Question Number: 19690

Kicks From The Penalty mark 8/5/2008

RE: competitive Under 12

rob booth of Montreal, Quebec canada asks...

Please could you clarify the following. we recently lost a semi final in penalty shootout at an important tournament on an unclear decision that I would like you to please clarify.

After regulation time, the teams were tied 2-2 so it went straight to a 5 shots per side penalty shootout. On the other team's last shot, our goalie saved it and so we just had to score with our 5th penalty shot to win the game and go to the final.

Our player placed the ball, and kicked it but the ball hit the post and bounced out and so was not a goal. However, the linesman (not the ref) who was stood by the goal to see whether there were any infractions,raised her flag immediately after the penalty was taken and informed the ref that the goalie had not been on his line when the missed penalty kick was taken. The ref said that if the goalie had saved it, he would have requested that the kick be retaken, but since our player hit the post, it should not be retaken !!!

Consequently they went on to win the penalty shootout and later that afternoon, the final 4-1 !!! We feel that that call cost us the tournament.

Please could you clarify whether the ref was correct not to request that the missed kick be retaken - to me, it seems that it is not common sense that if a goalie is not in the correct position for the kick but the player misses, then it should not be retaken. makes no sense. Why should this be different if the goalie saves it!!

We obviously spend hours and hours training our kids over the last few years to a certain level and it is frustrating when important games finish like this.

many thanks

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

The referee evidently thought that the keeper's position was trifling, and so he did not call for a retake.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Firstly the assistant referee was not familiar with the correct signal indicating the goalkeeper was not where he was supposed to be. That signal is not raising the flag. Of course there might have been some other infraction that the assistant saw and called the referee's attention to. If the goalkeeper did violate Law 14 and a goal was not scored the correct decision is to retake the kick. However the referee is well within his discretion to judge the violation had absolutely no effect on the kicker hitting the post and consider the kick fairly taken. The referee is obligated to act on the advice of an assistant and that action is one of three things: to play advantage [not applicable in this case], to accept the advice or to ignore the advice.

It appeared to you the referee ignored the advice. That is the referee's prerogative. The decision was correct because it was a fact connected with play. The referee, in taking a decision, had his opinion regarding that fact and his decision is incontestable.

Because none of the panelists was present at the match we will all find it difficult to come to any other conclusion.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

The AR by raising the flag has created a spectacle since all attention is now directed towards the referee to find out what occurred?
The correct procedure is for the referee to look over at the AR and get eye contact and the AR will side step into the field indicating I saw the keeper move before the shot. No fuss just the AR silently indicates I saw this, what do you think? Referee thinks, thanks but it was trifling, case closed. Why this becomes a contentious issue is you claim the referee in facts admits there was a procedural infraction and then says he chooses to ignore it stating the ball and keeper did come into contact. That fact has nothing to do with the procedural issue. The referee has the final decision and as wrong as the explanation sounds as a judgment the referee can decide the infraction was not sufficient to go beyond a doubtful or trifling status. In other words he has effectively discounted the ARs decision and replaced it with his own that nothing changed as the result of the early movement by the keeper. The AR and the referee need to go over the criteria as the mechanics of the decision here is definitely poor but as to whether you could successfully win a protest your chances are zero to none at all!
Next time do not miss!

Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Gene Nagy

Rob, I can feel your frustration with this situatuon. In spite of what the correct method of signalling is and opinions are expressed by the A/R and the ref, the decision has to stand. But I would be furious as to how it was arrived.

I reffed a provincials final game in Penticton BC when the goalie moved well off his line and the ball sailed 3 meters above the net. I had the kick retaken becasue the goalie moved off his line. To me it makes no difference where the ball ended up; the goalie moved, case closed. My rationale was that the kicker missed the shot BECAUSE the goalie moved. That movement came before the the ball was kicked so whatever happens after the goalie moved off his line is irrelevant. If he scores: goal. If he misses: retake.

Now you have to take into consideration at what kind of referees you will get at U12 games. Do you really expect a ref with 20 years experience and thousands of games under his belt? So for this reason, furious as I might feel, I would keep it to myself and write letters to asktheref.com to vindicate myself.