A&H

Some rather alternative LOTG challenges

P

pingvino

New Member
Will we ever encouter these situations? Probably not! But what would you do if they were to happen?

1. An attacker is running towards the goalkeeper with no defender able to stop him. The goalkeeper's mate is standing next to the goal, holding his pit bull. The goalkeeper shouts at his friend to release the dog and run at the opponent, which he does. The attacker leaves the ball and runs off with the angry pit bull chasing him.

2. During play, a player suddenly finds himself in need of a leak. He pulls out his willie and urinates in the middle of the pitch.

3. The ball goes towards the (neutral) AR, who for some reason, with the ball staying in play the entire time, decides to kick the ball, which somehow ends up in one side's goal.

4. You as the referee get a little too close to a challenge for the ball between two players. One player dives in studs-up, misses his opponent and goes over the top of the ball, but plants his studs firmly in your leg.
 
The Referee Store
That's some imagination, hopefully not inspired by anything you have witnessed as an official! You should write to Hackett at the Observer.

In all seriousness (and please correct me with recourse to the laws if I am mistaken):

1) Stop play; ensure the striker is unhurt and that the dog is tethered; book the goalkeeper for unsporting behaviour, send his friend away from the field of play, and restart with an indirect free kick wherever the ball was when the goalkeeper gave the order. Nobody should be behind the goal during play anyway, so this could have been avoided.

2) Stop play and send off the guilty player--indecency is a form of offensive behaviour without doubt; restart with an indirect free kick to the opposition.

3) Unless you can pretend there was some other reason to stop the game, such as the ball having gone out of play, you will have to allow the goal; have a stern word with your AR, and replace him if necessary/possible. His officiating career is probably over.

4) I have been guilty of getting too close before, but how exactly you could make such a misjudgement as to squeeze yourself between two players challenging for the ball is beyond me! Obviously, if you saw the challenge and deemed it serious foul play, it's still a red card for the offender and a direct free kick. My guess, however, is that the referee cannot have seen it that well from this standpoint and his proximity probably confused the players and thus exacerbated the incident. In that case, play on; or if you require medical attention, stop play and restart with a dropped ball when ready.
 
Ok - I'll bit.

1. DOGSO or SFP for me. Same as throwing a boot etc providing you actually heard him give the instruction? Red card and penalty.

2. Offensive gesture - toilets are that way. Red card.

3. Goal and sack.

4. Still seems like an excessive challenge. Can't really see how you'd be there though.
 
I'll play:

1)Stop play, etc. Whether you can RC for DOGSO depends on whether you believe doing something such as shouting at an opponent can result in a red card (you caution for that, therefore you're stopping play for an offence, therefore DOGSO). Personally I think that's circular reasoning and incorrect. Can't possibly be SFP as the keeper hasn't challenged for the ball. If any of the comments from the keeper even hint at wanting the dog to go after the player (and not the ball), such as 'get him!', then it's VC. Remove the spectator, and report the incident separately. If the dog bit the player, I'd seriously consider abandonment and I'd be telling the ground staff to call the police.

2) Offensive gesture, red card

3). I'm dropping the ball for this one. I don't think the idea of the match official being like a goalpost isn't intended to extend to this scenario. That talks about the ball bouncing off the referee, not the referee kicking the ball, so it's open here. Get rid of the AR and report

4) Red card, has to be VC though. High studs, hit the ref, enough for a red card there.
 
Last edited:
I've seen 3 different opinions from 3 different FA's from (possibly) 3 different countries. Let's add a 4th :D

1. For me, this a RC for DOGSO. Sure, the GK didn't commit on offense himself, but using an outside agent like that with the intent to stop an attack like that is pretty much extending his body to commit an offense (kinda like a thrown goalie's glove being an extension of his hand).

2. RC for offensive gesture. No questions there.

3. I'd be dropping the ball from where the AR kicked the ball. Before that though, I'm making my AR walk and reporting him/her for referee misconduct. Under Law 6, the AR can be dismissed for failing to perform his/her duties, and scoring a goal for a team is definitely a way to get your badge terminated.

4. Sometimes referees are caught out of position. Doesn't excuse the lil devil from planting his studs. I'd need to evaluate whether or not it was malicious before I determine if I even need a card. Would be a dropped ball from where the ball was when I was hit, only being dropped after I got some form of medical attention.
 
Looks like we've quickly reached a consensus on 2 & 4 so I won't bother adding to those.

On 1, I'm in the caution for UB camp. Don't believe that an outside agent can be equated to the using part of your equipment as an extension of your body. Fair to say though, that I'd be hoping against hope the keeper later held onto the ball for 7+ seconds allowing the chance for a three card trick!

