[lmeadski]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Secondly, the play was VERY rough, enough for two of my players to get bloody mouths and another to have an eye watering and red she couldn't see clearly out of it for over 15 minutes.

As far as advantage goes, this was 11 and 12 year old girls playing in a FRIENDSHIP tournament.
[/B]

Rough play does not equate into illegal play. Rule book sez so-- rule-4-27:

- SECTION 27 INCIDENTAL CONTACT
Incidental contact is contact with an opponent which is permitted and does not constitute a foul.
ART.1...the mere fact that contact occurs does not constitute a foul. When 10 players are moving rapidly in a limited area, some contact is certain to occur.
ART.2...Contact which occurs unintentionally in an effort by an opponent to reach a loose ball, or contact which might result when opponents are in equally favorable positions to perform normal defensive or offensive movements, should not be considered illegal, even though the contact may be severe.

Those are the guidelines laid out by the FED. It always has been, and always will be, a judgement call by the official whether illegal contact has occurred. In this case, there also may be additional factors- (1)young girls playing the game who haven't yet developed the necessary skills to play the game at a fluid level- and (2)maybe a newer ref officiating that hasn't really had the experience yet to develop the judgment necessary to recognize the difference between illegal contact and inadvertant contact. Of course, in #2, the other alternative is that the official had developed that skill, and his judgment was OK.

I don't know who is right, which is why I haven't commented. Unless I can actually see the play myself, imeadski, I don't think that I'm qualified to say who has the right take on this- you or the official. I do know that that I've seen all kinds of m/s-aged games where the overall level of physical contact was greater than most high school games, and the reason for that was simply a lack of skill on the players' part [/B][/QUOTE]

JR, not looking for right or wrong. I am not looking for an indictment of the ref. I am not looking for anyone to say I was right or wrong. If you look at the post, my question was: when does a ref, who is first a dad and then a coach, take off his ref's shirt and put on his coach's shirt in a situation like this. I am sure if this was posted in a coach's forum, the reply would be coach's shirt first. Most of the replies here have been ref's shirt first (not to my surprise or dismay). I was also wearing another shirt: father and protector of the girls entrusted to me by their parents. The irony of the situation is what I wanted to share. And, with some of the replies (Man in Blue and his replies) it is not hard to see why a wall exists between some in the coaching/player and reffing communities.