A&H

Colchester v Swindon

L

ladbroke8745

RefChat Addict
Watch from 1 minute in...
Look very closely at the keeper following the cross. It is very much on the left side of the screen. Blink you'll miss it...
Officials worked well together it seemed and got right outcome.
Now.. the very next clip.
Player is pulled back on edge of box, ref has deemed as a DOGSO and sent him off.
But the ball literally falls to a team mate who takes it a couple more yards into the area and is then clipped/fouled in the area.
Personally I think he should have given the foul in the box. I dont think he has made a genuine challenge for the ball so would still be giving a red.
Whats your thoughts?

 
The Referee Store
Looks like GK can have few complaints with the Red Card for his retaliation. I'd have been tempted to also give the striker who slid in on him a yellow.

You're absolutely right that the second challenge, in the penalty area was a foul and a DOGSO. For me, that kind of challenge (rightly or wrongly) is always deemed to be a challenge for the ball ... so an interesting debate whether it's better for the attacking team to have the free kick outside the area and a Red card or a penalty plus a Yellow card!
 
Yeah good work on the keeper send off. I prob won't caution the attacker. Not reckless for me.

On DOGSO you use the word 'geniune'. This means a higher degree of certainty. The laws don't use this word and not additional qualification for 'attemptung to playe the ball'. I have made it vocal many times in the past to drop the word 'genuine' from our forum discussions for dogso. For me the defender was attempting to play the ball.

The bigger question is, was the other attacker in an offside position at the time of the pass, it looks like he was. If so this should have been called as offside for interfering with an opponent.
 
I cant see what happens in the first one. It looks like some kind of kick out, not selling it to me as an act of violence, however, I cant see clearly so it might be.

Second one a pk and yellow card. There is more than enough to consider that an attempt to play the ball.
 
one said:
Yeah good work on the keeper send off. I prob won't caution the attacker. Not reckless for me.

On DOGSO you use the word 'geniune'. This means a higher degree of certainty. The laws don't use this word and not additional qualification for 'attemptung to playe the ball'. I have made it vocal many times in the past to drop the word 'genuine' from our forum discussions for dogso. For me the defender was attempting to play the ball.

The bigger question is, was the other attacker in an offside position at the time of the pass, it looks like he was. If so this should have been called as offside for interfering with an opponent.
Click to expand...
On the challenge that led to the retaliation, if it's borderline careless / reckless then I'm always tempted to go yellow, if only to demonstrate to the other team that I saw what led to the retaliation and have dealt with it appropriately. Whilst in no way condoning or diminishing the sanction for the retaliatory act

Totally agree re 'genuine', it unhelpfully distorts the conversation.

Impossible to tell from the video if either of the attackers were in an offside position at the time of the pass, though if the AR was correctly positioned then it appears not. I agree with you though that if the attacker who was 'DOGSO'ed outside the penalty area was in an offside position, he committed an offside offence before he was fouled
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Russell Jones said:
On the challenge that led to the retaliation, if it's borderline careless / reckless then I'm always tempted to go yellow, if only to demonstrate to the other team that I saw what led to the retaliation and have dealt with it appropriately. Whilst in no way condoning or diminishing the sanction for the retaliatory act

Totally agree re 'genuine', it unhelpfully distorts the conversation.

Impossible to tell from the video if either of the attackers were in an offside position at the time of the pass, though if the AR was correctly positioned then it appears not. I agree with you though that if the attacker who was 'DOGSO'ed outside the penalty area was in an offside position, he committed an offside offence before he was fouled
Click to expand...

I cant see this gk incident ckearly to say. So bigger picture, if the striker is already on a yellow, is he going off here, based on the principle of being seen to deal with the instigator?

I agree throwing a token yellow at the first challenge which leads to the opposing red here can be beneficial, but, we do need to be sensible with it.
 
The FK outside the area is not DOGSO for me. Yellow had stopped and allowed his mate to run into the ball.

The foul inside the area was an attempt to play the ball, so YC.

However, plausible to give YC for the collaring, and then a very quick second YC for the DOGSO downgrade
 
Redster said:
The FK outside the area is not DOGSO for me. Yellow had stopped and allowed his mate to run into the ball.

The foul inside the area was an attempt to play the ball, so YC.

However, plausible to give YC for the collaring, and then a very quick second YC for the DOGSO downgrade
Click to expand...
Crikey. That's like getting done for speeding by two speed vans 100m apart. Not disagreeing, but anyone strong enough to give two YCs?

As an aside, if this happened in one of my matches, I'd need a good 5 seconds to think about how to deal with it, replaying it in my head a few times and thinking through the scenarios. With everyone screaming for different things, I'm not sure I could make a reasoned decision live.
 
Macca said:
Crikey. That's like getting done for speeding by two speed vans 100m apart. Not disagreeing, but anyone strong enough to give two YCs?

As an aside, if this happened in one of my matches, I'd need a good 5 seconds to think about how to deal with it, replaying it in my head a few times and thinking through the scenarios. With everyone screaming for different things, I'm not sure I could make a reasoned decision live.
Click to expand...
Agreed
In real life you just latch onto a course of action and hope for the best
 
Amazing OP really
Our life / job really is imposs!
If 'Refereeing' was a University Degree, I wonder whether it would be a BA or a BSc
Either way, you'd need at least a Masters to pick the bones out of the DOGSO incident... and even then... chances are the Observer will still do you!
 
Yes awesome clip. The DOGSO…
Presuming no offsides.
Foul 1 is an easy DOGSO red DFK.
Foul 2 is DOGSO PK, and for me, a trip, no attempt to play the ball.

If player 1 was offside then offside offence.
If player 2 was offside then no offside and go with the first foul DOGSO red PK.

But if no offside… then advantage on the first foul and the onfield decision would be red PK.

If you think the second foul was an attempt to challenge, I think you can go with double yellow, first for reckless foul 1, then the DOGSO downgrade.

If you’d go with the the advantage option, would you try to gesture that on the field - show some fingers etc to explain???

great scenario
 
No way on earth the trip in the box is an attempt to play the ball. Shame the powers that be have allowed the laws to be bent in a way that DOGSO trips in the box automatically downgraded regardless of if the offender actually attempts to play the ball or not!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top