowed to.
THe free kick was "indirect" so you cannot score a goal on the first touch, so you need one of you teammates to touch it first, but it also means it's now a live ball
Either team can/has to touch it.
Leave JOmBOi alone, he's just given a script to read.
The easiest thing to do is just pass it laterally to your teammate. I recall Salah assisting TAA with something similar just outside the box. He didn’t have to pass it but it takes part of the wall out of play
it also should have been disallowed, the white player came inside the 10 yards when the first guy ran over the ball then when the ball was touched by the second player the white shirt was like 5 yards away... re take the kick
@@thomasd725100% correct. awful refereeing.
It was an indirect in the box...rare call, can't happen from a foul. Only if the keeper drops it and and picks it back up, or if a teammate passes back to them and they pick it up, or if they hold it past the 6 seconds. So the "shove" wasn't the foul... It had to do with the goalie.
Maybe called the goalie for needless flopping on the ball to waste time?
It was a bad call regardless. The kick was by DFA. SAT was clearly allowed to deflect back to their keeper. So, you're likely correct as to the reason for the call but it was a bad call anyway.
no because the restart is at the spot of the infraction, and is done near the top of the box. It's almost certain from what I saw that the call on the field was obstruction (the red player didn't let the black player attempt to play the ball), or something happened that was cut from the clip.
I'd guess the ref called time-wasting on the keeper. They only have seconds to get the ball out of their hands, and the punishment is an indirect kick at the spot where the keeper was holding the ball.
@@bemusedalligator that's not how the rules work in any shape or form
As someone who's played a lot of racquetball, I thought "I don't think anything in this paddle highlight is going to surprise me." I was mistaken.
Yeah, you can see a lot of similarities with racquetball, but running out of the room was not one that I saw coming.
I've seen someone run out of the room to make a hit in paddle before and I was STILL impressed by the read on the shot that dude had. Insane.
Racquetball is an absolute gem of a game don't hear or see it a lot anymore I used to play all the time as a kid though in the 90s
Paddle clip was wild.
meh, pretty normal
@@chingatu6644yeah but it’s wild for people that probably have never watched Padel before
@@lunamotocrossyeah man I just finished my 4000km warmup run for my paddle 24 hour tourney and while I was doing that I saw this and laughed cause I do this every game
How ESPN isn't paying you for this segment and calling it "ESPN 8: The Ocho Sports Recap of the Week" is a travesty.
So you got the football play a little wrong. That was an indirect free kick, I'm not sure what for, possibly because the keeper held on too long and some of the video was cut out.
The attacking play was actually kinda smart, just really badly executed. The normal idea on an indirect is to pass to the side then another player goes for goal, instead they decided to touch the top of the ball, making it in play, then the next attacker kicks for goal. They just did it way too slowly and the defender reacted very quickly
The defender had already encroached by a few yards due to the fake out and he didn't retreat so it should have been another free kick, really.
@@Stephens_Rocket agreed.
Is that specific to Indian league? It's just a yellow card in most leagues.
@@seantimmons5900 absolutely not, but it is poorly enforced most of the time.
There are actually a few different infractions that result in an indirect free kick. The only 2 I can remember presently are the keeper handling the ball after a pass, and the keeper holding on to the ball for more than 6 seconds.
But as I say, the 6 seconds rule might be the least enforced rule in the sport
@@TFMagicMan
2:30 "The Paris Saint-Germain, as I say it properly." 🤣🤣🤣 Oh, never change, Jimmy!
ANDREAS PALICKA! Swedish sports hero represented on Jommboy, awesome! Seriously, go watch som of his highlights, he is amazing. 38 years young!
The padel shot is crazy because that dude is running pretty much full speed, has to stop on a dime, and then he's got a very tiny window between the door and the net to hit that.
Additionally, watch the dude on the losing side of the point! He comes very close to tipping it back up and over once it hits the net, which would be a legal play! Just because it's in the net doesn't mean you can't play it. These dudes are always ready for everything!
