A bit confused

NickName

SILVER ELITE
When I saw this foul live, I could have sworn it was going one way. Took a turn for me and was curious what the refs et al believe beyond another vodka.


Hopefully came out well. Honestly havent looked at it until now
 
I don't see a foul. Looks to be a great tackle. It looks like the trail referee (out of shot) called the foul, and you can see the viewing angle of the referee on that side. You can assume the other referee has a straight-on view. Both are less than ideal. You have 40-50 yards between the play and either referee. This was a bang-bang play. With video, we can see the goalkeeper played the ball first. Referees on the field don't have this luxury. With all this, you can understand why a decision might be given - either way.

I'm guessing this was called a foul on the attacker, otherwise you wouldn't be so surprised. I hope you don't feel "cheated" out of a PK. It shouldn't have been a penalty, and there's no difference between "no foul" and a foul on the attacker. I imagine if the same call was given for your team, every one would be chuckling to themselves how they got away with one and no video would ever make it onto YouTube.

My hope is that people (parents) realize that the viewing angles are so bad in the 2 referee system that "bad" calls will happen. Even acknowledging this would lead to people just getting on with things. You will get some for you and some against, but on the balance of things, everything will come out just about even.
 
My hope is that people (parents) realize that the viewing angles are so bad in the 2 referee system that "bad" calls will happen. Even acknowledging this would lead to people just getting on with things. You will get some for you and some against, but on the balance of things, everything will come out just about even.
Don’t get me wrong, I post quite a few clips because:
A. I’m genuinely curious why a call was or was not given
B. Some clips look to be educational for the layman like me

I dont try to call out a ref. There are some very good ones and occasionally some not so good. Typically the ones that fall into the “not so good” category are 2 man crews in high school. I assume some of the non/calls happen due to the positioning during the games.

In the case of this clip, the call went against the keeper (our team) by the trailing ref. The far side ref who it looked to have a better (but agreed not great) view of the play said nothing.

To follow up on the “balance” observation, I totally agree. Earlier in the game there was a non call on what I thought should have been a PK against us.

I do have a bit of a different perspective on the games than the “normal parent.” While filming, I have to somewhat disassociate myself from the game, but after the games during the production piece, I can watch for things that might have been missed. Quite a few times I’ve found myself agreeing with a call during production when I disagreed live.
 
The joys of duals ... the lead referee is pinned to the far touchline, trying to stay wide enough to judge offside. Anything critical in the corner closest to the camera is going to be tough. He does take a few steps towards the play as he realizes a challenge is coming. The trail referee probably figured they had a better angle and was trying to help. If they're standing where I think they are it's a clear view down field although it's a long ways away.

So, yes, if this was called a PK it's a miss (notice the direction of the ball ... generally an indicator of a clean win before contact) but I can see why it was given. Maybe the ref thought the GK tripped him.
 
But this brings up a good point about referring: you should never guess or assume a foul. The opposite is true - better to miss one or two calls because of bad/difficult positioning than to guess that a given play was a result of a foul. You can't call it if you didn't see it - the fact that someone fell doesn't mean they were fouled.
 
But this brings up a good point about referring: you should never guess or assume a foul. The opposite is true - better to miss one or two calls because of bad/difficult positioning than to guess that a given play was a result of a foul. You can't call it if you didn't see it - the fact that someone fell doesn't mean they were fouled.
never say never, but i tend to agree with this. don't look to make calls. Look for reasons not to make calls unless you have to, and certainly don't guess with your whistle. this is a horrible error in my opinion.
 
I guess it depends a little on how you feel about a kid getting kicked in the head. As long as you dont mind, the "let them get hurt" school makes sense.

To me, I mind. Throwing your head in the way of a running player puts both you and him at risk. Reasonable call.
 
I guess it depends a little on how you feel about a kid getting kicked in the head. As long as you dont mind, the "let them get hurt" school makes sense.

To me, I mind. Throwing your head in the way of a running player puts both you and him at risk. Reasonable call.
Reasonable for a penalty kick? Really?
 
I guess it depends a little on how you feel about a kid getting kicked in the head. As long as you dont mind, the "let them get hurt" school makes sense.

