|
Post by northlasoccerdad on Dec 14, 2009 15:28:20 GMT -6
The other issue here is the REFEREES processing the disqualification. If the ref doesn't report a red card or a "soft red", then as far as the LHSAA knows it didn't happen. From what I can gather some refs do report them and some do not - is that equitable? NO - especially if it is regional based. For example, and this is just an example not based on factual information....what if Lafayette area refs have made it their normal practice to only send in reports on straight REDS for a specific type of action, let's say fighting. And they do not send reports in on REDS for language or soft reds for other fouls. However, another organization, for the sake of argument, let's say Baton Rouge....sends in reports on ANY Red. Then if that's occuring that's highly irregular and very much puts teams at a disadvantage in regards to the rules in place. I'd like to think that it isn't being done in that manner but who knows....probably more of an issue of "individual" referees just not wanting to follow up with paperwork. HOWEVER - it WOULD be nice to get it SPELLED OUT more specifically for ALL involved. I thought the idea that send-offs (red cards) from tournaments do not need to be (but can be?) reported to LHSAA was interesting also. (That was reported in a previous thread.) Is that correct? If so, that seems inconsistent and potentially capricious also. I agree -- there needs to be some clarification about what needs to be reported and what doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by beauchenecoach on Dec 14, 2009 17:03:03 GMT -6
I will make that one of my issues for the March Advisory meeting with the LHSAA (LHSSCA will meet with them). I think this will be a very good topic to discuss with them. I will discuss with the other members of the LHSSCA committee.
|
|
|
Post by fifty50bawl on Feb 20, 2020 16:46:31 GMT -6
NO... its only straight Reds. Yellow-Yellow reds are like fouling out in basketball. Refs are not supposed to file reports on anything other than EJECTIONS for Unsportsmanlike Conduct. If you have been unfairly accused of this by the LHSAA thinking a yellow/yellow was a straight Red violation (happens as some are not familiar with the rules of soccer), you should appeal it and report what really happened. 6.11.10 Player ejected from a contest in a sport for unsportsmanlike conduct: First offense – the player shall receive, through the school, an official warning. Second offense – the school shall be fined $100, and the student shall be placed on probation. Third offense – the school shall be fined $200, and the student shall be suspended from participating in the same sport for the remainder of the season. 6.11.12 Coach ejected from a contest in a sport for unsportsmanlike conduct: First offense – the coach shall receive an official warning. Second offense – the school shall be fined $200, and the coach shall be placed on probation. Third offense – the school shall be fined $300 and may be prohibited from playing in a contest(s) with the coach serving as the coach of the team in the contest(s).
good stuff. fast forward 10 years - is LHSAA reporting soft reds to school?
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Feb 20, 2020 17:01:09 GMT -6
There is no such thing as a "soft red" anymore. It used to be that a red card for a second yellow would mean that a team didn't have to play 10v11, but that changed years ago.
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Feb 20, 2020 17:01:11 GMT -6
The “soft red” concept went away about 8 or 9 years ago. It used to allow a player to be disqualified but the team would still play with 11.
|
|
|
Post by rlb2024 on Feb 20, 2020 17:02:56 GMT -6
NO... its only straight Reds. Yellow-Yellow reds are like fouling out in basketball. Refs are not supposed to file reports on anything other than EJECTIONS for Unsportsmanlike Conduct. If you have been unfairly accused of this by the LHSAA thinking a yellow/yellow was a straight Red violation (happens as some are not familiar with the rules of soccer), you should appeal it and report what really happened. 6.11.10 Player ejected from a contest in a sport for unsportsmanlike conduct: First offense – the player shall receive, through the school, an official warning. Second offense – the school shall be fined $100, and the student shall be placed on probation. Third offense – the school shall be fined $200, and the student shall be suspended from participating in the same sport for the remainder of the season. 6.11.12 Coach ejected from a contest in a sport for unsportsmanlike conduct: First offense – the coach shall receive an official warning. Second offense – the school shall be fined $200, and the coach shall be placed on probation. Third offense – the school shall be fined $300 and may be prohibited from playing in a contest(s) with the coach serving as the coach of the team in the contest(s).
good stuff. fast forward 10 years - is LHSAA reporting soft reds to school?