As roughly two dozen people have already mentioned, twasn't a PK. It was an indirect free kick, which are extremely common. It was within the 18-yard box (or "penalty area"), but not from the penalty SPOT, which likely means the keeper committed a foul at some point - usually from mishandling the ball, because keepers can't just use their hands all willy nilly-like whenever they want to.
The important part is that they had fun and tried their best . . . or whatever. 😉
(Edit: After watching it again, my guess is that the foul was given because the keeper held the ball waaaay longer than 6 seconds. After unnecessarily smothering it and whispering sweet nothings into the ball's ear, he probably stood up and slowly walked to the edge of the box. I'm just guessing, though, based on the ball's position and the fact that it was the 91st minute of the match and the keeper's team was winning. Keeper was wasting time.)
Paddle looks cool as hell.
I can't wait for the "year you missed you didn't even know was over" awards
I think we had that, it was called Covid
I am not planning on watching.
God that indirect kick brought back so many memories from high school soccer. We'd come up with the dumbest plays and pitch them to coach. He told us he'd kill us if we ever tried 😂 My favorite were when me the goalie would somehow end up on offense.
As many people pointed out, the free kick was an indirect one, so the second guy to run over the ball touched it to make it live, so the third one could shoot.
Problem is that one defender (illegally!) entered the exclusion zone (I'm assuming it's about 10 yards in India same as in UEFA, but I may be wrong) so he was in position to steal said life ball. The referee should have called the play dead as soon as the defender left the wall because the ball wasn't touched yet, but such indirect kicks are very rare, and Indian league 3, well. Not the best referees down there I guess.
To be honest, I have no clue why the indirect kick was given in the first place. The goalie is allowed to grab a header even from his own player, it's only illegal if it's a back-pass. Again, I blame it on 3rd league quality.
Exactly correct. That goal was illegal as the Red/White player was within 10 yards when the kick was taken. Ref should have caught that as it was super obvious.
The defender who got the ball was definitely not far enough away when the free kick was taken.
That was their first mistake... They should have stopped right there and had the ref reset the wall.
Agreed. Defender got juked initially so he was off his line when the second player actually touched it.
Jomboy is right that the second player's touch "activated" the defender but what got activated with his ability to have left the line, not just been eligible to touch the ball.
Generally that doesn't get called in soccer unless you complain to the ref about it, and then it's just a warning usually. It's that way so you can ignore players cheating forward if they aren't going to impact your play. That said, they probably should have stopped and called him on it here.
@@RyanEglitis It's always called. The FIFA refs literally have spray paint to create that line.
@@RyanEglitis It's called all the time. Refs will stop the kicker to readjust the defense if they encroach. The rule is there specifically to prevent players from cheating forward...so what do you mean "it's that way so they can ignore" it? Also, no ref calls penalties only when a team complains about it. That's ridiculous.
Your comment is absolutely absurd bro 😂
Three things about the football video. 1) What was the indirect free kick offence? 2) There was no player from either team in the location of where the referee placed the ball for the free kick, so why is the kick to be taken from that location?. 3) Once the first player ran over the ball the defender ran forward about 5 yards. He should have retreated back to his original position. Once the second player touched the top of the ball the ball is in play but the defender was 5 yards away. Once the defender ran towards the ball from a position he should not be in then the referee should have blown his whistle to stop play, either warned the defender or shown him a yellow card, and ordered the indirect free kick to be retaken.
I just posted a big explanation on this as a comment, but briefly here, the referee awarded the indirect free kick for "impeding the progress of an opponent" on defender #3, who blocked the path of attacker #23 towards the goalkeeper (presumably to receive the header from #25). You can see in the side-view replay how #23 practically jumped up the back on the defender to get around him. The referee placed the ball where he did because (in his judgement) that's where #23 was when the obstruction began. I would have put it closer to the penalty spot, but I won't give the ref grief over a few yards.
