Question Number: 29775

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 10/3/2015

RE: Select Adult

Simon of Toowooomba, Queensland Austraia asks...

This question is a follow up to question 29771

This months YCI reminded me of a situation: I was AR, and the CR is a much more senior ref. The game was challenging, lots of sniping, minor late contact and complaints of get control ref and after about 30 mins the CR made an obvious decision to be more assertive to foul play to regain control of game.

A high ball was kicked in towards my PA. The centre back and centre forward (blue 10) challenged for the ball. The CR must have seen a foul (illegal use of arm by centre back when jumping up), and awarded DFK in the arc, and came running in towards them with a yellow card in her hand (but not shown). But the ball had skidded off the centre backs head to another forward (blue 11) standing another 10 m away who volleyed the ball and kicked it past GK for a 'goal'.

The CR then changed the card, and showed the centre back a red, (DFK outside the PA). At halftime, the reasoning was the foul caused her to stop play, which denied the blue team a goal scoring opportunity, DOGSO.

In another situation I can understand the advice to delay when a defender sticking his arm out to stop a ball about to enter the goal, even though the ball continued to bounce and roll into the goal anyway.

What I cant understand is the construct of this situation, where the goal scoring opportunity is denied not by the foul, but the refs reaction to a foul.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Simon,
Once the referee has blown the whistle play is dead! The DFK foul outside in the arc is ...WHY... play stopped! The CR DID blow the whistle? IF the referee HAD played advantage allowing a bit of time to see how the situation might evolve then the goal could have counted.

The criteria of DOGSO must be met at the time of that DFK foul, not at a later date, given the ball fell favourably to another team mate. It ...COULD... be the CR changed their mind thinking that a caution for the initial foul was not sufficient and recognized that the criteria of DOGSO was realized?

They certainly can not use the fact the ball wound up in the goal, due to a too early whistle, as an excuse to show a red card to a player for DOGSO, when it was their too quick intervention, not the foul itself, which denied the goal. Running in with a yellow then placing it back to get the red card perhaps she can attribute it to more credible info from the AR but it is not a good idea to pull a card unless you are using it.

Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Simon
Interesting scenario
The early whistle here clearly was unhelpful as a goal was denied. Had the CR waited a fraction she could have awarded the goal and cautioned the defender.
Now the big question here is Did anything change with the whistle being sounded and play being stopped? A lot can happen in those seconds which include defenders stop moving, positions change etc. Now as described I believe that DOGSO may have been correct.
Have a look at this video
http://www.uefa.com/trainingground/referees/video/videoid=746585.html?autoplay=true
Referee Terge Hague of Norway is speaking about a decision he made in the Champions League Final of 2005 between Arsenal and Barcelona.
It does not exactly fit your scenario in that there was a clear goal scoring opportunity denied in its own right yet it shows that the foul did also deny the subsequent *goal* by play having been stopped rather being allowed to continue. If the foul by the Arsenal goalkeeper Lehmann had in itself not have been a DOGSO challenge it clearly would have denied a subsequent clear opportunity and a sending off. Note how Referee Hague regrets the decision to this day and say that had he waited a second or two he could have made a better decision. Barcelona did not score from the free kick and it took them until late in the game to equalise and then go on to win.
Also the CRs early show of the yellow card was unhelpful. Imagine if Referee Hague had a yellow card pulled from his pocket as he ran in to award the free kick. That is poor mechanics. Had she waited a second or two she would have made the decision with no perceived *change of mind*