Dear Mark: (DAD)
Don't worry. You are correct. According to the LOTG, the match should have been stopped, the "goal" disallowed, and play re-started with a dropped ball.
We do not know what instructions the EPL referees may have received about these "beach balls" as many fans seem to be throwing many of these featherweight balls on to many pitches.
Stick with your solid interpretation.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: xxx
Sent: Sunday, October 18, 2009 8:41 PM
To: John yyy; Jim zzz
Subject: Liverpool Beach Ball Goal
Gentlemen,
As you are my mavens of soccer I look to you for your guidance on the following. Over the weekend there was a bizarre play in the EPL match between Liverpool and Sunderland, perhaps you are aware of it? You may view the play here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7Qu7FjxUQ8&annotation_id=annotation_980515&feature=iv Essentially I wish to learn your opinion of the goal that was scored. In my version of the ATR there are two paragraphs that seem to bear on this play. The first is 1.7(d) and the other is 10.7. My take on this play is that the goal should have been waved off and the restart would be a drop ball in the Penalty Area. But as the Referee in this match allowed the goal I questioned my understanding of the LOTG, and as I could not find anything there to guide me I turned to the ATR.
The closest I could come that seemed applicable to the exact circumstance was the following: "Interference by any outside agent other than a substitute illegally on the field will result in the referee declaring a stoppage of play, restarting with a dropped ball where the ball was when the play was stopped."
Well, that did not put my mind at ease. As this is certainly a great teaching moment I turn to both of you for help. Please share your thoughts? Much thanks ...
--
Best regards,
Mark xxxx (AKA MY DAD AKA THE GUY WHO'S BEEN REFFING FOR 10+ YEARS.)
HAHHAHA I FEEL LIKE A DICK NOW. HAHAHAHAHA.