As for your third point, 100% that should have been blown dead when the defender ran in to take the ball. I personally wouldn't have carded him, because he only ran in as a result of some trickery by the attackers (the first player leaping over the ball), but the free kick should have been retaken. For reference, speaking as a referee myself, typically a yellow is given to a defender encroaching on the 10 yard distance for "Delaying the restart". In this case, yeah the defender ran in early, but there wasn't anything unsporting about it. Just blow it dead and let everyone line back up again. Easy peasy.
The football video was the first one. I think you are referring to the soccer video
@@2skyman nah mate, we're talking about true football here
@@GregMcNeishSo, impeding in the box isn't a direct penalty kick? Surprising.
@@masonmount17 not here
0:31. The camera angle of that throw is so perfect for just how spectacular is that throw by Cam O'Hara. Man, that is an NFL distance.
0:28
Looking for these comments. I’m under the notion it is isn’t typical for a highschool kid to throw like that
1. It is not a Penalty Kick.
2. It is an Indirect Free Kick, which means that a goal cannot be scored direct from the free kick. It must be touched by another player (attacker or defender) after it has been kicked to count as a goal. Defenders must be at least 10 yards from the ball until it is played unless they are on their own goal line. However they cannot move forward of the goal line until the ball is played.
3. The idea of the multiple attackers over-running the ball is to make the defenders move and thus break up the defensive line. However, until the ball is actually played, the defenders still cannot move closer to the ball.
4. The 1st attacker does it right by not touching the ball and there is movement in the defensive line, with an end defender illegally moving within the 10 yards limit. At this point the referee should have stopped the play and ordered a restart because of the defender having moved closer to the ball before it is played.
5. The 2nd defender touches the ball, bringing it into play. However the defender is well within the 10 yard limit and should not have been allowed by the referee to "steal" the ball.
6. The "goal" scored should not have been allowed and the referee should have ordered a retake of the free kick.
7. The 2nd attacker did err by bringing the ball into play contrary to the plan but the major mistake was made by the referee in allowing play to go on.
Definitely an award for highest IQ plays and that paddle/racket/pickleball play should be a contender!!!
thats an indirect freekick. not a penalty. you dont see it often but somebody has to touch the ball first before the free kick is taken.
Jomboy struggled through "the Paris Saint-Germain" like its some obscure unknown handball club noones ever heard of
The longer gambling has been legalized, the more i understand why grandpappy called it a sin
This channel is definitely my favorite new subscription of the year.
We’ve missed something on the indirect free kick.
I’m going to guess the keeper was wandering around where the kick was taken and took too long to release the ball
Bingo. It's the 92nd minute.
That paddle ball highlights may be one of the coolest things I’ve ever seen, in or out of the realm of sports. Holy crap.
That soccer clip is a nightmare mess. There was no dive, it wasn't involved with the call, the call was baffling (it's like not awarding an extra point to a team that kicks the extra point. It would be inexplicable), and the comments about it are even more inexplicable.
Also, Forgotten Rotten got robbed by that early celebration nonsense. JS.
E: Like others have said, it was probably an illegal back pass that got clipped out for some reason.
Thank you for the variety, loving it!
Soccer referee here. The foul was NOT called on the players going up and #25 flopping to the ground. As an indirect free kick and the placement of it, the only call I can think of would be #23 for the offence being impeded by defender #3. The defender moved into the path of the attacker trying to get to the headed ball before the goalkeeper grabbed it, causing him to have to run around him. When the ball isn't within playing distance of the defender, that's illegal. Because the defender didn't make contact with the attacker, that's why it's indirect instead of direct (which would have been a penalty kick).
For basketball fans, you can think of it this way: If the ball isn't close enough that you can reach out and touch it, you're not allow to move into an opponent's path for a pick. You can stand your ground, or continue in the straight line you're already moving (even if it crosses someone else's path), but you can't veer in the way of someone else when the ball isn't nearby.
