Question Number: 30140

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 2/23/2016

RE: Intermediate Under 13

Phil of Tarzana, CA United States asks...

This question is a follow up to question 30134

This got me thinking. Suppose an attacker & defender are a few yards from & right in front of the goal...no other players involved. Attacker goes to head the ball & the defender comes in studs first & comes within a few inches of attacker's head. Attacker backs off to protect himself, so there's no contact.

Can you dismiss the defender for DOGSO? The restart would still be an IFK, however, unless you determine that the defender attempted to strike the attacker, right?

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Phil
No reason why not once the referee opines that the offence denied an obvious goal scoring opportunity. The Laws state that the offence that denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity can be a technical offence punished by an IDFK restart with the exception of goalkeeper handling offences INSIDE the penalty area which are a free kick ONLY.
I might say a PIADM DOGSO is a rare offence as it is highly subjective with many variables. I would need to be 110% certain before doing so.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Phil,
the LOTG state in the 5th bullet point under sending off offences
Quote
'denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity to an opponent moving
towards the player's goal by an offence punishable by a FREE KICK or a
penalty kick:
end Quote

I put the words' free kick' in capitals although a PK can only be an upgraded to a DFK offence Free Kicks do not distinguish between INDFK or DFKs as offences. A PIADM offence is punishable by a INDFK it could occur where that action resulted in a denial of a goal scoring opportunity thus a showing of the red card and a send off reducing the team by a player is 100% completely plausable!

Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Phil,
DOGSO can apply to any free kick offence. That includes indirect free kicks, so yes, you can dismiss for DOGSO for PIADM.

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 30141