The Ref Stop

New futsal DOGSO confusion

santa sangria

santa sangria

RefChat Addict
"If a goalkeeper is just in front of his/her own goal to guard it, it is
considered that no DOGSO offence can be committed, even if the
situation meets the other criteria for DOGSO.

If a goalkeeper commits an offence which denies the opposing team an
obvious goalscoring opportunity or denies the opposing team a goal
or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by handling the ball outside the
penalty area when his/her goal is unguarded or only guarded by an
outfield defending-team player behind the goalkeeper, the goalkeeper is
considered guilty of a DOGSO offence.

If the number of attacking-team players is greater than the number of
defending-team players (except the goalkeeper) guarding the goal, this
shall be considered to be a DOGSO situation."

WTF does that third paragraph mean?
It seems to directly contradict the first paragraph... but it can't mean that. It's been written missing context. Has anyone been trained on what it means?
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
The Ref Stop
I think it is absolutely contradictory to paragraph 1.

But ignoring that (!) I just read it that it means if the attacking team has an overload (2 v 1 or 3 v 2 etc.) not inc the keeper then any foul would be considered dogso.

I think

I've no experience at all with futsal mind!
 
Poor editing, unfortunately.

If the GK is guarding the goal, it can never be DOGSO (as per pg 63 of the 20/21 Laws). To guard the goal, the GK must be in their penalty area between the ball and the goal.

If the GK is NOT in that circumstance, then and situation where the attacking players outnumber the defending players could be a DOGSO situation, as long as the other considerations are also met.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
What I used to like about futsal laws of the game because it didn't have the confusing statements like the football one. That is gone now.

I had a good chat about "guarding" with my instructor in the refresher course. It pretty much is what @AlexF says. The context is, give Futsal goal is much smaller a GSO is somewhat reduced as defending the ball going into goal becomes easier (closing the angles). This concept is introduced by the word 'guarding'. We see far less (relatively) one on one goals than football. So if the goalkeeper can guard the goal (as a goal keeper, meaning using their hands) then it is not possible to have a DOGSO. But if the goalkeeper is not guarding, eg he is the fouler or outside PA, then it is only possible to guard the goal if the defender numbers are equal to or more than he attackers.

So one on one against any defender (keeper or not) can't be DOGSO
Two on one against keeper in PA can't be DOGSO
Two on one other situations is DOGSO.
 
The other problem is that they have transfered all the problems with the changes from football too. Like the 'usaually' word from handball or should I say the entire handball. Some are even more problematic in futsal. With flying goalkeepers in futsal, it's much more possible to create a accidental handball GSO in your defending PA. Ball accidentally hits a defender's arm (mostly hidden behind the body to avoid it) drops to the defender and an opportunity to shoot at an empty goal 40 meters away with a clear path is a GSO (and could/would happen within a second). Something that used to be goal at one end is now a pen at the other end and it is not as far fetched of an idea as it would be in football.

BTW has anyone tried to do the 4 second count exactly as per the new illustrations without dislocating their elbow/wrist?
 
@one -- You have to remember that they transferred the text from the 2019-20 football laws, before the "usually" changes were removed.

There's already some established resistance to the outcome of the "accidental handball" leading to a penalty or possible DFKSAF. I've had a few conversations with Marc Birkett and Peter Nurse (FA FIFA refs and instructors) about this, as well as a few FIFA instructors/etc. There's a feeling that this will be changed, but FIFA (as of a few weeks ago) still hadn't agreed to change it. The first time a penalty is given for a case like that under the new laws in a high profile game is the day before it will change I suspect.

re: the 4s count... it's the same count as is used in basketball. It's actually pretty easy once you see and understand the proper mechanics.
 
one said:
Two on one against keeper in PA can't be DOGSO
Click to expand...
Minor correction here -- if the GK is in the PA, but out of position (ie, not in the goal, but over near one of the corners for example), then it can still be DOGSO.
 
@AlexF I think you missed the point. I realised the wording is a direct transfer. It used to be, they look at the changes, they take the good bits and remove the confusing/incorrect/irrelevant bits and we have a better version of the laws. Now it's just a straight copy despite all the issues.

Regarding the 4 second count, I am well aware how it's done, it's just terrible illustration. You can't possibly hold your fist that way in front of your body with your fingers pointing outwards.

And yes about keeper guarding the goal, I took that as given.
 
one said:
And yes about keeper guarding the goal, I took that as given.
Click to expand...
I just wanted to clarify, in case someone read that statement and didn't consider the other circumstance. :)

P.S. I think that the problem this time in taing the changes verbatim came because there are (apparently) some football people that sit on the futsal law committee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
AlexF said:
Poor editing, unfortunately.

If the GK is guarding the goal, it can never be DOGSO (as per pg 63 of the 20/21 Laws). To guard the goal, the GK must be in their penalty area between the ball and the goal.

