Talk:Own goal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Football (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

too modern[edit]

Some ninety percent of the examples cited date from 1990 or later. Either athletes have become more clumsy in the last two decades, or Wikipedia contributors have no sense of history. Of course, if we listed more incidents from the 1980s and earlier, this article would get really big. I mean, even bigger than it is now. Tell you what, why don't we reduce the entries to, say, two or three per sport per decade? This is an encyclopedia, not a catalogue. 165.91.64.216 (talk) 13:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)RKH

Badly worded 2[edit]

"...player John Warren went on a fast break and dunked the ball Portland's the net. Instead of being down only one, they were now down by 5, and would go on to lose the game." (almost last sentence in the article)

Is this supposed to read "...player John Warren went on a fast break and dunked the ball into Portland's net. Instead of being down only one, they were now down by 5, and would go on to lose the game." I have no knowledge of the game and so didn't dare edit it. If someone does know could they change it to make sense, please?

-Eddie (unregistered poster) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.76.15.198 (talk) 18:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

If a Cleveland player dunked the ball into Portland's net, that would not be a basket for Portland, but for Cleveland. Perhaps the intention was to say "dunked the ball into Cleveland's net" or "dunked the ball into his own net"--if this is indeed a true story at all. Holy (talk) 19:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Nope. Technically, a basketball team shoots at its own basket. The terminology is the reverse of most sports. WHPratt (talk) 12:18, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Badly worded[edit]

"An own goal cannot be scored directly from a throw-in or a free kick (a corner kick will be awarded to the attacking team if so should happen), and under certain other circumstances."

This needs to be reworded. The rule is - if an attacker takes a free kick, or a throw in, and (for some bizarre, completely unlikely reason) kicks or throws it into his own net, then it's not an own goal, but a corner is given to the other team.

The way it reads now, you might think that if an attacker takes a free kick, and a defender knocks it into his own net, it's not an own goal - when of course it is - obvious example David Beckham/Carlos Gamarra. You can argue the toss about whether Beckham or Gamarra gets the "credit", but it certainly didn't result in a corner for Paraguay.

I know it says "directly", so the example doesn't really apply, but the sentence as reads now just seems a bit strange to me. Some explanation is required, but I'd rather someone who has a copy of the rule book did it :) Camillus (talk) 15:23, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Recentism?[edit]

John Arne Riise scored an own goal on the 22nd April 2008 in the Champions League Semi Final, 1st Leg. This was scored in the 95th minute, and gave Chelsea a precious away goal and 1-1 draw against Liverpool at Anfield. Chelsea later went on to win the home leg 3-2, and progress through to the Champions League final.

I dont feel this is a particularly notable goal compared to most on the list and is probably being added because it is recent rather than having any real importance. --neonwhite user page talk 02:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree - if not for this own goal, Liverpool would have reached the Champions League final - assuming a 3-2 victory for Chelsea in the second leg, Liverpool would have gone through on the away goals rule. Rather significant, I'd say, and the fact that it was scored so deep into injury time also makes it an especially cruel blow for Liverpool. Camillus 10:21, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
But it's only one semi-final that will likely be forgotten in time, whereas if you look at each of the other entries they all have some kind of significance/controversy beyond affecting the outcome of the game. Such as multiple own goals, Andrés Escobar's murder, goals that decided competitions. If this was the final and the champions were decided by the goal i think it would be a different case but i don't see how this is not just a regular own goal among hundreds scored worldwide each year. At best i think it's borderline significant. I'd like a few more opinions on this. Maybe a rfc? --neonwhite user page talk 12:04, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Missing the point somewhat - if they hadn't scored the own-goal, they'd be in the final of arguably the most prestigious tournament in club football. I'd says its much more significant than that of Nicola Caricola, Jonathan Woodgate, Djimi Traoré, Keith Gillespie, two own goals in a Scottish First Division match, or the one by Yuri Kovtun. Camillus 12:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
As i pointed out they all have significance beyond the result, this goal does not and did not win the competition or cause any controversy. There have been many own goals scored in knockout comptetions this is just another. --neonwhite user page talk 15:00, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
You know what, it doesn't really matter - the six I mentioned had no significance beyond the result whatsoever, whereas Chelsea and not Liverpool are in the Champions League final, and Liverpool are at least 3 million pounds poorer [1], because of Riise's og, 4mins 3 seconds "into" 4 minutes overtime, descibed by the Times as "one of the greatest own goals of all time". "did not cause any controversy"? - I see black, you see white. Oh well. Next case. Camillus 21:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
I will explain the significance. Woodgate - one his debut and gets send off too. Nicola Caricola for the so called Curse of Caricola, fans blamed to goal for the teams poor run. Djimi Traoré because of the unusual way the goal was scored. Keith Gillespie because of the fight and discipline afterwards. I grant that Hamiltons goals may be dodgy. Yuri Kovtun - iceland beating russia is a significant without an own goal, because it was an own goal makes it notable.
The problem with the list as i see it is that it is unsourced. It should be based on coverage and as you suggest so i propose changing the criteria to include only goals that have had significant relaible coverage. I think this will bring it more in line with WP:V policy. Obviously this would require going through all the entries. What do you think? --neonwhite user page talk 01:35, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Sources[edit]

Done some work on the sources, still needs more doing, this article has some more that can be added [2] also the list needs ordering possibly into chrono. order? --neonwhite user page talk 15:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

"Some scorers will give credit to the attacker..."[edit]

