Search results

This is such a great post and I've been talking to my son about it. He quickly said YC and IDFK and then I asked, what about DOGSO and he said..."DOGSO? The defender didn't deny a goal scoring opportunity? The attacker took the shot." And I didn't have much to say. How would you respond...

Can you think of a situation where the following is NOT true... if the defender that fouls the attacker is either the very last defender or 2nd to last defender regardless if he/she is the GK, then it's DOGSO (provided the other criteria is met), but, if there is a 3rd defender close by between...

The law says to consider the location and number of defenders for DOGSO. What criteria do you use for this to determine DOGSO? Most people talk about "last defender" has to foul the attacker for it to be DOGSO. Here are some hypothetical situations. Any difference in what you would call? Any...

Right, but I'm saying...If I muff a goal kick and pounce on it. It's a red card. If I roll it and pounce on it, no sanction. To me, these are pretty similar actions. I'm wondering if there is a reason that they are not treated similarly as far as sanctions go.

Can anyone provide the reasoning behind why the laws treat the instances so differently? Why a sanction for a double touch after a restart but no sanction for a handling offense? Seems the situations are very similar as presented in the original post. Thanks.

Thank you! I did not see this. My eyes went right to the table at the bottom that didn't address this situation.

Sorry, I was unclear. I meant to say that if the kicker is impacted then the PK is retaken. That's clear. But if the encroachment does NOT impact the kicker, then 2nd bullet point of the law states ...."A teammate of the goal keeper is penalized for encroachment only if...the encroaching player...

So if there the encroaching defender impacts the kicker in the eyes of the referee, the penalty kick is retaken. What is the restart if the encroaching defender plays the ball or challenges for the ball and this prevents the opponents from scoring? The table in Law 14 only discusses if there is...

So I just found the replay and watched it. It also includes the audio. https://www.nbc.com/watch/paris2024/soccer-womens-quarterfinal-3/12000817 Watch from about 2:39.50. The referee flips the coin and gives Germany the choice of which goal to use. Then the referee flips it again. Germany wins...

Hello, watching the women's Olympics, there have been a few shootouts and, at least twice, the camera was up close with the coin flip for the shootout. Both times that I watched, the referee flipped the coin and it looked the referee allowed one of the captains choose which goal the shootout...

We've had no heading for U11 and younger for quite a while here in the US and I've done dozens of U11 and younger matches and what I (and whoever, I've refereed with, because, believe it or not, most of the U11 and younger games I've refereed have 3-man crews.) have done because of what I have...

I immediately thought and still think offside is the best call, but, after reading all the posts and playing a little devil's advocate...the law quoted above states..."and interferes with the movement of the opponent towards the ball". Did the GK really show any movement towards the ball before...

Thank you. Before last night, I wasn't too concerned with the signal for the direction of a throw in, but I use a parallel arm based on the same thought process as James L; however, after the game, a "mentor", someone sent out by the referee assignor to watch games and report back to the...

This may be trivial, but what is the correct hand signal for the direction of a throw in. Is the it more like a signal for a corner kick (arm up on and angle) or is it more like the direction for a free kick (arm parallel with the ground)? Law 5 doesn't show this hand signal. Thank you.

Watching the highlights, the attacking team scores on the following free kick, but wasn't there an attacker in/behind/within 1 yard of the defensive wall? Wouldn't that nullify the goal? Thanks

Based on previous discussions and my interpretation as well, this would not be an offense...at least not the first time. So if, IN THE OPINION OF THE REFEREE, the teammate's intention was to pass it to his centerback per se, and the GK yelled "leave it" and picked it up, I would not consider...

I remember having this discussion here a while back. I believe the consensus is that the ball has to be deliberately kicked to the GK. Not just deliberately kicked. I remember some examples were brought up such a player playing back to his centerback and the the centerback allowing it to roll...

I saw this clip on Twitter. It doesn't appear a foul was called. Say you were teaching the Laws to brand new referees. How would you explain whether this is a foul or not? Did the defender clearly get the ball? Yes. Did the defender take out the attacker? Yes. Thanks

Law 14 tells you were everyone has to be before the whistle. Then it tells you the offense for encroachment but it skips the part of defining what encroachment is. The original poster stated that he was happy that all the players knew the Law and didn't complain. I was going to respond and say...

Yes, but it doesn't tell you want encroachment is.