For (American) football fans, it's kind of similar to an illegal contact call on a cornerback, in that it's a foul on the defender for illegally blocking the receiver from running their path to where the ball will be. The difference in this case is that soccer's rule includes a non-contact version of that impedance, which is what was called here.
In summary, an indirect free kick was awarded for "Impeding the Progress of an Opponent" on the defender in the middle of the box, when he ran in front of #23 and forced him to change his path towards the ball in flight.
EDIT: Now that I've watched the rest of the video, this 100% should have been called back, because the defender who ran in to get the ball was well within the 10 yards at the time the free kick was taken (by the second player, who tapped it backwards). Since it was the result of trickery by the first player jumping over the ball, I don't think you give the defender a yellow for delaying the restart (which is typically what you do if someone doesn't respect the distance), but the ref should have blown it dead immediately so the free kick could be retaken.
So, out of the two decisions the ref made, I have the exact opposite take as Jimmy here. The initial free kick was properly awarded, but the ref failed to call the defender who encroached on the free kick.
💯
Thank you! I was so confused watching that! I don't think I've ever seen a FK awarded for that in 20+ years of watching football.
I was like, wait if that was a foul (on #25), that has to be a penalty. What on earth was the indirect FK awarded for?
To follow up on Greg's spot-on analysis, indirect free kicks in the PA do happen, they're often the result of playing the ball back to the keeper and they pick it up. The rule pick is like basketball, you can do a pick if you don't move (it's useful in indoor, but moving makes it obstruction). It has to be an infraction (minor), but not a foul (handball, illegal contact), which would give a penalty kick (from the 12 yard spot, everybody outside the box (the keeper has to stand on the line).
The goal area is 6 yards out, the penalty area is 18. You normally have to give 10 yards for any kick, so for the kick on the edge of the area, they should've been within 1-2 yards (or meters) of the goal area. They weren't.
The cool ones are the ones that occur in the goal area. The defenders outside the field of play, in the goal behind the goal line, so you have 11 people in the goal, while the attacking team has to pass it and shoot it while the defenders run out. It's like pinball sometimes. But not a PK.
@@patrickvolk7031 like this analysis. As a referee though, I still don't understand why he would place the ball like 17 yards from goal when the 'impedance' (which I think was suuuper soft anyway, i mean just look at the lack of reaction from all the players, like nothing even happened; the guy was never gonna challenge for the ball anyway) occurred maybe only 7-8 yards out. at that point, like you said, you just have to move the wall to one side of the goal or the other to maintain 10yds distance which is when it gets weird lol
@@patrickvolk7031 None of the analysis made any sense. This is insanity.
The guy we are talking to is a troll, a bot, or a bad ref.
I need to start watching more paddle tennis!
Paddle ball seems like one of those games that an elementary gym teacher makes up.
that paddel thing happens semi regularly in high level play
How is it legal? In (almost?) every net-divided sport, once you cross to the other teams' side you're in violation. If not that, how does spiking it into their side of the net work?
He wasn't in their territory though, he was outside of the field of play altogether. I assume if he went on the opponents territory that would be illegal, but what he did was like receiving a serve in tennis from outside the lines. Nothing wrong with that.
@@griffithd05 In certain leagues of volleyball you can play it from there, but you have to hit it back to a teammate to hit it over the net in between the antennas
I find the whole thing very confusing (I've never even heard of this sport). How can he play he ball on the opponents side of the net and attack from the side hitting it into their side of the net.
Looks like it should be illegal. (Not saying it is, as I know nothing about this sport).
This and weekly dumb are my favorite segments as much as I love baseball. These are cool as hell
That paddle clip was sick
Obstruction is also an indirect free kick. Based on the location of the foul, my guess is that 5 obstructed 23 from running in for the cross. It wasn't in frame but it's the only thing that makes sense.
