|
Post by kevin on Mar 2, 2015 17:38:22 GMT -6
I'm hoping to pick up with the discussion from the St. Louis-Northlake Christian game.
If I'm interpreting happyjack's points correctly, a referee should not call a foul in the penalty area (or indeed anywhere else) if that foul has no outcome on the play. (I would assume, of course, that exceptions would be made for violent conduct or other card-worthy offenses.)
In the other thread, I discussed the penalty given in the SLC-NLC game. I suggested that the NLC player had no chance to play the ball, happyjack suggested that he did. I compared it to the play from the MCA-Dominican game (already discussed in another thread in this forum). He suggested that there was no chance for the MCA player to get to the ball (and I agree with him). If the crux of the issue is that penalties should only be awarded when the attacker has a chance to make a play, so be it. And it's a judgment call, of course. If the CR thought the Northlake player would have had a chance to play the ball, that's fine.
However, I feel there is very little consistency in the interpretation of this situation. And it probably goes more toward guidelines (or lack thereof) from FIFA, USSF, and state organizations. For example, in the SSA-Ben Franklin game at Pan Am this season, a BF player bumped into an SSA player inside the box, just as the keeper was picking up the ball a few yards away. As I watched that game in person, I immediately looked to the ref for a call. The ref didn't whistle until she (I think it was a she, I might be wrong) saw her AR raising his flag for the foul. Now, in my opinion it was very silly of the BF player to risk that sort of contact, but the SSA player had no chance to get to the ball. Since I can't read minds, I don't know what the CR and AR were thinking. But it seemed unlikely to me that they thought the SSA player had a chance to play the ball, and were awarding the penalty based on the obvious contact between the BF and SSA players.
The point I'm trying to make is that as a fan or coach or player in any given game, I have very little idea of whether a referee will call a penalty for any contact in the box, or whether he'll wave it off if he thinks it didn't make a difference. And as a player, coach, and fan, that's a frustrating position to be in.
Since I should probably end this with a question, here goes: what guidance is provided to officials in deciding to award a penalty or not?
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 2, 2015 23:53:10 GMT -6
Not intending this to be as crass as it sounds, but if you have no idea when watching, how will anything written on here give you an idea?
Referees have a ton of advice, laws of the game, personal experience, advice to referees, feedback from other referees, feedback from assessments, classroom learning from experienced officials..
I know you are looking for a cut and dried answer, but comparing 2 different situations and games does not lend to giving that answer.
As an example, in girls D2 final, challenge near top of. Box resulted in handling by keeper just outside the penalty area. I heard opinions from varIous officials at the game that it was yellow, red, and just handling with no card warranted. And each of those could be correct, based in the referees interpretation of what occurred. (In this case, no card was given). And ultimately, it is the sole decision by the referee based on what they saw.
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Mar 3, 2015 9:08:06 GMT -6
I respect that refs are making judgment calls and that they aren't perfect robots. For example, one ref might see a player handle the ball and blow the whistle. Another ref might decide that the player's arm was in a natural position or was protecting his face, etc. In this situation, there's plenty of advice from USSF about whether to call a foul for handling or not. Same thing with something such as DOGSO--there are clear criteria. Obviously, not every ref will make the same call, but in those situations there is a pretty clear thought process coming from any referee in that situation. I don't know exactly what the referee's judgment calls are, but I at least know what factors he's considering.
With the decision to call a penalty or not, I have no clue what the thought process is, because the publicly-available advice from USSF and FIFA is sorely lacking. In some of the threads here, refs have looked at the same replays and used very different thought processes to arrive at their answers. That's the issue I have: not that refs may arrive at a different conclusion, but that their journey to get there can vary so drastically.
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Mar 3, 2015 10:00:06 GMT -6
D3 boys final had the gk handling issue as well, about 3 yds outside the penalty area.
To me the decision on pk/not is fairly simple: Would I call it anywhere else? Penal foul (direct)? In the penalty area?
I think that some of my colleagues don't call legitimate PKs under the guise of not wanting to impact the game. In the case of the D3 boys final pk awarded to NLC, this may have been a courageous decision to award the pk based on foul criteria and its location. I did get more information on that specific call but I don't think it has any impact on the way it was called.
There's a term being used called fingerspitzengefuhl or some fancy German word, meaning, tip of the finger. Figuratively that the referee has to feel what the players want and the game deserves.
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 3, 2015 10:37:09 GMT -6
The journey to make the decision is based on the referees experience...no 2 are ever alike.
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Mar 3, 2015 13:28:47 GMT -6
And this us why soccer refs are probably under more criticism than other refs in different sports. One could be well versed in the laws of the game (yes- I know most of us are not) amd still not understand why a ref is or isn't making calls.
No way to cover everything in rule book and human experience and error plays a part.....
Please don't take this as ref bashing- not the intent. It just seems like the answer to most questions of the sort is always maybe or depends. Appreciate the honesty but hopefully you can see how the ambiguity could cause frustration. That being said I don't know how you could make it more black and white or if you would really want to.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 3, 2015 14:45:00 GMT -6
I don't believe soccer officials are under more criticism than other sports (see NFL playoffs). I find that soccer programs do a great job working to educate officials and get the word out with what they've done. Just because you hear a couple of vocal critics does not mean everyone is in agreement with the criticism.
