The decision not to retake the penalty kick missed by Real Madrid star Kylian Mbappe against Betis sparked widespread controversy, due to doubts about the Andalusian team's defender Marc Bartra entering the penalty area before the kick was taken.
Despite the confusion that prevailed in the sports circles, the Technical Committee of Referees in Spain (CTA) revealed, according to a report by the newspaper "Mundo Deportivo", that the referee on the field, Alejandro Hernandez, and the video assistant referee, Javier Iglesias Villanueva, made the absolutely correct decision not to retake the kick, based on a precise text in the laws of the International Federation of Football Associations (IFAB) and the refereeing (CARD) guide for the current season.
The approved rules state that the player's position at the moment of executing the penalty kick is determined based on the position of his feet, or which part of his body is actually touching the ground.
In the case of jumping, the IFAB rules explain a crucial detail: "The vertical (virtual) projection of the feet of a player suspended in the air is only counted if his entire body is separated from the ground and does not touch it in any way."
Herein lies the small detail that decided the situation in Mbappe's missed penalty kick, as a review of the footage showed that Marc Bartra was not completely suspended in the air, but rather one of his feet was inside the penalty area and the other was touching the ground outside of it.
This external contact prevented the rules from applying the concept of "virtual vertical projection," and his body position was deemed legal and did not warrant cancelling the game or retaking the kick.
The laws add another condition for counting an early intrusion into the penalty area during the execution of a penalty kick. It is not enough for the defender to simply enter the area, but his advance must clearly affect the kicker, or he must compete for the ball after it rebounds from the goalkeeper in a way that prevents the opponent from scoring.
In the case of Marc Bartra, if both of his feet had been suspended in the air and their hypothetical landing inside the penalty area, it would have been considered an attempt to circumvent the law, and the penalty kick would have had to be retaken. However, the fact that one of his feet was on the ground outside the area made his entry consistent with the explicit text of the law. This precise clause settled the controversy and closed the door of salvation for Real Madrid, who lost the match against Betis by one goal to nil.
what is your opinion on this news ?do let us know in the comments on tha comment box
if you liked this news article please share on friends & family & don't forget to follow on website & social media
