Wealdstone v York DOGSO
- Thread starter RefGod
- Start date
It's a foul and a DOGSO, IF, you stop play immediately.
I think the referee has played advantage (whether he indicates or not) and as such play should just continue following the shot and the defender cautioned at the next stoppage.
Was an obvious goal scoring opportunity prevented, I don't think it was
The absence of any appeals from the fouled player and his team speaks volumes.
I think the referee has played advantage (whether he indicates or not) and as such play should just continue following the shot and the defender cautioned at the next stoppage.
Was an obvious goal scoring opportunity prevented, I don't think it was
The absence of any appeals from the fouled player and his team speaks volumes.
Really tough one. I think there is a shirt pull there, so cannot argue with the foul being awarded as referee has a good view. Some may argue that it is 'soft', but still a shirt pull.
I am not 100% sure that this is DOGSO though. Looks like there may a covering defender with the keeper when the foul is committed, so I would say SPA YC would be more appropriate IMHO.
Agree with @JamesL that player reaction tells you it all - nobody expects a RC.
Interested to see other opinions on this. I had to watch a fair few times before I came to this conclusion...
I am not 100% sure that this is DOGSO though. Looks like there may a covering defender with the keeper when the foul is committed, so I would say SPA YC would be more appropriate IMHO.
Agree with @JamesL that player reaction tells you it all - nobody expects a RC.
Interested to see other opinions on this. I had to watch a fair few times before I came to this conclusion...
Just gone back to check and there is no covering defender at the point the foul is committed.
Distance to goal 19-20 yards, general direction of play towards goal, in control, no covering defenders it's a very obvious GSO in my opinion.
You are correct. Think referee did himself a diservice by playing advantage, but I also think he did the right thing... A damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario.
I can see an argument for SPA and Yellow or DOGSO and Red. But from the angle the referee appears to have had, I can see why DOGSO red was given. The defender pulls the shirt twice (or one long hold), which slows the attacker or prevents him getting the ball as he would have otherwise. There was no covering defender, and you could argue the only reason the covering defender got back to block the shot was because of the long pull/pulls on the shirt of the attacker. Brave decision, but seems pretty clear to me the defender was making no attempt to win the ball and had no one covering...
I don't see a credible way to bring this back AFTER the shot has been taken. If we're going to treat this as DOGSO then we need to stop it before the attacker gets the shot away.
Signal or not, the referee has played an advantage here. Let play continue and return to caution the defender once the ball is put of play.
Signal or not, the referee has played an advantage here. Let play continue and return to caution the defender once the ball is put of play.
I think I lean towards allowing the advantage here.
In terms of footballing outcome the sanction doesn't really match the severity of the foul that occurs and the chance that remained was still a very very good one and not a lot different to the one that would have been had if the holding offence didn't occur.
That said each referee to own, my over riding position is, it is one outcome or the other. Can't have it both ways.
first time post - be gentle. I thought if he stops play when he sees the foul, then red for DOGSO is spot on - I agree with other comments that it meets the criteria. But if he allows advantage then pulls it back, the red moves down to a yellow for unsporting behaviour and the caution is given at the next stoppage?
It’s interesting one because I as a football fan would prefer a red card and free kick if this was in the first few minutes of the game. If it was the last few minutes of the game and could be a potential winner I’d want the advantage…
As a referee we can’t have it both ways and unless I’m extremely confident of a goal I’d go DOGSO red. The keeper is rushing out to close it down and an argument can be made the slight pull has had an impact on the outcome I.e not shooting immediately.
As a referee we can’t have it both ways and unless I’m extremely confident of a goal I’d go DOGSO red. The keeper is rushing out to close it down and an argument can be made the slight pull has had an impact on the outcome I.e not shooting immediately.
8 mins to go, 1-1, advantage has to be played there and then YC for defender. There would have been uproar if ref had blown straight away with player through on goal and still on his feet, even if that did result in red.
Once he comes back for a free kick it can only be a red card for DOGSO, the attacker was clean through on goal with no chance of a covering defender getting there.
The issue I have is coming back for the free kick, I think it is a real push to say that the advantage didn't accrue. The attacker has a one on one and has made a bit of a mess of it, really don't think I'd be coming back for a free kick there.
The issue I have is coming back for the free kick, I think it is a real push to say that the advantage didn't accrue. The attacker has a one on one and has made a bit of a mess of it, really don't think I'd be coming back for a free kick there.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
There is an interesting question of whether the send off should be part of the advantage analysis for a referee. I've never seen anything official discussing that beyond the general guidance that advantage should not be played on a send off unless there is a likely goal. I'm inclined to think the R should only be considering the play itself--is there a high likelihood of a goal, and is the opportunity better than the FK (or PK) that would be awarded, and should not be accounting for the send off (which means there is no reason to consider the amount of time left). But I'd love to see official guidance on this.
thought coming back for a FK outside the penalty area once you deem an advantage not to have materialized and applying a red only applied if the original challenge was serious foul play (in which case, unless there was an absolutely clear chance, you'd best not be letting an advantage run...). My understanding is that by playing an advantage, the red becomes a YC and if it was SPA then the yellow is not given. If it's in the box, then yes, keep the red and yellow as is.
