Keepers and DOGSOs
- Thread starter Kent Ref
- Start date
Hi
Not sure what the fuss is about. Ever since DOGSO was introduced referees found ways to not send off players, going away from goal, no control of the ball, covering defenders, too far from goal etc. the 4Ds not being present. those conditions still exist and all that has happened is that with a penalty award a fifth condition has been added of whether the foul was a genuine attempt to play the ball or not, a deliberate foul or not? Make it the 5thD. Most refs are around the game long enough to recognise a cynical foul some of which are listed such as pulling back, arm push, holding back, handling. Others include a cynical trip from behind, no hope challenge from the rear with the ball not close.
As regards the opening post the decision is up to the referee. If the 2nd one was not a genuine attempt to play the ball then it was a red. There is nothing new here in any referee making what might be the "best" decision in the game rather than the "correct" one trying to be consistent. Trying to explain the finer points of law here was not a runner IMO. If it is apples and oranges then two different decisions. If it's red apples and yellow apples then so be it. If I'm asked I say that IMO the player made an attempt to play the ball. If the foul is clearly an indisputable not a genuine attempt to play the ball then the referee has no choice. It must be a red. I believe that if there is doubt with a penalty awarded it will be a yellow. Move it outside the penalty area it will have to be a red.
Not sure what the fuss is about. Ever since DOGSO was introduced referees found ways to not send off players, going away from goal, no control of the ball, covering defenders, too far from goal etc. the 4Ds not being present. those conditions still exist and all that has happened is that with a penalty award a fifth condition has been added of whether the foul was a genuine attempt to play the ball or not, a deliberate foul or not? Make it the 5thD. Most refs are around the game long enough to recognise a cynical foul some of which are listed such as pulling back, arm push, holding back, handling. Others include a cynical trip from behind, no hope challenge from the rear with the ball not close.
As regards the opening post the decision is up to the referee. If the 2nd one was not a genuine attempt to play the ball then it was a red. There is nothing new here in any referee making what might be the "best" decision in the game rather than the "correct" one trying to be consistent. Trying to explain the finer points of law here was not a runner IMO. If it is apples and oranges then two different decisions. If it's red apples and yellow apples then so be it. If I'm asked I say that IMO the player made an attempt to play the ball. If the foul is clearly an indisputable not a genuine attempt to play the ball then the referee has no choice. It must be a red. I believe that if there is doubt with a penalty awarded it will be a yellow. Move it outside the penalty area it will have to be a red.
Absolutely. We are there to uphold the laws, not to try and interpret them however we see fit. I hate the idea that the same challenge outside the area is going to be a red, but inside will be a yellow. When I have to give one, I'm going to feel that the player sent off was unlucky. However, I'm not on the committee and don't make the laws, so I will have to make the decision that I know is right in law regardless.
To be fair, this isn't that much different from the current DOGSO, where when a player made a genuine attempt I would feel a red was harsh - especially if it resulted in a penalty too. I still had to follow the law as a referee - sometimes making the point that it wasn't personal!
To be fair, this isn't that much different from the current DOGSO, where when a player made a genuine attempt I would feel a red was harsh - especially if it resulted in a penalty too. I still had to follow the law as a referee - sometimes making the point that it wasn't personal!
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
Yeah, right Padders, because players are always in SUCH a rush to give away penalties and get cautioned ......
That's exactly what I meant, a push or pull are easy to judge as no attempt to play the ball, a trip potentially much less so.
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
Padders is right. This will encourage the risky challenge or the 'I don't care if I get the ball or player' type challenge. Because if there's an OGSO, there's absolutely nothing to lose from this type of challenge. Heck, you'd be foolish to not make sure you don't get one of the two.Yeah, right Padders, because players are always in SUCH a rush to give away penalties and get cautioned ......
I have seen a couple this season where the referee is so wrapped up in 'whether there was an attempt to play the ball' or 'was it in or out of the box' and have missed the big decision of 'was there an obvious goal scoring opportunity'
Saw a keeper sent off for minimal contact, outside the box, very wide of goal and a lot of doubt whether the striker would have kept the ball in play, let alone had a clear chance of scoring !
Saw a keeper sent off for minimal contact, outside the box, very wide of goal and a lot of doubt whether the striker would have kept the ball in play, let alone had a clear chance of scoring !
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
Good point Duncan, we all need to take care not to over complicate this one!