Should he have gone

[Scottybee]

Still doing my qualifying games as trainee ref before my exam but think I had a brain fart today

Red v Yellow U14s Div3 both teams unbeaten so far this season so a keenly contested game, red dink the ball over the top and the strikers away after the ball straight down the middle on a break away, Keeper on his toes and it’s 50/50 who’s getting there first, keeper wins the race and catches the ball, queue mass appeals from red, it’s chucked with rain all night and the lines are barely visible but as I make up the ground the keeper is stood holding the ball a good 3 yards outside the box, He’s as shocked as I am at what he’s done! I blow whistle, and give a Dfk only which comes to nothing.

My brain at the time said keeper handling outside box is treated same as any other player but after some thought I realise I’ve dropped a big clanger, I’m then thinking deliberate handball and a Yellow or Red for Dogso? Thoughts please chaps

 

[alexgr]

Depends if he was denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity. If it was DOGSO, it should have been a red. If it wasn’t, and it was just stopping a promising attack, then it’s a yellow. It sounds like you had to be there but it’s one of those two. All boils down to whether you think an obvious goal scoring opportunity was denied.

 

[Ref1981]

At least a caution for SPA. Based on what you've written I can't be sure whether it is a DOGSO or just SPA.

 

[spuddy1878]

Where would the ball have gone if the GK had not touched it ?

Where would the striker have been ?

If hes tapping it into an empty net then it should have been Red.

 

[RustyRef]

If he hadn't handled would there have been an OGSO? In most case there wouldn't have been, but one of those that you need to be there to judge.

 

[Big Cat]

Still doing my qualifying games as trainee ref before my exam but think I had a brain fart today

Red v Yellow U14s Div3 both teams unbeaten so far this season so a keenly contested game, red dink the ball over the top and the strikers away after the ball straight down the middle on a break away, Keeper on his toes and it’s 50/50 who’s getting there first, keeper wins the race and catches the ball, queue mass appeals from red, it’s chucked with rain all night and the lines are barely visible but as I make up the ground the keeper is stood holding the ball a good 3 yards outside the box, He’s as shocked as I am at what he’s done! I blow whistle, and give a Dfk only which comes to nothing.

My brain at the time said keeper handling outside box is treated same as any other player but after some thought I realise I’ve dropped a big clanger, I’m then thinking deliberate handball and a Yellow or Red for Dogso? Thoughts please chaps

On the assumption that Div 3 U14s is likely to be very tame and given the mitigating circumstances, I'd be trying to find a reason in Law to keep the lad on the field. If DOGSO is certain, there's no option but to show what is likely to be the player's (and team's) first red card

 

[Scottybee]

Well if you removed the keeper from the scenario the ball would have headed straight into the middle of the goal, it may not have had enough pace without another touch but the striker certainly would have rolled it in. One of them moments you think to yourself “why didn’t you just clear it with your feet”
The game finished 0-0 and I think subconsciously I didn’t want to be making “the” game deciding decision.

Shame also that I went into the game intending to let the game flow which back fired as things slowly deteriorated foul wise to a point that it started to feel like a runaway train, problem I then faced was not feeling able to start blowing things that I had been letting go. Any advice on this other than “get on top of it from the start”

 

[markref]

If you start out giving free kicks before easing off after a few minutes then it’s easier to start giving them again if the game ramps up and you need to clamp down on it. If you start off letting the game flow then it’s harder to get it under control, because you never have really been in charge.
Basically if you start out being a passenger then it’s hard to change that mentality when you need to.
I always tell the captains that I will let the game flow as much as possible, but I make sure they know I’m in charge before I do so. Then if I need to clamp down it’s not a shock to them. It doesn’t mean you need to really lay down the law but slow the game down to start with before letting it breathe.

 

[Scottybee]

If you start out giving free kicks before easing off after a few minutes then it’s easier to start giving them again if the game ramps up and you need to clamp down on it. If you start off letting the game flow then it’s harder to get it under control, because you never have really been in charge.
Basically if you start out being a passenger then it’s hard to change that mentality when you need to.
I always tell the captains that I will let the game flow as much as possible, but I make sure they know I’m in charge before I do so. Then if I need to clamp down it’s not a shock to them. It doesn’t mean you need to really lay down the law but slow the game down to start with before letting it breathe.

Sounds like good advice, thanks

 

[markref]

The other thing of course is that as a trainee it’s better to make sure you’re ok controlling a game before you try to let the game flow too much. You need to get confident with giving free kicks before moving to the stage where you decide whether or not to give them. You will then have more experience to allow you to work out what sort of referee you want to be. If you start off not really controlling games then when you get games where the players don’t want the game to flow it will be much harder to clamp down hard, which is what this needs.

Good luck!

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

Well if you removed the keeper from the scenario the ball would have headed straight into the middle of the goal, it may not have had enough pace without another touch but the striker certainly would have rolled it in. One of them moments you think to yourself “why didn’t you just clear it with your feet”
The game finished 0-0 and I think subconsciously I didn’t want to be making “the” game deciding decision.

Shame also that I went into the game intending to let the game flow which back fired as things slowly deteriorated foul wise to a point that it started to feel like a runaway train, problem I then faced was not feeling able to start blowing things that I had been letting go. Any advice on this other than “get on top of it from the start”

Yeah, should have been a red card. He may have only lost sight of the lines, but it's a mandatory red. Oh well, you learn.