Handball is an absolutely electric sport. Been following the German league after watching it in the Olympics this year.
Fan D. She looks like an archeology youtuber I just discovered
Greatest show on the internet!!!
7:10 The player is in the 10-yard restriction here, shouldn't that have been called?
Jomboy, if you actually do an awards show, i bet they'd all be perfect decisions for every category
I wish I could watch wholesome content without gambling ads attached.
Good luck on that.
Paris (okay that was good) Saynt (oh no) Jermaine (goddammit jomboy)
Some of these odd sports they play in other parts of the world remind me of games we would make up as kids in our neighborhood when we didn't have enough kids to play baseball or when it was the middle of winter and we had to play in the basement.
@4:59
ME: That's stupid. JOMBOY: That's crazy.
ME: That's stupid. JOMBOY: That's crazy.
#NoRehearsal
Been a long time since I played Soccer but I'm sure that kick would have gone back as the defender cut down the distance between himself and the ball before it was touched.
Love all of his interpretations
The paddleball shot? How many times could you even get a chance to hit that shot? Then execute it flawlessly.?! Dude was in the zone
Every match it can happen. Hence why they train for this situation like they train for smashes. It was a mediocre smash, at high levels they spike the ball so fast they can just aim for the ball to rebound to their own side.
that throw??? that catch was ridiculous
I love Jimmy but he does not know soccer at all lol
Cuz soccer sucks
They didn’t call a dive. It was the goalie who messed up. Which made it an indirect kick. You can’t kick indirect kicks into the goal. It has to touch another player first.
That paddle clip had to be a studio c production
I hate it when people try to be cheeky with an indirect free kick. If i understand the rule correctly one of them has to touch the ball but it has to move to actually play it. A little spin or half spin suffice, but the ball didnt move. 90% of the time it doesnt get called, in this case calling it would've save them.
i have to imagine Ura is in contention for some things you missed award but i can't remember anything particularly crazy by him so far this year (next basho starts nov 10th though!)
The other thing that impressed me with the padel ball clip is that, when the guy got injured, it was the other team over there helping him out. There was, apparently, no medical staff at the event, and even the guy's own teammate just stood there watching while the other team helps him stretch out the cramp. GREAT sportsmanship, but maybe they wont ever do that again? =^D
Mikkel hansen VS Russia freethrow. That one is sick🔥
Paddleball seems like a game you’d play when you were a kid where you can make up a new rule in the middle of the game as long as you haven’t hit the ball yet.
I imagine the play on the free kick was supposed to be first guy fakes and runs right, second guy rolls it back, third guy passes to the first guy who is now free on the right.
The fact that that paddle shot is legal and makes sense to do instantly means that's the most bonkers sport I've ever seen.
That’s what you get when you outsource a free kick.
great intro music
The Freekick should have been retaken, the kid charged the ball before it was touched and you have to remain 10 yds away
Yeah that second player shouldn't have touched the ball but the defender encroached. Ref should have called it back.
If Scott Sterling doesn't win Goaltender of the Year I'm rioting
he made the play, my jaw actually hit the floor...meme style
Man i thought the qb toss was great but that paddle play was insane, can honestly say thats something i havent seen before
That's a free kick as others have no doubt indicated. The referee has also indicated by his arm that it is indirect so there must be two touches. So, it does require a more complicated approach than a penalty kick of even direct free kick. I was also already 2 nil in the 92nd minute so not really a dramatic situation (unlike the handball highlight).
Paris Saint Germain or PSG is pronounced Par-ee Saaa-uh Germeh, with the Saaa using a soft 'a'. That's as close as I can come.
He does get my vote for the three big saves.
Idk how I got here but “everything you missed that you were never gonna watch” was VERY accurate 😂
Nothing about that soccer pk series of events has anything to do with the actual rules of soccer.
That guy is the Pete Weber of handball.
