Thanks for that, glad to learn. Apologies for my erroneous post earlier
I think most people's view is that the ref should not have blown his whistle so quickly. All he had to do was wait a second or two to see what happened as the incident was still ongoing. From what I saw, Larkin simply dropped the ball in front of himself before knocking it in - nothing wrong with that.
Its a foul to intentionally drop the ball to gain and advantage, imo it was deliberate but I agree its open to interpreation it could have been an accident.
In any sport, once the whistle is blown you can't really have play continuing. That wouldn't be fair to defenders (evenif they're the guilty parties)
True. One thing that some people don't seem to realise is that just because a player is being fouled, doesn't give them a right to foul the ball in any way.
One example of this (please don't jump down my throat, it's just the most high profile example I could think of) was the Kildare - Down game in 2010. Along with Coulter's goal being ridiculously illegal, Kildare's goal was scored after Callaghan (I think) took a massive amount of steps. Some people came on and said that as he was being fouled (which he was, outside the box) the referee was right to allow advantage (which he wasn't).
Looked at it there again and Larkin dropped the ball was about to hit the ball and got a push on the back and then let the ball bounce before tapping it in. It should have been a goal but Kelly blew a bit too quickly (these things happen).... Matt ruth was clearly outside the square but Larkin did take a lot of steps. I thought he let a lot of overcarrying go on both sides, one example was Bugler taking 9 steps to get clear of TJ Reid and throwing up the ball and going to tap it on his hurl missing the hurl and catching it with his other hand and getting a free for being dragged back!
The ref seems to blow the whistle just after Larkin hits the sliotar / just before the sliotar crosses the line.
I would like to think that the ref realised that Larkin fouled the ball (by throwing it out in front of him) while he was being fouled by the Clare defender, and then awarded the penalty.
So I think he made the right decision.
A player throwing the ball out if front of them in order to gain an advantage is one of the most common occurences these days and rarely gets called. Although it is very difficult to officiate.
So dastardly, does that mean if you throw the ball up to hit it and don't hot it until it bounces its a free??
no it's not a free, you could have been hooked or miss hit the ball, the rule is more about throwing the ball on the ground if you get bottled up.
Unless it's blatantly obvious its never whistled.
No of course not, it is , similar to the rule with the hurl, where you throw the ball intentionally to gain and advantage that the foul arises, in this case Larkin most certainly didnt throw the ball ''up'', Ref got it spot on IMO, first foul was by the Clare defender so a penalty was the correct call.
Which rule says anything about "up"? Surely a player is entitled to drop the ball ball at their own feet to hit on the half volley if bottled up and unable to make any other stroke? I agree if he threw the ball that it would be a foul. If he simply drops or hand-passes the ball in front of himself, I don't see where the foul arises. Perhaps I'm wrong but I'd like something more definitive than anything you've provided so far.
Surely a player is entitled to do it is right....why penalise creativeness and genius like what we saw in the All Ireland Q/F in 2005 when Brian Corcoran dropped the sliothar and hit it on the half volley knowing he'd be blocked by the fullback otherwise. Moment of pure brilliance and most importantly the goal stood, rightly so!
It's the 4th goal in this video: