I would have been spitting glass if it had been disalowed,i think it was a great piece of thinking,do you not agree,had it been your team?
i support chelsea.im fair minded.
2007-02-21 22:00:47 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football ➔ English Football
hiya LF so your not the buckie swilling hoop mon i thought you were lol. great goal taught to us by a french man called terry henry unless your giggsy i think he has another name for him lol.
2007-02-22 05:52:29 · answer #1 · answered by Deano™ 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sorry gerbil but strictly speaking the goal should be allowed - and was! The issue over quick free kicks is when its been taken before the ref has assesd the situation. In the Lille game this was not the case! The ref had asked the reds if they wanted the whistle and moved away! If Lille had scored it im sure they wld have enjoyd it as much as United!
The goal was a fantastic peice of genius by a veteran of the game! Experience paid and the frogs cldnt handle it!
2007-02-22 07:31:54 · answer #2 · answered by Grantius Maximus 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As it happens, Chelsea were on the receiving end of two similar goals in recent times. Remember Henry at Highbury?
According to the laws of the game the goal should, strictly speaking, NOT have been awarded.
However, I don't see why a team that commits a foul on the edge of their own area should gain an advantage for their crime. We always see quick free kicks being taken on the halfway line so why should it be any different for a kick outside the box?
Grant K: Law 13 states: " if a free kick is taken and an opposing player is within ten yards of the ball then the kick MUST be retaken".
So, strictly speaking, the kick should have been retaken. My point was that referees turn a blind eye in other areas of the pitch out of common sense. As you point out, the ref had assessed this particular situation and allowed play to continue. I'm not saying the goal should have been disallowed, I think it was good refereeing, but the laws of the game state that it should have been.
2007-02-22 06:26:45 · answer #3 · answered by Gerbil 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Its a good goal but if it was chelsea it would have been disallowed because nobody likes Chelsea.
I dont like them myself.
The ref was a Man U Fan everybody could tell except for the ManU fans.
2007-02-22 08:06:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I agree I think it was just quick thinking on Giggsy part.... We've seen people like Henry do it before. It was a great goal.
2007-02-22 06:13:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Theiry Henry scored like that AGAINST chelsea.
2007-02-22 08:39:50 · answer #6 · answered by Nanook~Maybe I need a longer Name?~ 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
yip it was a legal goal... one of the lil players should jus stand near the ball until they no if a quick free kick will b taking...... also if a quick free kick is taking the wall does nt have t b ten yards frm the ball...
2007-02-22 07:52:59 · answer #7 · answered by nufc for life 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh I am sure they have. There was nothing wrong with the goal, we won our Game, yours was a draw.
2007-02-22 06:06:28 · answer #8 · answered by madge 51 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
if chelsea had scored that goal it whould not have been allowed
i think the ref was a bit of a united fan my self.
2007-02-22 06:06:41 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋
the ref is a united fan, then what?
2007-02-22 10:06:32 · answer #10 · answered by guru 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