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 3, 2015 15:15:38 GMT -6
To paraphrase former Supreme Court Justice Stewart...I may not be able to give you a definitive description of a foul worthy of a penalty kick, but I'll know it when I see it.
|
|
|
Post by smee on Mar 3, 2015 16:45:58 GMT -6
To paraphrase former Supreme Court Justice Stewart.I may not be able to give you a definitive description of a foul worthy of a penalty kick, but I'll know it when I see it. And, I much prefer this to the "calling balls and strikes" of other Supreme Court Justices, which is what tends to be the case in throwball or basketball. Soccer is a game of angles, possibly more so than any other sport. If the ref is in the "right" spot, he/she may see something that nobody else sees, or could possibly see.
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Mar 3, 2015 18:20:11 GMT -6
I guess what I mean is that with soccer- there a lot of rules that have things like if the player gained advantage or not in them. This leaves a lot to the referee opinion and experience. This is not necessarily a bad thing just different from a lot of sports where the rules seem more cut and dried.
Just the issue of when handling should be called has several variables from what I remember. It's just one of those things.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by copakid14 on Mar 3, 2015 20:55:08 GMT -6
I would like some clarification from our referee members about advantage and going back to a foul in the context of the girls D2 state championship game. Soccerdad23 posted the highlights and now that the game is over, I'm curious about the free kick given that resulted in the third Ben Franklin goal. It's somewhere around the 6 minute mark in the clip. The first part concerns whether a foul was even committed, I do not see one, the second part is if a foul was committed how long do you have to go back to it? The ball was passed twice and a significant amount of time had transpired before deciding to go back to the foul. I would be curious to have our referee powers that be on the board give their opinion/interpretation. laprepsoccer.proboards.com/thread/19926/ben-franklin-3-loyola-2Clip on page 6
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 3, 2015 21:59:12 GMT -6
If advantage is applied, referees have 2-3 seconds to call back. I saw no indication that advantage was called. I did see player for loyala swing her leg into the back of #8 leg and less than 2 seconds secknds later foul was called. I am looking at video on phone so I can't tell if contact was made. There was only 1 pass after what looked like a kick. Referee was right there so I assume contact was made
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 3, 2015 22:03:33 GMT -6
I guess what I mean is that with soccer- there a lot of rules that have things like if the player gained advantage or not in them. This leaves a lot to the referee opinion and experience. This is not necessarily a bad thing just different from a lot of sports where the rules seem more cut and dried. Just the issue of when handling should be called has several variables from what I remember. It's just one of those things. There are 17 laws in soccer, the fewest of any sport (except possibly beveragepong). Not many opportunities for advantage by my count
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Mar 4, 2015 4:50:06 GMT -6
Going to try to clarify what I mean one more time and then give up....
Offside- (admittedly too lazy to find exact rule while insomniac)- I remember it is not always called but should be called if player got an advantage. To a lay person it could seem like this was a missed call when the ref simply felt like it didn't meet this criteria among the others. Possible would get call from another ref but neither wrong. ...
From what I remember about handling- there were a few variables as well. It makes it difficult for a fan or player to tell why it may be called one time but not another.
Maybe there are such nuances in other sports as well of which I am unaware.
My point wasn't that anything wrong with soccer or even the refs. Just saying in my view, the nuances in soccer can make it difficult to understand why certain things are called and why others are not.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Mar 4, 2015 8:47:38 GMT -6
Going to try to clarify what I mean one more time and then give up.. Offside- (admittedly too lazy to find exact rule while insomniac)- I remember it is not always called but should be called if player got an advantage. To a lay person it could seem like this was a missed call when the ref simply felt like it didn't meet this criteria among the others. Possible would get call from another ref but neither wrong. . From what I remember about handling- there were a few variables as well. It makes it difficult for a fan or player to tell why it may be called one time but not another. Maybe there are such nuances in other sports as well of which I am unaware. My point wasn't that anything wrong with soccer or even the refs. Just saying in my view, the nuances in soccer can make it difficult to understand why certain things are called and why others are not. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards Offside is a lot more black and white, with a lot less room for interpretation, than anything in Law 12. The only thing truly interpreted in Law 11 is control/deliberate play on the ball. Think of offside in groups of three. If the player is ahead of all three lines - midfield, ball, second last defender - they are in the offside position. From the offside position one of three things must be met - become involved with active play, interfere with active play, or gain an advantage from being in that position - then the player is now offside.
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Mar 4, 2015 9:47:02 GMT -6
Handling is quite simple, did the ball play the hand or the hand play the ball? And was the hand in a normal position at that point?
Nothing else matters.
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Mar 4, 2015 11:25:52 GMT -6
Ball heading straight for player face. Player places hand to block ball. Doesn't swat at ball but leaves hand there until ball has struck hand. Is that normally handling?
Yes- I know- player should move head instead.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Mar 4, 2015 11:29:52 GMT -6
Ball heading straight for player face. Player places hand to block ball. Doesn't swat at ball but leaves hand there until ball has struck hand. Is that normally handling? Yes- I know- player should move head instead. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards Depends on speed, distance, reaction time. HS used to have a stupid rule that said if the arm moved after the ball was kicked and the ball struck the arm, it's handling. Fortunately this came more in line with USSF and referees can be more practical in its application.
|
|
|
Post by laffysoccermom on Mar 4, 2015 12:19:27 GMT -6
So I am assuming that if ref feels it was a protective reaction- ball coming in hard from not too far away then he would probably not call handling.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Mar 4, 2015 19:12:09 GMT -6
So I am assuming that if ref feels it was a protective reaction- ball coming in hard from not too far away then he would probably not call handling. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I537 using proboards Correct
|
|