A&H

S4 - Handball DOGSO

Robbo_6

RefChat Addict
Had a vets game today where at about 30 mins in the fullback for the blue team very clearly stuck his arm up to stop the ball going in/near the goal. The player immediately knew what he had done, and started walking. Easiest red of my career. Nobody even argued, bar one person...

The captain of the blues insisted that as the header on goal was going wide the full-back didn't deny an obvious goal and therefore it shouldn't be a red. I explained that it was a goal-scoring opportunity so was still a red. Besides, to me it looked like it could have gone in or hit the post. He was very incessant and was adamant it was going wide and shouldn't have been a red and there was no goal-scoring opportunity as it was going to be a goal kick had he not touched it.

He only stopped complaining when I threatened him with a sin bin but by this point the red player who made the header confirmed it was going wide which made the other blue players start to question me. I reiterated what I told the captain. The penalty was then taken and scored and nothing more was said of it, until half-time when a few blue players came over and were questioning it again, albeit in a calm manner. Again I explained the rule and they gradually accepted the decision.

At the time I was adamant in my decision and the player walking helped sell it, but since then a little doubt has creeped in. I have checked the LOTG and it doesn't say about whether the shot being on/off target matters, so just wanted to get extra opinions to confirm I was correct?
 
The Referee Store
Going in = DOGSO
Going wide is not a DOGSO but it sounds like a caution for failed DOGSO attempt
Only you can determine the likelihood of whether it was going in and which outcome was the best fit
I guess it could also be a caution for Stopping a Promising Attack, but it doesn't sound like it
 
As much as I would prefer it morally that a player who deliberately handles the ball because they think the ball is going is the goal should be sent off whether or not the ball was actually going in, in law you should only be sending off the player if you are confident that the header was on target - if you weren't sure whether the ball was going in or whether it was hitting the post, I would argue that doesn't sound like an obvious goalscoring opportunity.
 
As much as I would prefer it morally that a player who deliberately handles the ball because they think the ball is going is the goal should be sent off whether or not the ball was actually going in, in law you should only be sending off the player if you are confident that the header was on target - if you weren't sure whether the ball was going in or whether it was hitting the post, I would argue that doesn't sound like an obvious goalscoring opportunity.
It was very hard for me to tell as the header was back across goal and I was in a central position. The way the player reacted and immediately started walking off said to me that it was going in.

Thank you for the clarification! Would have been nice to have VAR to see that again
 
As much as I would prefer it morally that a player who deliberately handles the ball because they think the ball is going is the goal should be sent off whether or not the ball was actually going in, in law you should only be sending off the player if you are confident that the header was on target - if you weren't sure whether the ball was going in or whether it was hitting the post, I would argue that doesn't sound like an obvious goalscoring opportunity.
I think you're marginally overstating how confident you have to be. I think when it's a clear deliberate action, the expectation is a red. You should only be downgrading if your position means you can be confident it is not going in.
 
Back
Top