Keeper clashes with striker
- Thread starter one
- Start date
Keeper looked as though he got a solid punch to it, if so, play on.
boulderdomb
Active Member
play on for me in real time
Pen and red. Keeper gets a touch to it but only after the defender has headed it and his fists go straight into the attackers face. If that isn't endangering the safety of an opponent I don't know what will. Just because keepers can use their hands, doesn't give them license to launch kamikaze assaults.
On another note, shame to see the referee just casually jogging in.
On another note, shame to see the referee just casually jogging in.
one
RefChat Addict
You can see it in slow motion.
After the header by the striker, the ball bounces off the keeper's side of the face with both his hands down. Then there is a clash of heads.
Something not in the clip. Both players received medical attention with striker taking no further part in the game.
After the header by the striker, the ball bounces off the keeper's side of the face with both his hands down. Then there is a clash of heads.
Something not in the clip. Both players received medical attention with striker taking no further part in the game.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Pen and red card for sfp.
Well spotted. Agree with you.
Out of interest, did you spot it real-time, or was it with the benefit of action replay, freeze frame, etc??
No foul for me. Although the striker gets there first, the keeper successfully blocks the header. The rest is a collision between two players focused on the ball. My interpretation of SFP, is that it involves excessive force, brutality or a disregard for player safety. The latter of which could equally be measured against the attacker in this case
It should be Pen and RC - I am not sure that it is SFP, but is definitely a reckless challenge and therefore DOGSO, so RC all day long.
I admit I had to re-watch it far too many times for my own liking.
Instinct was 'I don't know what's happened here...'
But on reflection, no foul play on.
Really, players are allowed to barge into players recklessly - it is not Ice Hockey. Watch the Schumacher challenge from the 1982 World Cup
Hrm... No, but I think these examples are different.
Schumacher's collision seems more black and white to me; the ball has gone away from him and the keeper looks to be going straight for the player. I don't see that in the example @one posted, I see a keeper making a save and two players colliding in the follow through of both players.
Maybe I would react differently on the field, I don't know.
Play on.... both honest challenges
I don't think it's anything like the Schumacher challenge for two reasons. Firstly, Schumacher gets nowhere near the ball. Secondly, after the ball has long gone he deliberately takes out the striker.
This keeper successfully blocks the header. I think he's perfectly entitled to go for it, and he gets it cleanly. After both players have played the ball there is a collision which neither player could avoid without having pulled out of the challenge.
If he'd decided to pull out he would have looked pretty silly I think.
This keeper successfully blocks the header. I think he's perfectly entitled to go for it, and he gets it cleanly. After both players have played the ball there is a collision which neither player could avoid without having pulled out of the challenge.
If he'd decided to pull out he would have looked pretty silly I think.
Even with slow-motion etc., we can't decide.
Shows what a difficult job we have every Saturday afternoon!
Shows what a difficult job we have every Saturday afternoon!
NorthLondonRef
Active Member
Goalkeeper and Forward challenging for ball. Forward makes contact with ball. Ball hits GK. Both players collide as they are both moving towards each other at speed.
Why is it a PK and red on the GK but not the opposite i.e at least a free-kick against the forward?
Play on for me. Potentially a stoppage of play and restart for a head injury or something but not a red or PK for me when watching on video. If that's a forward running onto the ball and a central defender replaces the GK you'd just see it as a collision.
Why is it a PK and red on the GK but not the opposite i.e at least a free-kick against the forward?
Play on for me. Potentially a stoppage of play and restart for a head injury or something but not a red or PK for me when watching on video. If that's a forward running onto the ball and a central defender replaces the GK you'd just see it as a collision.
one
RefChat Addict
I largely agree with @lincs22 . The difference being this can't be DOGSO. The foul happend after the ball is rebounded off the keeper towards defender. Pen and a Yellow for reckless challenge.
While the keeper is entitled to go for the ball he was never going to get to it first. His body shape suggests he know that and he is going for a block which he is also entitled to. He can 'go' for the ball in a careful way, not careless or reckless. The way he went for it (jumping towards the striker at full speed) a hard clash was inevitable regardless of if he managed a block or not. Given that the striker clearly got to the ball first its the keeper's foul. Had the keeper got to the ball first, it would have been the strikers foul.
The common situation I can liken this to is when a player is about the shoot the ball. A defender runs in for a block with his foot (sometimes sliding and sometimes with raised leg and studs showing). The ball rebounds of the defender's foot but the defenders foot is very close and he connects to the attackers foot on the follow through of the shot. This is always a foul an depending on the amount and point of contact its anywhere from no sanction to a red card. Similarly here, the keeper blocks the header but connected with the striker on the follow through.
The referee's decision was (after a chat with the AR) was a yellow card to the keeper and obviously a penalty.
While the keeper is entitled to go for the ball he was never going to get to it first. His body shape suggests he know that and he is going for a block which he is also entitled to. He can 'go' for the ball in a careful way, not careless or reckless. The way he went for it (jumping towards the striker at full speed) a hard clash was inevitable regardless of if he managed a block or not. Given that the striker clearly got to the ball first its the keeper's foul. Had the keeper got to the ball first, it would have been the strikers foul.
The common situation I can liken this to is when a player is about the shoot the ball. A defender runs in for a block with his foot (sometimes sliding and sometimes with raised leg and studs showing). The ball rebounds of the defender's foot but the defenders foot is very close and he connects to the attackers foot on the follow through of the shot. This is always a foul an depending on the amount and point of contact its anywhere from no sanction to a red card. Similarly here, the keeper blocks the header but connected with the striker on the follow through.
The referee's decision was (after a chat with the AR) was a yellow card to the keeper and obviously a penalty.
Clocked it first time because of the odd angle of the ball. Did take a couple of replays to confirm though. Very hard to spot in real time.