The Ref Stop

last man defence

The Ref Stop
In the Penalty Area but definitely not an attempt to play the ball so IF it's deemed DOGSO then must be Red.

In terms of DOGSO criteria, whilst covering defenders might have had chance to stop a shot on the line, they don't remove the obvious goal opportunity. So only question revolves around the direction of the attacker and therefore the angle he would end up shooting from ... for me, he would still have had a decent chance to shoot and score so I'd be going Red rather than Yellow. But there's definitely an element of doubt so a (somewhat) understandable decision ...
 
I would happily defend any referee who gave a red or yellow card in this scenario. For me, it's a yellow card because of the direction he's carrying the ball and the additional defenders getting back on the line, but if someone gave a red then I could understand that as well.
 
Circular 7 (came out in November, applies immediately) has a bit about the attacker being allowed to go in a diagonal to avoid a defender, as long as it is still generally in the right direction, and it still being DOGSO.

That seems to be the case here. When the foul is committed by the goalkeeper, there are no defenders behind him. By the time the player actually hits the ground, there are two (which would remove the OGSO).

In a perfect world, this is a red card all day (holding/pulling), but I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the referee did the quick glance up when he saw the attacker going down, saw two defenders, and leaned toward that consideration no longer being fulfilled, thus yellow.
 
Well, it's holding. So the DOGSO changes don't apply.
With DOGSO, there's a point where it clearly is an OGSO, and a point where it clearly isn't. Many scenarios fall in between.

In those scenarios, as well as using our personal judgement (which others disagree with), we consider the nature of the match and offence. In a position where you could potentially at a stretch argue that it wasn't DOGSO, and it's just a carelessly mistimed foul, low grade match, 10-0 in the final minute, that sort of thing? Yeah, that might change our approach. Which is fine given it can be subjective determining if there is an OGSO. Strictly speaking it's wrong, but there's a point where we get to apply pressure to the laws to get them to bend to our will. And that's a good thing.

The purpose to my little diatribe is that the nature of the offence matters. In those scenarios where I could consider that it is or isn't an OGSO, then I'm more likely to swing towards no-OGSO if it's a carelessly mistimed foul than when it's clear the fouler has malicious intent.

And that's because the LOTG used to actually state that (paraphrased) the reason for the red card was because foully denying a goal was one of the most heinous acts of the game so it punishes the intent behind the action.

Here, the direction alone is in that grey area. Pushing towards no OGSO, but not enough to state, inarguably, that there is no OGSO.
The actions of the keeper - not even pretending to go for the ball but trying to cheat the opponents out of a goal - mean that I really have no reason whatsoever to be sending the benefit of the doubt his way. It's going the other way. Because let's be honest - he deserves to go, by the spirit of the law, and the area is grey under the letter of the law.

For me, running away from goal - yes - but players were never required to be running directly at the net. At the time of the foul, he was still in a position where he could easily put the ball into the net with his next touch. Running away from goal, but still facing it enough to score.
So it really comes down to the 2nd defender. Given that he was only level with the attacker at the time the foul started, he isn't in a position to stop the ball.

So, it's a red for me.
 
AlexF said:
In a perfect world, this is a red card all day (holding/pulling), but I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the referee did the quick glance up when he saw the attacker going down, saw two defenders, and leaned toward that consideration no longer being fulfilled, thus yellow.
Click to expand...

Yep, I think this is what happened as well. Referee sees the defenders when the player goes to ground, not when the foul starts, which probably errs him towards yellow.
 
Thank you everyone for your input.

I think this is a %100 red, as some of you explained, referee probably looked at the defenders (i think only one of them had a legit shot to make a save) when the player actually went down and yellow could be understandable. However, in a case where a goalkeeper is in his proper spot and a defender (as a last defensive man) pulls an attacking player down then we do not question whether the striker could make the goal (or goalkeeper's chance to make a save a one on one situation). In this case, even if a defender had a shot to block the ball from going in (definetely less likely compared to a goal keeper) this is still a perfect chance of scoring. Attacker's direction is irrelevant as long as he is going towards the goal line and he has a reasonable angle (again in this case his next touch was gonna be rolling the ball towards to goal unless he wanted to be in a funny youtube video :) )...

Thanks again everyone. Feel free to add more comments :)
 
Capture2.PNG
em4rWQ
 
UKColt said:
Yep, I think this is what happened as well. Referee sees the defenders when the player goes to ground, not when the foul starts, which probably errs him towards yellow.
Click to expand...
While that may explain the mistake I wouldn't accept it as an assessor - it highlights the importance of being aware of the position of all players at times like this so you're not making a decision then checking to see where everybody is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top