repetitive navigational links
L-Soft  -  Home of  the  LISTSERV  mailing list  manager LISTSERV(R) 14.3
Skip repetitive navigational links
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (April 2003, week 3)Back to main SOCREF-L pageJoin or leave SOCREF-LReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional fontLog in
Date:         Thu, 17 Apr 2003 11:40:34 -0400
Reply-To:     Steve G <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Discussion of Topics for Soccer Referees <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Steve G <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Conferring with AR for show

On Wed, 16 Apr 2003 18:56:19 -0700, The Geissmans <[log in to unmask]> wrote: <snip> >Now for the substance of this. ;-) There are two goal-related send-off >offenses >that come from to handling -- denying a goal (the ball is going into the >goal and >nobody would have been able to stop it legally), and denying an obvious goal- >scoring opportunity, which means something like knocking down a pass headed >to a player who is wide open and standing in front of the goal. Because this >was a shot, the first rule would seem to apply. One would think that a >shot from >20 yards is rarely an obvious goal, unless the goal keeper not in >position. Was >that the case? Certainly this is USB because of the poor sportsmanship that >deliberate handling demonstrates, but it is only a send-off if you can be >pretty >sure that a goal would actually have resulted without it, and the scenario as >presented didn't seem to make that clear. What I didn't make clear, Jim, because it wasn't pertinent to what I was posting, was that this shot would have gone in had the player not handled it. The attacker was badly out of position and began charging from a position behind the keeper. The keeper had already been beaten on the play and the defender had two legal choices: 1) head the ball out (which he probably decided in an instant not to do since the shot was coming with great force and speed) or 2) allow it to go into the goal. He chose the illegal choice, put his hand up in the path of the ball, and knocked down the shot. The justifiable result was that not only did his team end up losing a goal in any case since the PK scored, but they played down a man for the rest of the match and lost by 3 (they were ahead 1-0 at the time of the offence).

Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SOCREF-L page

LISTSERV.URI.EDU CataList email list search Powered by LISTSERV email list manager