LHSAA did away with the distinction between soft red and regular red a few years ago -- at least partially if not totally. It used to be that if a player was sent off for a soft red the team did not have to play short-handed the rest of the game, whereas a straight red meant the player could not be replaced. I know that is no longer the case -- you do not replace the player under any red card now.
Not sure about the penalty portion -- one of the coaches or referees should weigh in on this.
|
|
|
Post by fifty50bawl on Feb 20, 2020 17:07:51 GMT -6
The “soft red” concept went away about 8 or 9 years ago. It used to allow a player to be disqualified but the team would still play with 11.
I thought soft red was just a way of saying red via 2 yellows.. Thanks for the clarification
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Feb 20, 2020 17:09:55 GMT -6
The penalty code does not really equate to soccer. We have choices of unsportsmanlike or flagrant misconduct for most red cards. Others are clearly listed such as fighting or coming off the bench to participate in a fight or coach misconduct.
The penalty code really just wants a distinction between fighting and non fighting. 3 of any red card makes you ineligible. 2 for fighting makes you ineligible.
This year we had several with 2, some were 1 fighting and 1 unsportsmanlike. One player had 2 fighting.
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Feb 20, 2020 17:12:09 GMT -6
The “soft red” concept went away about 8 or 9 years ago. It used to allow a player to be disqualified but the team would still play with 11.
I thought soft red was just a way of saying red via 2 yellows.. Thanks for the clarification
I can remember one other condition going straight to soft red - excessive goal celebration. Whether you had a yellow before or not, it was soft red. And maybe one other situation I am not remembering now. Both cards held up in the same hand side by side.
|
|
|
Post by shadowman06 on Feb 20, 2020 17:56:37 GMT -6
Just this season, I know of a player getting 2 yellow cards, both for challenges that were a second too late. The player was shown a red and sent off. The AD met with the player and wanted to know why he exhibited “un-sportsman like behavior”? That’s how it was reported to the school!! That’s not how 2 late challenges should be viewed. There was nothing un-sportsman like about it.
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Feb 20, 2020 19:20:30 GMT -6
Just this season, I know of a player getting 2 yellow cards, both for challenges that were a second too late. The player was shown a red and sent off. The AD met with the player and wanted to know why he exhibited “un-sportsman like behavior”? That’s how it was reported to the school! That’s not how 2 late challenges should be viewed. There was nothing un-sportsman like about it. Only two options to report this, unsportsmanlike or flagrant misconduct, which one do you think it should be?
|
|
|
Post by shadowman06 on Feb 20, 2020 20:36:18 GMT -6
If I were the player I’d rather have it listed as flagrant misconduct. It’s asinine to categorize a player putting in hard tackles albeit a bit late as “unsportsmanlike”. A big part of the problem is that these players will have to end up trying to explain to a AD that doesn’t have any idea what the situation was. It doesn’t help that 90% of these AD’s wouldn’t know a soccer ball if it hit them upside the head. Bottom line, this system of reporting doesn’t work for soccer
|
|
|
Post by cardsinhand on Feb 21, 2020 8:10:55 GMT -6
If I were the player I’d rather have it listed as flagrant misconduct. It’s asinine to categorize a player putting in hard tackles albeit a bit late as “unsportsmanlike”. A big part of the problem is that these players will have to end up trying to explain to a AD that doesn’t have any idea what the situation was. It doesn’t help that 90% of these AD’s wouldn’t know a soccer ball if it hit them upside the head. Bottom line, this system of reporting doesn’t work for soccer I'm really curious if you guys ever read this stuff? This is straight from the IFAB. As referees all we can do is what is in the laws. Here are the listings of what is considered "unsporting". The real problem is how LHSAA interprets this. BC coach is correct and that is where it needs to be addressed. "Cautionable offences A player is cautioned if guilty of: delaying the restart of play dissent by word or action entering, re-entering or deliberately leaving the field of play without the referee’s permission failing to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a corner kick, free kick or throw-in persistent offences (no specific number or pattern of offences constitutes 'persistent') unsporting behaviour entering the referee review area (RRA) excessively using the ‘review’ (TV screen) signal A substitute or substituted player is cautioned if guilty of: delaying the restart of play dissent by word or action entering or re-entering the field of play without the referee’s permission unsporting behaviourentering the referee review area (RRA) excessively using the ‘review’ (TV screen) signal Where two separate cautionable