Taken from the "Association football" section. Shouldn't it be "Some officials" instead? Thanks Kvsh5 (talk) 21:01, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't think the match officials - the referee, assistants (linesmen) and fourth official - handle crediting goals to individuals.82.46.253.56 (talk) 09:55, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Comment mvoed from main article[edit]

I've moved the text below here from the main article; I believe this was the authors intention. TB (talk) 15:47, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


It might be appropriate to incorporate these items from the Jim Marshall article:

During his time with the Minnesota Vikings, Jim Marshall was involved in one of the most embarrassing moments in professional sports history on October 25, 1964. In a game against the San Francisco 49ers, Marshall recovered a fumble, but ran 66 yards with it the wrong way, into his own end zone. Thinking that he had scored a touchdown for the Vikings, Marshall then threw the ball away in celebration. The ball landed out of bounds, resulting in a safety for the 49ers. Fortunately for Marshall, his Vikings won the game 27-22, in part because of a key sack and fumble he forced after his miscue. Marshall later received a letter from Roy Riegels reading "Welcome to the club".[4] While playing for the University of California, Riegels was tagged with the nickname "Wrong Way" after making a similar blunder in the 1929 Rose Bowl. Unlike Marshall's mistake, Riegels' run cost his team dearly; the two points scored from the ensuing safety off of the blocked punt proved to be the margin of defeat in an 8-7 loss.

WHPratt (talk) 15:54, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


I've now added this item to the main article. JudahH (talk) 15:53, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Similar idea in other games[edit]

Is there anything to add about a similar idea in other games? Potting the opponent's ball in pool springs to mind, as does 'friendly fire' in paintball and airsoft. Obviously this wouldn't usually be called an 'own goal', but the idea is the same. 82.46.253.56 (talk) 09:53, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

The closest things I can think of in baseball would be:

  • On an extended play, perhaps involving an extra base hit or a rundown or both, nobody is covering home (the catcher has gotten involved somewhere else) and the thirdbaseman (or whomever), holding the ball, helplessly chases an opposing baserunner across the plate. This happened in a World Series game, though I forget just when.
Aha! Check the article on Heinie Zimmerman -- he's the poor fellow who had to chase an opposing runner home in a World series game. WHPratt (talk) 15:30, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
  • The time that outfielder Jose Canseco tried to catch a deep fly ball, but had it bounce off his head and over the wall for an "own-homer" and a headache. WHPratt (talk) 13:36, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
"Own forceout"? Jackie Robinson once, as a baserunner, fielded a groundball and threw himself out at second. He did it to keep the secondbaseman from getting the ball and starting a double play. He knew he'd be called out at once for letting the ball touch him, but wanted to give the batter time to reach first. They subsequently made a rule to call this a double play if a fielder was in position for such at the time of runner interference. WHPratt (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Own goal in the NBA[edit]

An own goal really isn't that rare in basketball, which is demonstrated by the fact that four examples referring to less than a year ob NBA 'ball are mentioned. So, should we mention them at all? Instead, I would rather mention the (in)famous intentional own goal made by Lorenzo Alocen during the last seconds of a champions cup's match in 1962. Intentional own goals have been ruled impossible by FIBA since then (probably because of that instance, but I'm not sure). --Axolotl Nr.733 (talk) 21:23, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposal for change of name[edit]

I wish to request consensus for a change of name for this article. I wish to change the name from “Own goal” to “Own point”, because for the NBA, it is points, not goals. A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 01:25, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

The common NBA score is officially a "field goal," so "own goal" isn't really incorrect. Now, as to whether an "own free throw" can occur . . . WHPratt (talk) 18:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
+ in all other games it's called a goal, and not a point. The intro even mentions the metaphorical use of "own goal", which would make little sense in an "own point" article. Making this article NBA-specific would serve no purpose, just redirect from "own point" if it's really necessary. 84.114.214.144 (talk) 17:59, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Language of terms[edit]

Association Football (Soccer) has a number of terms like "offside" that may not translate well into the local language, so the English term may be used. This may well be the case with "Own Goal". Comments? Tabletop (talk) 08:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Badly worded 3[edit]

"Some scorers will give credit to the attacker if the defender's mistake caused the own goal, similar to ice hockey"

This is very confusing. The "scorer" is the person who scored the goal; in the case of an own goal, that would be the defender. I *think* that this is a very poorly worded attempt to say: "In some cases/in some statistics [whose??], the goal will be awarded to the attacker, even if the goal would not have been scored without the defender's intervention - similar to ice hockey."

That said, I'm not aware of when or where this is common practice; if it is indeed common practice, there should probably be mention of where this is the case.

At any rate, 'twould be nice if this sentence made some kind of sense. 84.114.214.144 (talk) 17:57, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

2006 World cup[edit]

The Own goal by Carlos Gamarra in the 2006 world cup is not mentioned here. I saw this on television and I recall the announcer saying it was the first 1-0 score by an own goal in World Cup history. I can't find any citation for this "first" but there are plenty for the goal itself.--173.49.255.227 (talk) 23:54, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Misleading?[edit]

It says that "On seven occasions in the NHL, players have directed the puck into their own empty net, either late in the game or because of a delayed penalty call ... " and there is reference to the rare feat of a goalkeeper scoring a goal due to this. However the article on NHL goalkeepers who have scored mentions a total of seven own goals. Now, surely, every empty-net own-goal has not resulted in a goalkeeper getting credit for the score. Credit must have gone to another player roughly 5/6 of the time, probably more often. So, there must be more than seven total, maybe 50 or more. Maybe "On rare occasions ... " would be a better way to begin that paragraph, unless someone has exact numbers. WHPratt (talk) 14:03, 5 November 2013 (UTC)