As for going into the game - try not to go into it with too much of a preconceived idea of how it's going to happen. Otherwise you risk sticking too firmly to that rather than responding to the game. You'll learn your style. And you'll experiment and make mistakes with it

 

[QuaverRef]

Yeah, should have been a red card. He may have only lost sight of the lines, but it's a mandatory red. Oh well, you learn.

As for going into the game - try not to go into it with too much of a preconceived idea of how it's going to happen. Otherwise you risk sticking too firmly to that rather than responding to the game. You'll learn your style. And you'll experiment and make mistakes with it

this all sounds to me like a promising attack to me rather OGSO
- Striker was never in control of the ball
- Striker didn’t get to the ball first
- Ball didn’t have enough pace to reach the goal

Had the keeper had awareness, he simply could have cleared it but didn’t. There was never really a goal scoring chance for the attacker by the sounds of it unless the keeper messes it up

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

this all sounds to me like a promising attack to me rather OGSO
- Striker was never in control of the ball
- Striker didn’t get to the ball first
- Ball didn’t have enough pace to reach the goal

Had the keeper had awareness, he simply could have cleared it but didn’t. There was never really a goal scoring chance for the attacker by the sounds of it unless the keeper messes it up

Striker doesn't have to be in control of the ball or even get it first. If the foul is preventing him from taking control of the ball, then that's DOGSO.

You can have a DOGSO foul when the attacker has never touched the ball if the foul is what is preventing them reaching the ball.

If the keeper committed the foul to take possession, then what would have happened? The attacker would have reached the ball in an OGSO.

That's a red card.

this all sounds to me like a promising attack to me rather OGSO
- Striker was never in control of the ball
- Striker didn’t get to the ball first
- Ball didn’t have enough pace to reach the goal

Had the keeper had awareness, he simply could have cleared it but didn’t. There was never really a goal scoring chance for the attacker by the sounds of it unless the keeper messes it up

"The defender COULD have cleared it without fouling" is the wrong way to look at it. You could apply that to just about every DOGSO foul.
They could have - but didn't.

So, take the keeper out of the equation.

 

[QuaverRef]

Striker doesn't have to be in control of the ball or even get it first. If the foul is preventing him from taking control of the ball, then that's DOGSO.

You can have a DOGSO foul when the attacker has never touched the ball if the foul is what is preventing them reaching the ball.

If the keeper committed the foul to take possession, then what would have happened? The attacker would have reached the ball in an OGSO.

That's a red card.



"The defender COULD have cleared it without fouling" is the wrong way to look at it. You could apply that to just about every DOGSO foul.
They could have - but didn't.

So, take the keeper out of the equation.

I’m confused as to how it can be an ‘obvious opportunity’ when the striker didn’t get to the ball and never actually had the ball in the first place.

I feel this scenario relys on the mistake for the opportunity to arise as currently, it’s in the defenders favours rather than the attackers

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

Mate, even the Lotg says 'control or likelihood of control'
Your idea that the forward must first have control is just wrong.heck the lotg used to have an example very much like this - except not even a 50-59, but keeper handled it outside the box within attacker bearing down and nobody around.

 

[one]

Got to agree with @CapnBloodbeard . What was the 'likelyhood' of the striker gaining control of the ball had the keeper not handled it? From the description I'd say pretty much certain.

In this scenario you don't take into account what else the keeper could have done. Because he clearly chose not to do that. I can understand the sympathy about poor line marking but there is nothing you can do about that. It is what it is.

An example to explain this is a shot comming into goal from outside the area directly at a defender on the goal line at chest Hight. The defender punches it away with outstretched arms in front of his chest. This is DOGSO handball. You don't take into account the fact that the defender could have chested it if he didn't handball it.

 

[QuaverRef]

Mate, even the Lotg says 'control or likelihood of control'
Your idea that the forward must first have control is just wrong.heck the lotg used to have an example very much like this - except not even a 50-59, but keeper handled it outside the box within attacker bearing down and nobody around.

I'm not suggesting that the the forward has to have control, I'm just stating that he didn't. The referee in the OP has already stated that the striker wasn't getting to the ball so the likelihood is non existent for me I'm just not sure how I can follow something being obvious when there was never really a chance. For me, closing down a defender/goalkeeper isn't an obvious goal scoring opportunity until the mistake has arisen as this story just sounds like we're giving DOGSO as the striker is just running in the right direction. Sounds like I'm going down the wrong path though

 

[one]

The referee in the OP has already stated that the striker wasn't getting to the ball so the likelihood is non existent for me

Well if you removed the keeper from the scenario the ball would have headed straight into the middle of the goal, it may not have had enough pace without another touch but the striker certainly would have rolled it in

I think you missed his second post.

 

[QuaverRef]

I think you missed his second post.

I was looking more at the 'keeper wins the race' part in the OP. I guess YHTBT then plays a part as I'm actually debating this with no clue as to how far aware the striker and keeper are away from each other.

 

[Tealeaf]

There's enough doubt here (and plausibility!) to say what you did was correct

1: It's a 50/50 between the players. That's POSSIBLE, not OBVIOUS.

2: It's rained heavily and the lines are obscured. Any chance the keeper has caught the ball legitimately inside the penalty area but momentum, and difficulty stopping has carried him out? If so, no opportunity has been unfairly denied.

3: It's rained heavily. Good chance ball could hold up and not roll through anyway. Again, that's POSSIBLE, not OBVIOUS.

4: It's rained heavily. They're under 14s. Someone's likely to end up on their backside chasing the ball.