Trip, then attack
 

From a South Carolina game on Monday. Charges were later pressed...

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LYz-X5AOUQw?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><para m name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LYz-X5AOUQw?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>

Incredible......and I was going to post it, but you beat me to it.

Hope they throw the book at her!

My son was a pretty good soccer player and the fastest sprinter in school. After getting beat a couple of times, the defenders began to take actions into their own hands.....I can't count how many yellow cards, red cards, direct and indirect kicks were directly contributed to him. But, I do know in three successive seasons he had a bruised kidney, broken ankle, and torn ACL as a result of some "rough play."

His senior year, he ran track............less contact there.

Assume for the moment that you had a caution for the trip, do you still give it in this situation?

Also, where the heck is the center while this is going on? Both ARs arrive on scene before him.

All I know is if I were first on scene while the attacker was punching the player in the head, it'd take everything within me not to give her a two handed shove off of the victim.

These are the types of things where I hate having to stand back because those punches can cause some serious injury.

I don't know that I would shove, but I do think I'd step between them when one of them is defenseless like this.

I wouldn't. Our state presently requires a ten-minute sit for cautions, and this foul doesn't warrant a ten-minute sit, IMO.

Wow, that's counter-productive. I don't mind the required substitution on a yellow that much, but a 10 minute sin bin is just going to prevent referees from giving justified yellows.

I have the same issue with my state's red card policy. The second red you receive is a season ban regardless of why it's given. I bottled several DOGSO cards this past season because it wasn't worth risking the player's season to give the card he'd earned.

But, to get back to my original question, if it was a bad enough foul for a caution, would you still give it?

That's why we're trying to fight the rule. And yes, we're not supposed to consider the sit when considering yellow cards, but honestly, how can we not?

A season ban is even worse, IMO. A game or two, I can see.

I still didn't think this was bad enough (it was an unintentional tangling of feet), but just because you get wrongfully pummelled does not earn you a freebie. A yellow is a yellow.

Caught on camera: Teen girl attacked during soccer game - 14 News, WFIE, Evansville, Henderson, Owensboro

In the report seen here, the referee (do not know if center or AR) is giving an interview to a reporter. I thought the only words to a reporter should be "no comment". Let the HSL and schools deal with the reporters.

I don't think it's that black and white.

This interview was obviously well after game day, and it doesn't hurt for the public to see officials as people, as opposed to unfamilar foes in stripes shirts. Besides, if this gentleman's assigner was okay with the interview, then we should be, too.

That was my thought too.

My concern would primarily be whether I was going to end up being sued. These kinds of situations usually end up with practically everyone present being sued and I wouldn't want to end up saying something dumb on tape that I would have to defend later. Also, the original dateline on the article is the 27th and the game was on the 26th.

Also, I'm not so sure it was well after game day. The referee is still in the same color as the game in question and I wonder if the TV crew would really have tracked down and interviewed the referee at another game some days later.

Maybe not. I made that assumption, because the video was clearly a home-video job, and not that of a local TV station, so I make the assumption that the crew didn't get the intervew that day.

But since you brought it up, sued for what? You didn't throw any punches, nor did you encourage such behavior. You'd have to say something particularly incriminating to wind up in court, but what could you have to say that would even approach that?

You have a much higher opinion of the quality of local news videos than I do! :)

I didn't say successfully sued, just sued. There's always a blame the ref mentality anytime someone gets hurt or a fight breaks out. Say something dumb like "I'd warned her twice to watch her behavior." and now you have to defend against a negligence suit. Better to not say anything to a camera, especially if it's not a news channel to begin with.