A&H

Yellow card for SPA (and red card for DOGSO) still possible after advantage?

J

J79

Active Member
Situation :
Corner team A, comes to nothing, counter-attack team B. 3 against 2, attacker dribbles past one of the two defenders, who holds his shirt (or tries a tackle), attacker is slowed down seriously, but can nonetheless continue. It would have been 3 against 1, now more players back, it's 4 against 3. Referee gives advantage. In the end, shot is saved.

Can referee still give a yellow card for SPA? Because the promising attack wasn't really "stopped" but continued, although having become less "promising" because of the offence.
 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
Basically same question for DOGSO.

Situation: Attacker in the D, one defender chasing him, OGSO. Last-man tackle makes attacker stumble, can keep going. Despite tackle, still OGSO. Referee gives advantage. The shot is saved. Can the referee still give a red card for DOGSO?
 
Taken from law 12, answers both questions clearly
If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution / send off
would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution / send off must be
issued when the ball is next out of play, except when the denial of an obvious
goal-scoring opportunity results in a goal the player is cautioned for
unsporting behaviour.
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
Referee can allow the advantage and then call it back for sit A

For sit B if advantage played and shot saved then it isn't a DOGSO therefore no Red can be issued, also there are a number of considerations to be taken into account as to whether it would be a DOGSO don't start the last man argument again grrrrrrrrr General rule is don't play advantage if you are going to issue a Red card.
 
For me, you'd go back and give yellow in both of those situations.

The "pull" still occurred in the first and you're getting a card out to penalise the unsporting nature of that tackle - there was still an attempt to be unsporting, it just didn't succeed. See Enre Can body checking Sanchez a few weeks ago after he played a pass and still going in the book even though the attack ended in a shot.

For the second, similar logic - DOGSO requires a clear and obvious goalscoring chance to have been completely denied. A saved shot is still a good chance, so I don't think you can justify red. But a yellow would still seem appropriate if it's made a difference to the shot
 
jamie0114 said:
Taken from law 12, answers both questions clearly
If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution / send off
would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution / send off must be
issued when the ball is next out of play, except when the denial of an obvious
goal-scoring opportunity results in a goal the player is cautioned for
unsporting behaviour.
Click to expand...
Read that, but the nature of the offence in these particular cases raises some doubts.

But so according to this, it's yellow for SPA and red for DOGSO (?)
 
Last edited:
GraemeS said:
For me, you'd go back and give yellow in both of those situations.

The "pull" still occurred in the first and you're getting a card out to penalise the unsporting nature of that tackle - there was still an attempt to be unsporting, it just didn't succeed. See Enre Can body checking Sanchez a few weeks ago after he played a pass and still going in the book even though the attack ended in a shot.

For the second, similar logic - DOGSO requires a clear and obvious goalscoring chance to have been completely denied. A saved shot is still a good chance, so I don't think you can justify red. But a yellow would still seem appropriate if it's made a difference to the shot
Click to expand...
Situation would be: it made a difference to the shot (angle more difficult, atacker has less time to prepare the shot due to stumble), but it's still an OGSO. Let's say the "obvious goal-scoring opportunity " becomes a little less "obvious".
 
J79 said:
If pull/tackle in situation A happens in midfield and shot is saved let's say 10 seconds later, you probably can't/won't pull it back. What do you do in that case?
Click to expand...
At the time of the incident I am pointing to player saying I am coming back to you, next time ball is out of play No. x please come over here!
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
J79 said:
Situation would be: it made a difference to the shot (angle more difficult, atacker has less time to prepare the shot due to stumble), but it's still an OGSO. Let's say the "obvious goal-scoring opportunity " becomes a little less "obvious".
Click to expand...

Try selling that.... Denial of a little less obvious than obvious goal scoring opportunity.

As the other's have said if you have allowed them to carry and they have had a shot then the goal scoring opportunity has not been denied.
 
J79 said:
Basically same question for DOGSO.

