Call or no call?

[JerBear]

I had a situation in a game last week I want to ask you all about....

There was a breakaway just inside the 18 and there was the goalie, one offensive player (with the ball) and one defender slightly behind him.

The Forward knew that the defender was coming hard (about a half step behind him) and took a shot on goal that was off balance and it flew across the goal line about half way between the goal post and the corner flag.

Right after the ball was away, the defender tried to kick where the ball was a moment before and tripped the forward flat on his face in the penalty area.

In my opinion, the defenders actions did not change the path of the shot, was not worthy of a card and there were no other offensive players in the area.

The question I have is, should the PK be awarded or a goal kick?

[refnrev]

I've got a GK. To me a PK has to be earned and from what you described that would have been a very cheap PK. Ball is gone and out of bounds. GK.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by refnrev

I've got a GK. To me a PK has to be earned and from what you described that would have been a very cheap PK. Ball is gone and out of bounds. GK.

If the ball is clearly away and has no chance to score, then, as the defender, why foul?

By rule if the ball has yet to cross the boundary line, then the defender committed a foul and a PK is warranted.

[JerBear]

Perhaps I should have been clearer. The action happened 1-2 not 1.............2 the defender was just enough behind that he couldn’t get to the ball before the forward got it away. He was definitely going for the ball but couldn't get there quick enough. I'm pretty sure the ball was still in play.

[clnlglmf2008]

http://www.homeofsport2008.cn

We export our brand shoes all over world because of our competitive
price, good quality products and good service. All our products are
guaranteed to be a minimum of AAA+ quality. Our price and good service
are often appreciated by our customers. So we can get repeat order to
sustain our development. Your support of our business is very
thankful.

We deliver all our orders promptly via EMS/UPS/DHL/FEDEX/TNT. A
typical delivery time is around 7 days from dispatch in China to
arriving at your door. We ship worldwide and guarantee delivery.
Payment we prefer Western Union Bank-of-China and paypal,please click this site:
(http://www.homeofsport2008.cn)

Our products are popular all over the world with high quality, low
price, timely delivery and best service. We will update the latest
style and stocks frequently. You are welcome to visit our website to
learn more information of our shoes and search the items you are
interested in.

We respect all our clients and we'd like to share with them on mutual
benefit. We want to strengthen friendship between us. If you are
interested in our products or service please contact us without delay.
We are waiting to serve you. You are welcome to visit our website:
(http://www.homeofsport2008.cn) !
msn:[email protected]
yahoo ID:[email protected]
Thanks for your reading , pls mail us if u have any problem with
the business . We hope that will make a long&great business with you in future.


Your satisfactions,Our pursuit!

[wardtc]

I also have a goal kick. If what you said is accurate, the defender was trying to prevent the goal by kicking the ball. In that case he was playing the ball. The attacker fell over the defender's foot. It is not a case where the defender was attempting to trip the attacker. See advice to ref's on the laws of the game 12.4:
"Tripping or attempting to trip is an offense if it is clearly directed at an opponenet and causes the opponent to falter or fall. Players, however, may trip or fall over an opponent as the result of natural play and no infringement of the law has been committed."

[Goldfish]

Hi
The timing here is absolutely critical. As described the correct decision is a GK.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by wardtc

I also have a goal kick. If what you said is accurate, the defender was trying to prevent the goal by kicking the ball. In that case he was playing the ball. The attacker fell over the defender's foot. It is not a case where the defender was attempting to trip the attacker. See advice to ref's on the laws of the game 12.4:
"Tripping or attempting to trip is an offense if it is clearly directed at an opponenet and causes the opponent to falter or fall. Players, however, may trip or fall over an opponent as the result of natural play and no infringement of the law has been committed."

Ward,
You make a great point, but that is not the way I'm envisioning the action on this play. I believe that the defender is sliding in a tad late and taking out the landing foot or plant foot of the shooter, rather than sliding in front of him and the shooter going over his leg as you have described.

For anyone saying that a goalkick should be awarded here, I believe that it is a poor idea to allow players a free whack on an opponent after he has kicked the ball. Would you let this go at midfield after a pass (and there is no advantage situation)? Late tackles simply must be penalized. Just my opinion.

