Question Number: 16932

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/27/2007

RE: Varsity High School

Susan Coll of Norwood, PA USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 16915

In response...I was not saying that my son didn't deserve a red card. Whatever the ref decides in that regard is what my son must abide by. And he knows that as he carries a grade 8 referee license as well. He referees under FIFA rules and plays under the high school rules, therefore he was concerned about the circumstances of the advantage and then subsequent penalty kick.

However, to clarify, he held the shirt to draw the penalty outside of the box and let go of the shirt before the player entered the box. He did not cause the offensive player to be off balance or to stumble, fall, or miss his shot in any way.

I guess I worded my questions wrong. I wasn't really questioning the card being given. I was questioning why the ref allowed advantage and a good hard goal attempt was made, at which time our goalie made a very nice save, and then gave a penalty kick on top of the advantage(which our goal keeper also saved).

Also, it was the first time I had ever heard the mention of the "soft" red card, so I didn't understand its meaning.

Thank you.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Hi Susan and thanks for the update. Apparently, the referee DID believe the foul carried through into the penalty area and must have also believed that the foul altered the effectiveness of the shot. In other words, you are correct, you cannot have advantage AND the PK also. That's why I believe the referee in your game did not feel advantage was realized or he would not have given a pk. I would caution your son as to what he does near the penalty area as every referee will have a different interpretation as to where and how the foul occurred. Soft reds are yet another idiocy promulgated on us by US High SChool soccer.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Sandra,
Words do not always adequately paint the exact picture we have within our minds. Rest assured you have done nothing wrong! We appreciate you taking the time to think about and seek information about the game. We also feel honored that you thought to ask us for an opinion.

We do try to provide solid reasons and occasionally entertain. Sometimes we rattle the cage and peeve a few unrepentant souls. However we all strive to educate that soccer is a game played by millions at various levels and one set of laws bind it together (for the most part).

Our passion and satisfaction in sharing our time, effort within a public forum allowing a broadcast of an opinion is our sense of fair play, integrity and self worth on record for all to see!

We are respected and cherished by some and reviled and dismissive by others! We are occasionally labeled as inflated ego maniacs or just maniacal, ego centric or just plain eccentric. Some actually find us informative humorous with a biting wit. Others feel we are self centered, petty and unable to agree that we could be wrong.

In a free exchange of ideas the right to agree to disagree is not restricted by being right or wrong or black or white. A good friend of mine has a DVD entitled "The grey areas!" it deals with the hazy (what ifs?) of the laws of the game. To some extent human dynamics are not much different!

There is good logic in you asserting that if advantage WAS realized is a PK and a red card another bite of the apple? Is an opportunity to get the shot away sufficient to not consider the DOGSO criteria attached to the initial foul?

In the opinion of this referee I must see the shot as equaling the opportunity before the foul! For example by slowing down the run your son provided the keeper with time to counter the attack. The foul is fought off and advantage applied but the distance between the goal, the angle of the keeper and the time to get the shot away were significantly altered. Any time a ball is directed towards the goal it could cross that goal line under the crossbar and between the posts in any number of ways a slight toe poke a funny bounce, the keeper mishandles or a super shot, great a goal. Now if the foul had no VC or SFP attached then in all likely hood a caution for the USB of the misconduct is all that a referee could consider.

Your keeper makes a save! You are 100% correct in thinking a referee COULD choose to see the save of a good scoring opportunity as advantage realized and not choose to send your son off for a foul punishable by a free kick which denies an OBVIOUS goal scoring opportunity. The referee equates the great shot and subsequent save as no different then if the player had an open goal and flubbed the ball over top or wide. In essence he places the blame on the shooter missing not the foul affecting!

Your son thought if he made a deliberate tactical foul he could thwart the scoring opportunity! The referee obviously recognized that point based on the resolution of the outcome. We can not know what the referee saw or did not see in your sons match or by what definition the referee decided to decide in the manner he did.

I must confess I find the high school adaptations and use of misleading terms like a soft red do confuse many that play by normal standards so you are not alone in wondering the meaning.
As a parent we learn one life and live the real one by what we impart to our kids. Never apologize for looking out for your child's interest! I cannot imagine those of us here dare stand in judgment as to what motivates your looking out for your child's interest as anything but the bond of mother and child which no decision on this earth can affect!

Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

In US high school competition what is meant when people talk about a "soft" red card is the player may be replaced. It is signaled by holding the red and yellow cards up together in the same hand.

Again, there was a crime committed and advantage was played. The referee decided to return to the original foul play AND misconduct to ensure the crime [the flagrant shirt pull] did not have the desired effect, a missed goal opportunity. In the cause of a disqualification, should the referee have it in mind a goal scoring opportunity was denied by the holding he MUST send-off the player. Further if he is of the mind the holding continued inside the penalty area he must award a penalty kick. All of these decisions fall to the referee on the match that day.

Regards,