On 3 I can't see any excuse in the LOTG for denying the goal. Obviously dismiss and report the AR. I'd probably be encouraging the benefitting team to allow a 'walk in' goal in return to even things out but obviously their call if they choose to do this
 
Russell Jones said:
I'd be hoping against hope the keeper later held onto the ball for 7+ seconds allowing the chance for a three card trick!
Click to expand...
What would you card for in this case? You can't do it for "delaying the restart", since the ball is in play. I wouldn't do it for USB either, since p 121 (2015/16) of the Laws states:

Inside his own penalty area, the goalkeeper cannot be guilty of a handling offence incurring a direct free kick or any misconduct related to handling the ball. He can, however, be guilty of several handling offences that incur an indirect free kick.
Click to expand...
(Bold is my choice for emphasis...)
 
AlexF said:
What would you card for in this case? You can't do it for "delaying the restart", since the ball is in play. I wouldn't do it for USB either, since p 121 (2015/16) of the Laws states:


(Bold is my choice for emphasis...)
Click to expand...

By that logic, the goalkeeper could just hold the ball until time ran out so as to preserve a narrow lead. As demonstrated by the referee in the recent Liverpool vs. Marseille Europa League fixture, in which Mignolet was caught out for one very such action, the laws of the game do not permit this. I agree that the terminology of 'delaying restart' is problematic for the reasons you have stated, but I assume it comes under the rather wider umbrella of unsporting behaviour, hence indirect free kick and yellow card.

On number one, despite the numerous suggestions, I cannot accept violent conduct here. It so clearly involves the will of another person (and animal!) that unsporting behaviour surely covers it. It may well endanger the opponent far more than a thrown glove, but the question is whether the offence is within the remit of the laws.

Finally, on number four, I believe the premise of the scenario presupposes that you contributed heavily to this situation, so I would have reservations unless I deemed the tackle an attempt to injure me.
 
Russell Jones said:
On 3 I can't see any excuse in the LOTG for denying the goal. Obviously dismiss and report the AR. I'd probably be encouraging the benefitting team to allow a 'walk in' goal in return to even things out but obviously their call if they choose to do this
Click to expand...

Can anybody actually find the LOTG reference for when the ball strikes the referee?
 
SLI39 said:
By that logic, the goalkeeper could just hold the ball until time ran out so as to preserve a narrow lead[...] I agree that the terminology of 'delaying restart' is problematic for the reasons you have stated, but I assume it comes under the rather wider umbrella of unsporting behaviour, hence indirect free kick and yellow card.
Click to expand...
The goalkeeper couldn't, as the referee would blow for an indirect free kick! And as Alex quoted, a goalkeeper cannot be guilty of any misconduct related to handling the ball in his own penalty area, which as I read it means you cannot caution here. But we had this discussion not very long ago regarding a SPFL U19s match where the referee cautioned the GK for exceeding six seconds.
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
Can anybody actually find the LOTG reference for when the ball strikes the referee?
Click to expand...
p.109
"If, when the ball is in play, it touches the referee or an assistant referee who
is temporarily on the field of play, play continues because the referee and the
assistant referees are part of the match."
 
Thanks. Had a look at couldn't find it.
Well, that says 'if the ball touches the ref'. Not 'if the ref touches the ball'. Stretching it I know, but it kinda fits :D (stretching is justifiable as the intent of the law clearly wasn't to cover scenarios like in this thread!)
 
Russell Jones said:
Looks like we've quickly reached a consensus on 2 & 4 so I won't bother adding to those.

On 1, I'm in the caution for UB camp. Don't believe that an outside agent can be equated to the using part of your equipment as an extension of your body. Fair to say though, that I'd be hoping against hope the keeper later held onto the ball for 7+ seconds allowing the chance for a three card trick!
Click to expand...

I don't follow at all. Aside from the fact that you can't caution for this, how is it relevant when you've already stopped play?
 
One more:

During the game a substitution is carried out. The player who enters the field has a rather alternative "name" on the back of his shirt- "You knobheads" and 69 as a number. What is your decision?
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
I don't follow at all. Aside from the fact that you can't caution for this, how is it relevant when you've already stopped play?
Click to expand...
Further up the thread I've acknowledged my error and agreed that you can't caution the GK for holding the ball more than 6 seconds. I originally mentioned this because I felt the actions of the GK with regard to the pit bull 'morally' deserved a red but I was struggling to justify it in law and was therefore hoping to find a (legitimate) reason to give the GK a second yellow later in the game.

However both you & Padfoot have given coherent arguments as to why you might be able to stretch the original offense to a red card in any case :)
 
Russell Jones said:
Further up the thread I've acknowledged my error and agreed that you can't caution the GK for holding the ball more than 6 seconds. I originally mentioned this because I felt the actions of the GK with regard to the pit bull 'morally' deserved a red but I was struggling to justify it in law and was therefore hoping to find a (legitimate) reason to give the GK a second yellow later in the game.

However both you & Padfoot have given coherent arguments as to why you might be able to stretch the original offense to a red card in any case :)
Click to expand...

Yes, agreed; I came in too quickly here without proper consultation of the relevant passage in law on a goalkeeper's being exempt from misconduct handling offences. I stand humbly corrected (incidentally, it has never actually happened to me in a match), and my reference to Liverpool vs. Bordeaux (not Marseille, as I wrote first time) overlooked the critical fact that Mignolet conceded the indirect free kick, but not the yellow card.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top