Situation: Attacker in the D, one defender chasing him, OGSO. Last-man tackle makes attacker stumble, can keep going. Despite tackle, still OGSO. Referee gives advantage. The shot is saved. Can the referee still give a red card for DOGSO?
Click to expand...

This happened in the So'ton v Spurs game back in December. I think it was Alli who was clean through, managed get a shot away *just* after Bertrand took his legs, so as he was falling he got the shot in. Ref awarded the free kick and sent Bertrand off for DOGSO.

Not always clear-cut. You can get a shot away, depends on how in control of the shot you are at the time. Sorry to confuse it a bit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
A Freethinker said:
At the time of the incident I am pointing to player saying I am coming back to you, next time ball is out of play No. x please come over here!
Click to expand...
Ok. Yeah, for the card sure. Thought from your first reply that you also would have called back the advantage.
 
Cheshire Ref said:
Try selling that.... Denial of a little less obvious than obvious goal scoring opportunity.

As the other's have said if you have allowed them to carry and they have had a shot then the goal scoring opportunity has not been denied.
Click to expand...
Well, not "a little less obvious than obvious", just "a little less obvious (but still obvious)". Like you have "tap-in" obvious and "one-on-one-with-goalkeeper" obvious; both OGSO, but the latter less obvious. If I'm expressing myself well...
 
Monotone Whistle said:
This happened in the So'ton v Spurs game back in December. I think it was Alli who was clean through, managed get a shot away *just* after Bertrand took his legs, so as he was falling he got the shot in. Ref awarded the free kick and sent Bertrand off for DOGSO.

Not always clear-cut. You can get a shot away, depends on how in control of the shot you are at the time. Sorry to confuse it a bit.
Click to expand...
Exactly - if you see fit to pull it back for the offence, then a red is still a possibility. If you allow the shot and then award a GK/corner or let play go on, I don't think you can then justify red.
 
If you play advantage, you cannot caution for SPA or send off for DOGSO. By playing advantage, you're saying there is still a promising attack or goal scoring opportunity.

J79 said:
Basically same question for DOGSO.

Situation: Attacker in the D, one defender chasing him, OGSO. Last-man tackle makes attacker stumble, can keep going. Despite tackle, still OGSO. Referee gives advantage. The shot is saved. Can the referee still give a red card for DOGSO?
Click to expand...

No you can't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Grug said:
If you play advantage, you cannot caution for SPA or send off for DOGSO. By playing advantage, you're saying there is still a promising attack or goal scoring opportunity.
.
Click to expand...

You are wrong...on both accounts if you play advantage you can go back and caution or dismiss whilst frowned upon for not issuing a red card immediately you can still go back and issue it, unless see LOTG below!

Advantage


If the referee plays the advantage for an offence for which a caution / send off would have been issued had play been stopped, this caution / send off must be issued when the ball is next out of play, except when the denial of an obvious
goal-scoring opportunity results in a goal the player is cautioned for unsporting behaviour. Advantage should not be applied in situations involving serious foul play, violent conduct or a second cautionable offence unless there is a clear
opportunity to score a goal. The referee must send off the player when the ball is next out of play but if the player plays the ball or challenges/interferes with
an opponent, the referee will stop play, send off the player and restart with an indirect free kick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: J79
No I'm not wrong.

The offence you have played advantage on is the foul, not the fact that they have committed SPA or DOGSO - that only results from stopping play, so therefore it does not apply.
 
Grug said:
No I'm not wrong.

The offence you have played advantage on is the foul, not the fact that they have committed SPA or DOGSO - that only results from stopping play, so therefore it does not apply.
Click to expand...

So what is the foul? How do you record a foul if it is not categorised as an offence...I am issuing you this card? What for? The foul? What offence? The foul? Wise up
 
Wise up? This is not an opinion, this is fact. If you play advantage, you are saying that there is still a promising attack, therefore you cannot issue a caution for SPA. The same goes for DOGSO. This comes from FIFA.
 
The offence is the trip/tackle/kick/whatever. If the offense is only careless, and you play advantage, then the misconduct cannot be SPA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top