[Goldfish]

n my opinion, the defenders actions did not change the path of the shot, was not worthy of a card and there were no other offensive players in the area.

Hi Nevadaref
I agree totally with your comments re late challenges but timing is critical here. If the player has got his shot away and the timing of the contact is a judgment opinion to be made by the ref on the day. If it merited a caution so be it but if the the attacker was simply tripped by contact after the event then that IMO advantage has been played and the attacker cannot get two attempts. If it was heavy contact then caution followed by a DFK or penalty but this reads to me like minimal contact after the event

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Goldfish

Hi Nevadaref
I agree totally with your comments re late challenges but timing is critical here. If the player has got his shot away and the timing of the contact is a judgment opinion to be made by the ref on the day. If it merited a caution so be it but if the the attacker was simply tripped by contact after the event then that IMO advantage has been played and the attacker cannot get two attempts. If it was heavy contact then caution followed by a DFK or penalty but this reads to me like minimal contact after the event

What advantage are you allowing to the attacking team in this case?
Do you believe that a ball which has no chance of entering the goal is better for the offended team than a PK?

Please remember that the attacking team has done nothing wrong here and the defending team has committed a foul. The only way that this foul should not be penalized is if the attacking team would actually benefit from the referee not stopping play for it. That is what applying advantage means. That doesn't seem to be the case here.

How hard the contact is or whether the offender is deserving of a card are not relevant considerations in determining to award the PK. The referee need only determine that the contact was not trifling and was indeed a foul. Regarding that the OP wrote that the defender "tripped the forward flat on his face." That sounds like a clear foul to me.

[Goldfish]

Hi Nevadaref
In the instance cited the player got the shot off without any foul from the defender. No foul committed and that's part of normal play. After the shot the defender makes contact in way described either clumsily or through momentum. If the shot went into the goal what would the ref have done. Brought it back for a FK??. I don't think so. This is a decision the ref has to make based on the circumstances presented. The challenge as described had no impact on the shot and as it was not malicious or deserving of a card then play on. Happens all the time, player in on goal shoots and is then 'fouled' after the event. Many times the forward does not even realise he's been fouled. In a Man Utd CL game recently Rooney was through on goal, lobs the keeper, keeper catches/fouls him after the lob and the ball goes narrowly over the bar. No way was it a penalty and the ref restarted with a GK even though the keeper made foul contact with Rooney after the lob. As I said previously timing is everything on this but as described in the OP IMO correct decision was made
While not totally relevant this is what the FA has to say in the UK on advantage and I quote

In the event, however, of the fouled player being allowed the advantage then wasting it as a result of a subsequent error (or a colleague who receives the ball immediately from the advantage loses it, or shoots wide of goal, etc) then play should not be halted to penalise the original offence.

[ref47]

a late foul on the attacker is still a foul. was this a foul or did the attacker fall over a player who did nothing wrong? if the defender tried to clear the ball and missed, then the attacker tripped over the attacker's leg, that is a foul and, if in the pa, a pk. matters not that he got off a shot and it eventually missed the goal or wasd saved by the keeper.

consider this. same play but the defender does not trip the attacker. instead he hits the attacker with a punch just after the shot is taken. what do you call? no foul? i don't think so.

the original post needs a decision whether the defender committed a foul or not. if a foul, then a pk. if no foul, just incidental contact, then no call.

[Goldfish]

Hi Ref47
Misconduct is a totally different matter and no one is suggesting that it should not be dealt with. Nor indeed should SFP not be dealt with. I am off the opinion that JerBear made the correct call from the description in the OP.

[JerBear]

This discussion has gone like it did in my head the day of the game. Back and forth, part of me saying the foul should be called then the other half saying you are giving one team an enormous advantage because of an action that didn't change the flow of the game or the end result of the action. The coach was somewhat upset but after the game we talked and shook hands and he said "See you next year". I don't know if this discussion will change how I would call it next time but thanks for your input.

[Goldfish]

Hi Jerbear
On another day maybe a different decision. Thats all part of the game. On the day its your call, no-one else. Some see it as right other see it as incorrect. The important bit is that you made a decision in good faith, the coach while he may not have liked it shook hand and looked forward. That's the important bit.