offences are committed (even in close proximity), they should result in two cautions, for example if a player enters the field of play without the required permission and commits a reckless tackle or stops a promising attack with a foul/handball, etc. Cautions for unsporting behaviour There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour including if a player: attempts to deceive the referee, e.g. by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation) changes places with the goalkeeper during play or without the referee’s permission (see Law 3) commits in a reckless manner a direct free kick offencehandles the ball to interfere with or stop a promising attack commits a foul which interferes with or stops a promising attack, except where the referee awards a penalty kick for an offence which was an attempt to play the ball denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity by an offence which was an attempt to play the ball and the referee awards a penalty kick handles the ball in an attempt to score a goal (whether or not the attempt is successful) or in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent a goal makes unauthorised marks on the field of play plays the ball when leaving the field of play after being given permission to leave shows a lack of respect for the game uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands verbally distracts an opponent during play or at a restart ." www.theifab.com/laws
|
|
|
Post by Rabid Monkey on Feb 21, 2020 8:37:36 GMT -6
uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands
This one has me all confused
|
|
|
Post by straightdummin on Feb 21, 2020 8:47:02 GMT -6
uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands This one has me all confused sounds like a rule created by someone that does not play soccer. it is perfectly legal to pass the ball to the goalie, with all parts of the body, except he can't pick it up when it is a pass from his teammate's foot
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Feb 21, 2020 9:18:25 GMT -6
uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands This one has me all confused What this truly means is that you cannot flick the ball up yourself to the head or chest or knee to then send it to the keeper in order to get around the passback restriction. But if that ball comes from somewhere else, it is legal. As described it is a form of trickery and I’ve seen it maybe half a dozen times.
|
|
|
Post by OuachitaCoach on Feb 21, 2020 9:19:18 GMT -6
uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands This one has me all confused I believe the idea is that you may not have the ball at your feet, flick it up to your own head/etc. and then play it back to the goalkeeper's hands. This removes the ability to circumvent the pass back rule that has made the game much more progressive since its introduction around 1992.
|
|
|
Post by time2retire on Feb 21, 2020 9:25:56 GMT -6
uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands This one has me all confused I believe the idea is that you may not have the ball at your feet, flick it up to your own head/etc. and then play it back to the goalkeeper's hands. This removes the ability to circumvent the pass back rule that has made the game much more progressive since its introduction around 1992. Yes. 1996 if I remember correctly. When the action is done the goalkeeper doesn’t have to even touch it, the trickery is the act itself. Caution yellow card and indirect free kick for opponent at the spot of the trickery.
|
|
|
Post by OuachitaCoach on Feb 21, 2020 9:30:10 GMT -6
I believe the idea is that you may not have the ball at your feet, flick it up to your own head/etc. and then play it back to the goalkeeper's hands. This removes the ability to circumvent the pass back rule that has made the game much more progressive since its introduction around 1992. Yes. 1996 if I remember correctly. When the action is done the goalkeeper doesn’t have to even touch it, the trickery is the act itself. Caution yellow card and indirect free kick for opponent at the spot of the trickery. Just double checked, first applied in a major tournament in the 1992 Olympics. Additionally it says the rule stating that the keeper can't collect a teammate's throw in with his hands began in 1997. ...Fun/weird having a civil discussion involving rules, history, and facts on the board!
|
|
|
Post by straightdummin on Feb 21, 2020 9:45:58 GMT -6
uses a deliberate trick to pass the ball (including from a free kick) to the goalkeeper with the head, chest, knee etc. to circumvent the Law, whether or not the goalkeeper touches the ball with the hands This one has me all confused What this truly means is that you cannot flick the ball up yourself to the head or chest or knee to then send it to the keeper in order to get around the passback restriction. But if that ball comes from somewhere else, it is legal. As described it is a form of trickery and I’ve seen it maybe half a dozen times. maybe that "trickery" occured when the pass-back rule was first implemented, but I don't think that I have ever seen this so-called "trickery" over the last 10 years
|
|