To me, I mind. Throwing your head in the way of a running player puts both you and him at risk. Reasonable call.

Would you propose that keepers shouldn't be allowed to go to the ground in 1v1 situations? I didn't see anything wrong in the keepers technique that put him in any unnecessary peril. There is always risk in diving in front of an attacker, but that's part of the game if your a keeper.
 
Would you propose that keepers shouldn't be allowed to go to the ground in 1v1 situations? I didn't see anything wrong in the keepers technique that put him in any unnecessary peril. There is always risk in diving in front of an attacker, but that's part of the game if your a keeper.
Depends a lot on how close the keeper is to the attacker. There is some wiggle room between ”never go to ground” and “launch your head at his kicking foot”.

I tend to be more on the side of protect the keeper. if the attacker is close enough to kick your head, then going to ground head first isn’t safe.
 
Depends a lot on how close the keeper is to the attacker. There is some wiggle room between ”never go to ground” and “launch your head at his kicking foot”.

I tend to be more on the side of protect the keeper. if the attacker is close enough to kick your head, then going to ground head first isn’t safe.
tennis might be a better option.
 
I guess it depends a little on how you feel about a kid getting kicked in the head. As long as you dont mind, the "let them get hurt" school makes sense.

To me, I mind. Throwing your head in the way of a running player puts both you and him at risk. Reasonable call.

There's a lot of nuances between keeper to keeper and trainer to trainer but keepers are basically taught 3 basic techniques in these situation to choose from. The smother which is what you see in the video. It's high risk for the keeper, lower risk for the attacker, but very effective particularly if the keeper is able to get his hands to hold the ball.

There's the defend with feet method which results in a body block (the K or star) if the shot is taken but a leg sweep usually if the contact is this close. This is higher risk for the striker (since he might get his legs cut out from under him), but less for the keeper (though the keeper could easily end up carded if it's not done perfectly and results in a lose ball usually...De Gea actually just got beat on the last Manchester Game doing this).

Then there's the hold and stalk method. It's the old way of doing it but you don't really see so much of it these days because it's just not very effective...if the keeper is holding it's very easy to chip them or toe pick around them (depending on whether their stance is high or low)....if the keeper is stalking the striker is usually a better dribbler and can get around the GK easily. It doesn't involve going to ground and the technique focuses on trying to hold the striker until your defender can get back to either help you out or take your place in goal. You don't see this much in the premier league....Arriza just did it recently but he's always getting beat on the 1 v 1 and it's one of the reasons they call him the worst goalkeeper in the EPL. But some trainers out there still teach it, citing safety as a concern....but if the striker is skilled, it's basically leaving an open goal except for the pole sticking down the middle which any kid playing attack at U12 or above even in the bronze divisions should be able to hit.
 
another option if you don't like including Goalkeepers is to play small-goal soccer, or some new hybrid game on smaller goals. If you're going to have a game that involves GKs they probably need to be allowed to play the ball. Even in traffic, even if someone is running really fast in their direction.

It's sometimes a scary role, and requires quick decision-making about what they can/cannot do within the rules of the game.
 
Depends a lot on how close the keeper is to the attacker. There is some wiggle room between ”never go to ground” and “launch your head at his kicking foot”.

I tend to be more on the side of protect the keeper. if the attacker is close enough to kick your head, then going to ground head first isn’t safe.
I made a post on this on the Keeper Forum a while ago, but the whole notion of "protect the keeper" has no bearing on reality. The phrase was birthed in rec leagues where keepers don't know what they are doing and it is repeated by higher skilled leagues just as an excuse to pretend to be pissed off at the other team and the referee. (But it has been repeated so often that the original "pretend" has turned into actual anger now in many players) In reality and if anything... it should be protect the attacker, because any keeper that uses proper form only risks at most a bruise to themselves in most cases. The attacker on the other hand.... can potentially break a leg if they don't pull out of a 50/50 with a keeper.

And proper form does not include putting your head in the kicking legs path. Your head will be nearby, but not in danger of being kicked unless the attacker deliberately tries to kick your head instead of the ball.
 
Back
Top