Was Jamie Vardy's goal against Liverpool a volley, half-volley or neither?

The Leicester striker scored a wondergoal on Tuesday night, but it seems nobody can agree on what to call it...

Volley? Half-volley? Who knows...

First things first: Jamie Vardy’s opener against Liverpool was a brilliant goal. But there is a caveat.

No-one can agree on what to call it. Was it a volley? Was it a half-volley? Or was it neither? Here are the three possible arguments:

It was a volley

The cleanest of the arguments in that there are no exceptions: every ball that is hit in mid-air counts as a volley.

It matters not that Vardy’s dipping effort came after Riyad Mahrez’s long ball had hit the ground – it was off the ground and therefore fits perfectly into the volley category.

Marco van Basten’s finest hour in 1988 was hit on the full, but Vardy’s is just as much a volley as that. Simple. Cased closed. Or is it?

It was a half-volley

Every ball that is struck when in the air after having hit the floor at least once is a half-volley.

Vardy’s goal was not a "clean" volley as it had bounced, so you cannot call it a volley. The ball was struck in mid-air, though, so deserves another name that distinguishes it from a bounce-less volley but nonetheless makes clear that the ball was in the air.

It was a half-volley

Every ball that is struck when in the air after having hit the floor at least once is a half-volley.

Vardy’s goal was not a "clean" volley as it had bounced, so you cannot call it a volley. The ball was struck in mid-air, though, so deserves another name that distinguishes it from a bounce-less volley but nonetheless makes clear that the ball was in the air.

It's neither a volley nor a half volley

To call Vardy’s goal a volley is to de-value the volley.

The volley is an action that requires exceptional timing, coordination, skill and precision, when a ball travels through the air and is struck before the ball reaches the ground.

The fact that Vardy's hit the ground before being struck makes it easier to execute and, a high difficulty level is an important aspect of the volley.

Nor is Vardy’s goal a half-volley. A half-volley is a very particular skill that involves the ball being struck at the moment (or a split-second after) the ball hits the ground.

Think Robbie Keane for Liverpool at the Emirates. Think Papiss Demba Cisse’s swirling effort at Stamford Bridge in 2012. Think a drop-goal in rugby. Think Tony Yeboah at Wimbledon in 1995. Just think about that one generally, what an absolute delight to keep stored in your mind:

Irrespective of whether the ball has bounced previously, these are half-volleys and are separate entities from the "volley" family. The Oxford English Dictionary agrees.

@Zonal_Marking @jonawils @kenearlys @jacklang OED has: pic.twitter.com/PM3HPoTw6g

— Jon Mackenzie (@Jon_Mackenzie) February 3, 2016

Vardy’s goal is neither on the full nor on the bounce and therefore fits into neither category.

Conclusion

I’m firmly in the "not a volley" camp and can’t see myself being convinced otherwise.

I simply cannot get behind the idea that Vardy’s could be a half-volley, as I take a half-volley to be the very specific type of kick described above.

I also wouldn’t call it a volley because the ball has slowed so much after hitting the ground. Perhaps I am being swayed by spending far too much of my childhood playing "headers and volleys" and the definition used for that game is ingrained in my brain.

I accept that the major problem with this line of thinking is that we are then left with Vardy’s goal being outside any obvious category and we just have to call it "a really good goal".

But I’m ok with that.

Are you? Make up your mind below: