- Soccer Referee Resources
- Home
- Ask a Question
- Articles
- Recent Questions
- Search
- You-Call-It
- Previous You-Call-It's
-
VAR (Video Assistant Referee)
- Q&A Quick Search
- The Field of Play
- The Ball
- The Players
- The Players Equipment
- The Referee
- The Other Match Officials
- The Duration of the Match
- The Start and Restart of Play
- The Ball In and Out of Play
- Determining the Outcome of a Match
- Offside
- Fouls and Misconduct
- Free Kicks
- Penalty kick
- Throw In
- Goal Kick
- Corner Kick
- Common Sense
- Kicks - Penalty Mark
- The Technical Area
- The Fourth Official
- Pre-Game
- Fitness
- Mechanics
- Attitude and Control
- League Specific
- High School
- Common Acronyms
- Meet The Ref
- Advertise
- Contact AskTheRef
- Help Wanted
- About AskTheRef
- Soccer Rules Changes 1580-2000
- Panel Login
|
Question Number: 32336Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 3/26/2018RE: Competitive Under 14 Eugene of San Jose, CA USA asks...In the situation described, why do you feel that the goalkeeper must be cautioned? If, in the opinion of the referee, the challenge didn't interfere with the shot taken, then there's no DOGSO, is there? If this was a careless foul, shouldn't a PK without a card issued suffice? Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson HI Eugene, I assume you are talking about the keeper contacting the attacker after the shot in his PA? ? You are correct. Absolutely, no card is an option. If you reread my answer I imply it as an option in the first and no card at all in the second. I will point out as a careless foul that awards a free kick in the PA is not the norm as they are often tactical in nature but your point is well taken that the option for no card is present. If anything on misses where the ball goes out of play and then contact occurs it almost seems the MISCONDUCT is ignored completely as the punishment for the miss itself. I would have carded several LATE Tackles where the attacker misses his shot and then is recklessly taken out. I mean if the ball is already gone, the sheer lateness of the contact screams card as much as the force used! It should not matter if the ball stayed in play or went out of play. A cheap shot is a cheap shot. Cheers
Read other questions answered by Referee Richard Dawson
View Referee Richard Dawson profileAnswer provided by Referee Joe McHugh Hi Eugene The situation was described as a possible denying of an obvious goal scoring opportunity so the compulsory DOGSO red card gets downgraded to a yellow card caution with the penalty award. Once the referee pulls play back to the penalty kick then if the conditions existed for a DOGSO at the time of the foul then the chance does not negate that so there has to be a card. Now the amended laws tells us that a caution is required when a players commits a foul which interferes with or stops a promising attack except where the referee awards a penalty kick for an offence which was an attempt to play the ball. So if there is no DOGSO then there is no caution once there is a genuine attempt to play the ball with a penalty kick awarded.
Read other questions answered by Referee Joe McHugh
View Referee Joe McHugh profile- Ask a Follow Up Question to Q# 32336
Read other Q & A regarding Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct
-
|
- Soccer Referee Extras
-
<>
This web site and the answers to these questions are not sanctioned by or affiliated with any governing body of soccer. The free opinions expressed on this site should not be considered official interpretations of the Laws of the Game and are merely opinions of AskTheRef and our panel members. If you need an official ruling you should contact your state or local representative through your club or league. On AskTheRef your questions are answered by a panel of licensed referees. See Meet The Ref for details about our panel members. While there is no charge for asking the questions, donation to maintain the site are welcomed! <>
|