If the GK is NOT in that circumstance, then and situation where the attacking players outnumber the defending players could be a DOGSO situation, as long as the other considerations are also met.
Click to expand...
That’s interesting.
The folks on the futsal FB are not interpreting it the same,
And my guys... we had our training today and we had a classic slide: basically that passage is so badly written we are ignoring it until we hear something concrete from Uefa;)
 
santa sangria said:
That’s interesting.
The folks on the futsal FB are not interpreting it the same,
And my guys... we had our training today and we had a classic slide: basically that passage is so badly written we are ignoring it until we hear something concrete from Uefa;)
Click to expand...

Sometimes I wonder if IFAB/FIFA are just using some version of Google Translate to work on these things . . .

Here's how I am interpreting these paragraphs.

Paragraph 1 - If the goalkeeper is in front of the goal, then there can be no DOGSO. So the goalkeeper in front of the net supersedes any other situation written later.

Paragraph 3 - If the keeper is not directly in front of the net, then any "odd man rush" situation (I'm using a North American hockey term) where the attackers outnumber the non-keeper defenders would result in a DOGSO situation.

I may be reading this completely wrong, but that's my story and I'm sticking to it. :) It's another example of FIFA/IFAB trying to remove subjectivity from the application of the Laws. I don't like it, but I am paid to enforce the laws, not write them.

As for the new counting signal, I agree that the photos look awful. But the best way to explain the mechanic is as follows:
1) Start with your hand at your chest with your forearm parallel to the floor.
2) Move your hand away from your body so your arm is fully extended. As you do this, open your hand from a fist with the palm facing the ground.

It's correct that the signal is identical to a basketball referee counting seconds for a possible backcourt violation. To be completely honest, it's actually a more natural signal than holding your hand straight up in the air while counting with your fingers. You can also move a lot better with your arm at chest height than trying to move with your arm straight up in the air.
 
RefIADad said:
Here's how I am interpreting these paragraphs.

Paragraph 1 - If the goalkeeper is in front of the goal, then there can be no DOGSO. So the goalkeeper in front of the net supersedes any other situation written later.

Paragraph 3 - If the keeper is not directly in front of the net, then any "odd man rush" situation (I'm using a North American hockey term) where the attackers outnumber the non-keeper defenders would result in a DOGSO situation.
Click to expand...
My understanding from two FIFA sessions and conversations with a couple of other instructors is that yes... that's exactly it...

Except change "would result in a DOGSO" to "would result in a possible DOGSO".
 
RefIADad said:
1) Start with your hand at your chest with your forearm parallel to the floor.
2) Move your hand away from your body so your arm is fully extended. As you do this, open your hand from a fist with the palm facing the ground.
Click to expand...
Never refereed futsal so I feel like you've just taught me how to do a Nazi salute.
 
It should make more sense with "the illustration" Although you'd have to be a contortionist to follow it to the T.

Screenshot_20201020-175931.jpg
 
I will have a first game next week. It will be interesting with the count, because we used to start on zero and the whistle was blown on 4. Now we start on one and blow on 5. We are also instructed to verbalise every count. So it's now going to be the first time players hear "4". I think it's also going to feel like the count is faster. It's also going to be harder to see our hands!

Oh and blocking like basketball, and DOGSO (now almost impossible so expect loads of outrageous fouls), and kick-ins on the line, and no goal if the attacker accidentally moves the goal, and scoring direct from the kick off, and no more beat-the-buzzer long shot goals... gonna be bizarre managing that lot!
 
Mr Dean said:
Never refereed futsal so I feel like you've just taught me how to do a Nazi salute.
Click to expand...

Oh, wow. Now that I've read my post again, you're right. That was NOT how I intended it at all.

The illustration is what I was trying to communicate. The referee in the illustration is double-jointed. :) If you start with your thumb against your chest instead of the back of your fist, you have what I was trying to describe.
 
Last edited:
santa sangria said:
I will have a first game next week. It will be interesting with the count, because we used to start on zero and the whistle was blown on 4. Now we start on one and blow on 5. We are also instructed to verbalise every count. So it's now going to be the first time players hear "4". I think it's also going to feel like the count is faster. It's also going to be harder to see our hands!

Oh and blocking like basketball, and DOGSO (now almost impossible so expect loads of outrageous fouls), and kick-ins on the line, and no goal if the attacker accidentally moves the goal, and scoring direct from the kick off, and no more beat-the-buzzer long shot goals... gonna be bizarre managing that lot!
Click to expand...

Obviously, my reply below highlights the confusion around this law change.

The way I've read the changes and the signals in the 2020-21 laws, I believe you count to four just as you did in the past. Using the old "one thousand one, one thousand two" method, I believe that you finish the seconds signal as you count "one". In other words, I count "one thousand one", and my arm extends with the one as I say "one" to myself.

So after we say "four", and our arm extends for the fourth count, we would then blow the whistle.

Like I said, it's all confusing. I would say that as long as we are consistently counting and signaling, the teams should adjust. FIFA and IFAB once again make things much more confusing . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top