Bad Timing: Accrington Stanley Denied Goal Against Wimbledon After Ref Blows For Half-Time With Shot In Mid-Flight (Video)

Alan Duffy

5th, March 2016

13 Comments

Referee Trevor Kettle found himself in the midst of a storm of controversy at Kingsmeadow on Saturday, with the official blowing his whistle for half-time just as an Accrington Stanley shot was headed for the corner of the AFC Wimbledon net.

Capture

The incident occurred when visitors Stanley were pressing for the opening goal, with striker Billy Kee turning in the Dons’ box before firing a goal-bound effort past ‘keeper Kelle Roos.

However, when the ball was in transit towards the goal, ref Kettle decided to blow for half-time, pushing the Stanley players to boiling point…

Surely Kettle should’ve waited for the ball to cross the line? Anyway, unsurprisingly, Accrington manager John Coleman was less than impressed, telling BBC Radio Lancashire:

I’m delighted with the way we played but sometimes the luck doesn’t go with you.

I’ve never seen anything like it happen [the disallowed goal] in all my 46 years playing and managing.

He blew as the ball was on its way into the net. You can’t account for that. Everyone in the ground is flabbergasted.

Referees make mistakes because they’re only human and that’s what makes the game of football so special because you have talking points and arguments.

The game would ultimately end goalless, with Stanley ‘keeper Ross Etheridge seeing red during the game.

Still, what a pedantic decision from Kettle.

You have already read 4 premium articles for free today
Access immediately the premium content with Multipass

Or come back tomorrow

Posted in FAIL, Football League, Newsnow, Videos

Share this article: Email

13 Comments

  1. usrick says:

    Pedantic perhaps, but also correct. Play ends when, in the opinion of the referee, 45 minutes have been played – not when the whistle can be blown without fear of controversy.

    • Todger Tugger says:

      Rubbish usrick, you must be a ref yourself or American or something. He is a man not a robot, you either blow before the ball goes into the danger area or when it leaves, it would only have been a matter of seconds either way. You know its a bad decision when the opponents wouldn’t have a bad word to say about the 1.3 seconds of added time the ref added for that goal. Would it?

      • usrick says:

        I am indeed a referee, with 38 years experience. Clearly you are not.

        • Neil says:

          I think the number one quality for a decent referee is to embrace the spirit of football. I guess at least 98% of refs would have blown up after the shot. The other 2% have more of a love of rulebooks and stopwatches than the game they are there to officiate.

  2. Todger Tugger says:

    Disgrace. Ref should never be at a game ever again. Why blow right then when the player was in the actual process of shooting, do it 2 seconds before or let him have the shot, if the keeper saves and the ball goes out the area then blow. He is a jobsworth idiot, and nobody likes a jobsworth. Even worse that the ref had a say in the result, nobody else did.

  3. Mr Sensible says:

    @usrick

    Yes but 99.9999999% of refs will use common sense and see how play goes before blowing at a specific second. Ref’s will always let play continue if something can happen, even if that goes a few seconds over the allocated time and that allocated time in a minimum.

    The ref’s an idiot.

  4. usrick says:

    A referee ought not take any decision, including when to blow full time, based on whether something can happen. To do so would be unfair to one side or the other.

    • Nuno says:

      Usrick, directly from FIFA rulebook: “The announcement of the additional time does not indicate the exact amount of time left in the match. The time may be increased if the referee considers it appropriate but never reduced.” so IT WAS overzealous (if there was no additional time, you’re not telling me there wasn’t 2 seconds lost that he could’ve waited). Idiotic referee against the spirit of the game/law

  5. JohnS says:

    So those who are complaining about this decision think that a referee should keep on adding time at the end of a half as long as one team has a chance to score?

    usrick is right.

    • Neil says:

      Obviously not. If you’ve actually seen the video it is literally the seconds between taking a shot and the ball hitting the net. What if the ref missed 2 seconds of an injury to an Accrington player earlier in the match? Would it be fair then to blow up right on 45 minutes. Kettle is right only in the same way a traffic warden is right for putting a ticket on a car with a tyre 1mm over a double yellow line.

  6. guignol says:

    usrick, 38 years experience in a land where most matches are played with a clock that counts DOWN and a horn to end play on the split second has seriously warped your view. to the rest of the world this is gold scenes inside the weird mine.

  7. Glynn Wandsworth says:

    If Trevor kettle is intent on working to the second, maybe he could explain why, after giving 4 minutes of extra time in a Tuesday evening match between Barnsley and stoke city, did he award stoke a penalty in the seventh minute of injury time. A penalty by the way that not one stoke player appealed for.
    Check the facts if you want, it was the same year that stoke were promoted to the premiership. The man is a complete idiot.

Leave a Reply