If it's a possible yellow and they score then questionable if needs to be goven yellow playing advantage bearing in mind they will have been making genuine attempt for ball. No 1 answer depends on scenarioDOGSO red offence and a goal is scored then sanction offender but a yellow card only
DOGSO yellow offence and a goal is scored then still sanction offender with a yellow card
Correct? If so is it consistent?
I presume we're talking about essentially the same incident, but inside and outside the PA?I think you should give an actual scenario
That's a very good point - if a goal is scored, we're not actually talking about the two types of DOGSO any more, as they require "Denying". And therefore again you're right, SPA caution is appropriate regardless of position on the field.DOGSO isn't committed if a goal is scored so you're not punishing DOGSO. Its an attempt to DOGSO so for me it falls more in line with spa attempted spa so caution correct in both scenarios.
Stopping a promising attack.What's SPA sorry?
Exactly my thoughts - if a goal is scored then DOGSO doesn't come into it.That's a very good point - if a goal is scored, we're not actually talking about the two types of DOGSO any more, as they require "Denying". And therefore again you're right, SPA caution is appropriate regardless of position on the field.
Unless it's within the penalty area, goal is scored (before whistle blows), and the referee deemed it a genuine attempt to play the ball.That's a very good point - if a goal is scored, we're not actually talking about the two types of DOGSO any more, as they require "Denying". And therefore again you're right, SPA caution is appropriate regardless of position on the field.
As long as the whistle isn't blown before the goal is "scored". The opposite of which is what happened at a game I watched Saturday afternoon. A busy box, and a DOGSO-H just off the goal line. The referee (that I thought had an excellent game throughout) immediately blew, followed a split second later by the ball going in to the back of the net. Red card and penalty, that was scored. Correct decision, but the grief he got initially from both sides - particularly supporters stood near me - along the lines of why has he not given the goal, how can that be a red card if they've scored etc... Great confidence in the decision making.
Unless it's within the penalty area, goal is scored (before whistle blows), and the referee deemed it a genuine attempt to play the ball.
In which case, good goal, no card.
Those close to the offending player did, and a handful of spectators. But as they were claiming for it the whistle went and a split second later the "goal" was scored. A few grumbles, but when they realised there was a red card and penalty they quickly calmed down. The team that lost a player had a bit of a moan, but credit to the player dismissed, he left the field quickly and calmly.And I guess that no one in the offended team (players of sidelines) claimed for hand ball?
I'm sorry but I feel the question is poorly phrased and therefore misleading. I assume the question has something to do with the way different DOGSO offences are treated depending on the location and nature of the offence.DOGSO red offence and a goal is scored then sanction offender but a yellow card only
DOGSO yellow offence and a goal is scored then still sanction offender with a yellow card
Correct? If so is it consistent?
The OP is not asking if and what is a DOGSO and when is it a yellow card or red card. You can come up with your own scenarios for each case. Its about an inconsistency of when advantage is played after the offence (under your own scenarios) and a goal is scored.
It was correctly mentioned above that once the goal is scored then it can't be a DOGSO because a goal is not denied. What is incorrect above is that a YC should be given for SAP. YC can't be be given for SPA because the promising attack was not stopped. Attempting to SPA is not and has never been a YC. We can't just make it up. If a goal is scored after any (YC or RC) DOGSO offence a YC must be given according to this clause:
"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."
This clause was around before the 16-17 DOGSO changes and remained the same after it. Not adjusting this clause accordingly has lead to an inconstancy.
- A red card DOGSO offence is down graded to a yellow card if a goal is scored.
- A Yellow card DOSO offence is still a yellow card even if a goal is scored.
Hope this makes it clearer.
It makes it a little clearer what you're thinking but I think it also makes it appear to me that you're inventing a scenario that doesn't exist. There is no such thing as "a yellow card DOGSO offence [where] a goal is scored." There can only be a yellow card DOGSO offence if the referee awards a penalty (for a genuine attempt to play the ball). In your scenario no penalty is awarded - the advantage is played and a goal is scored so it never was a "yellow card DOGSO offence."Hope this makes it clearer.
- A red card DOGSO offence is down graded to a yellow card if a goal is scored.
- A Yellow card DOSO offence is still a yellow card even if a goal is scored.
Removal of a caution (YC) for stopping a promising attack when a penalty kick is awarded for an offence which was an attempt to play the ball is consistent with a caution (YC), not a sending-off (RC) if the referee awards a penalty kick for a DOGSO offence which is an attempt to play the ball.