The red/white has to remain 10 yards from the ball until it's touched, so this should have been retaken. Probably why black took a second to react - they thought it would get blown dead. Easy for the center ref to miss but the linesman should never miss it
This is a show that we would be the favorite segment on SPORTSCENTER....Is that show still on? Seriously, I haven't watched cable tv in years....
First time seeing paddle. Looks like an amazing mesh of tennis and racquetball. What a play to leave the court!!
Also, every time I see a video about handball the more lame it seems.
They should replace the definition of "Keep it Simple Stupid" with a video of that free kick gone sideways. Absolute textbook example of an overly complicated play that backfires.
7:10 the defender was sooo offside lol he was like 2 meters in front of the wall.
That indirect free kick clip will have me loosing sleep for the next week.
We need a jomboy video on explaining handball .. is there no rebounds?
LMAO Coach said "never run that play!"
Although the ball was made live by the second runner touching it, the guy who intercepted was technically too close to the ball when it was played at, therefore the goal shouldn’t of stood.
Cooper is by me :)
I feel like the free kick should have been retaken. You can see that when the first black player jumps over the ball, the white player runs in, takes a step back, and when the ball is finally touched he goes in to get it. He should have been 10 yards away from the ball when it was first touched, but because he ran in, he was closer and stole it. Bad job by the referee, I have seen this play be effective when the defenders stay 10 yards back
don't want to be anti-climactic but i played handball for some time myself up to a semi-pro level and things like that happen at least in 1 out of 10 games ;-)
Didn't even know there was a Handball League. Kind of funny, because they have more fans in the stands than the WNBA does.
The goalie in the handball game was played by Flula Borg
never thought to see a PSG player in a Jomboy video, cheers, Allez Paris ! 🔴🔵
By the way not a penalty, but an indirect free kick for some obscure reason
Its fitting that the intials for the soccer team is DFA.
That was a free kick, he touch it ,thats why the opposite team could grab the ball
The handball would've just been a tie as it's the group stage right now. Basically the rules are the same as UEFA champions league in terms of ties and tiebreakers, knockout rounds are home and away, away goals tiebreaker, extra time, and penalties
Gambling wrecks lives. Legal gambling wrecks more lives.
I guess I'm the one person that thinks receivers shouldn't be allowed to catch over the back if DBs aren't allowed to defend over the back.
Poor refereeing on that indirect kick as when the ball was first touched the defender had encroached within ten yards and should’ve received a yellow card and black team gets to take again.
Not enough appreciation in the comments for fan of the week D
That last play wasn't a PK but an indirect free kick. Not sure why it was called for cause it's very rare for it to be called. Anyway, "indirect" means you can't go for goal right away, someone needs to touch it beforehand (vs direct free kick, like the "normal" free kick, where you can go for goal right away).
That indirect free kick should've been called back cause the player who takes the ball away is way too close. The fake out brings him in and he's unfairly close. Terrible play all around.
Handball goalie looks kinda like Flula Borg
I’m guessing the indirect kick was because the goalie held the ball too long. Also, the opposing player was inside 10 yards so that score should’ve never happened.
This collab is pure gold!
Bot
Deeply, deeply embarrassing not to understand what an indirect free kick is.
Someone close that door!
Now youknow why that soccer team lost 5 straight
Can we get the Dante divincenzo and thibs talking back n forth in the game tonight
That's an indirect kick: means you can't score directly, you have to pass the ball. It's given for minor infractions inside the penalty area, that don't warrant a penalty kick, and they're very hard to score from.
So that dive you showed wasn't called a foul. The indirect free kick was given for something else that happened. Something you don't show in the video. Most likely, the keeper walked out to the edge of the penalty box with the ball in hand, and held on to the ball for longer than the 6 seconds he's allowed to.
Jimmy, that wasnt a PK. It was an indirect kick.
You also missed the other most amazing paddle shot...the shot of the fans. I can't be how many!
Great episode!