CONCACAF has released their first public video for the Centre for Refereeing Excellence. In this, the Director of Officials, discusses the application of advantage for 20 minutes. Worth a watch.
I'm REALLY not seeing where you're getting half of this from here... here's an image of the point of contact. No boots. Not chest. Not excessive force. GK IS controlling his actions and pulling out of the challenge when he realizes that he cannot get the ball.credit the last clip for advantage and goal, I would not be polishing his bonnet too much though, the goalie should receive a red for sfp
Endangering safety. ( contact with boots on opponents chest, high,)
At speed
Excessive force
Not in control of his actions
Little chance of getting the ball
The focus is on the wait and see for advantage, it's not about sanctions here. The discussion on possible sanctions here would completely override the point that is being made in the clip.I dont see it on the clip but its a yellow at the very least and for a coaching tutorial to overlook a required sanction is disappointing
I'm REALLY not seeing where you're getting half of this from here... here's an image of the point of contact. No boots. Not chest. Not excessive force. GK IS controlling his actions and pulling out of the challenge when he realizes that he cannot get the ball.
View attachment 4268
SFP? Never. DOGSO? Likely. SPA? At a minimum.
The focus is on the wait and see for advantage, it's not about sanctions here. The discussion on possible sanctions here would completely override the point that is being made in the clip.
Now, could an offhand comment be made to mention that a sanction would be required? Sure, would it potentially open a bit of a can of worms in terms of derailing the discussion? Maybe.
The point of this clip? "Wait and See".
I'm REALLY not seeing where you're getting half of this from here... here's an image of the point of contact. No boots. Not chest. Not excessive force. GK IS controlling his actions and pulling out of the challenge when he realizes that he cannot get the ball.
View attachment 4268
SFP? Never. DOGSO? Likely. SPA? At a minimum.
The focus is on the wait and see for advantage, it's not about sanctions here. The discussion on possible sanctions here would completely override the point that is being made in the clip.
Now, could an offhand comment be made to mention that a sanction would be required? Sure, would it potentially open a bit of a can of worms in terms of derailing the discussion? Maybe.
The point of this clip? "Wait and See".
SPA, correct.But, of course, you're never going to book for SPA or DOGSO if you've also played advantage.
If the ref was better than sliced bread, he ought to have cautioned the GK for RP. This argument is made relevant, only because the commentator eulogises 'courageous' refereeing and the true definition of 'excellence'
Rightly in some cases and wrongly in most, referees look for avenues out of sanctioning players, if at all possible. This is an example. Truth be told, I'd have wrongly turned a blind eye to the GK whilst giving it the MD fist (only because of expectation)