Trip
- Thread starter NickName
- Start date
Phoenix Soccer Dad
BRONZE
Looks like defender makes contact - I have a PK. I can see the case for a yellow.
Impossible to know what led up to this play ... strange positioning for the ref (unless this is a dual).
Impossible to know what led up to this play ... strange positioning for the ref (unless this is a dual).
I should have said: high school dual refs
Tea and Busquets
SILVER
Play on for me. The kid got his shot off/mis-controlled the ball. While I'd call the trip anywhere else on the field, not enough for a penalty given that the ball was so far gone. Yes, I would nearly always pull that back anywhere else on the field, and yes, I have a different standard for fouls in the box. That's the game.
outside!
DA
Which is one of the reasons that forwards learn to hit the dirt when they are touched in the box. The ball was long gone. A late hit is a late hit and thug defenders should be punished. Let the defender apologize to his team for the stupid foul in the box. For the record, I have a defender and a forward playing.
baldref
GOLD
in some cases i'd tend to agree to a certain extent. but this isn't a little coming together. it looks (from the distant camera shot), like it's a mugging. not a maybe foul, but a clear and obvious one. that's a foul pretty much in any league, except MLS.....
That's exactly the backward way to think about PKs. The PA is drawn there to enhance punishment for fouls close to the goal, not to excuse them.
Tea and Busquets
SILVER
I broadly agree, but following the strict letter of the Law means the punishment for "little" fouls is overly disproportionate to the offense itself. Were referees to call every "foul" in a game, each (olders) game would have at least 5 penalties, not to mention the countless free kicks. The game would be chaos. Instead soccer could be a no-contact sport. As it is, referees have to decide what is and what isn't a foul. Maybe it's the award of a penalty kick that is the problem. Maybe it's time to re-evaluate the size of the penalty area and/or the punishment for a foul inside it.
One proposal which has been raised to IFAB is DFKs in the box except for DOGSO and other egregious carded fouls.
Reevaluating the size of the PA or the location of the spot itself raises the problem of having to redesign countless football pitches around the world, including many poor countries that can't afford to do it.
The other proposal that's been raised (which would also deal with the line review issue that's popped up on penalties) is let the GK move on the PK...it would reduce the conversion percentage but not by much.
Tea and Busquets
SILVER
Fair. For me it looks more clumsy than a mugging. Is it a trip? Yes. But crucially, the ball isn't within playing distance, which means (again, for me) a penalty is too harsh a punishment. Maybe a warning to the defender is warranted.
Interestingly, look at the Ings non-penalty against Liverpool this past weekend and the Deulofeu penalty that was given by VAR against Chelsea (which PGMOL subsequently said should not have been given) for trips that would seem to have a much bigger impact on a player being able to score a goal.
Tea and Busquets
SILVER
The problem with giving free kicks in the box is there is an optimal distance from which to shoot over the wall and still get it down to get it on target. Would likely have more impact in older games than in younger, though.
As far as the cost for re-lining the pitch, it's usually paint on grass. I don't see many poor countries using turf pitches where the lines are permanent, especially in poorer countries.
Won't happen anyway.
outside!
DA
He clumsily tripped the offensive player in the box after the ball was played. If I was the goalkeeper, I would yell at him whether or not a PK was awarded. It doesn't matter if the offensive player could have played the ball. It was dangerous play. Making a tackle in the box is risky for defenders.
Tea and Busquets
SILVER
Oh, stupid, absolutely. As you can see from responses here, easily could be given as a penalty. As a teammate or coach, you'd have every right to yell at him - as a player I'd be furious with a teammate who made a challenge like that int he box. I'm just giving my own perspective as a referee.
On your second point, was it dangerous? It's definitely a trip, but is that play more dangerous than any other challenge made at high speed? Is the attacker really endangered? How about if the defender arrives a split second earlier and wins the ball but the attacker still goes flying? Is that challenge still dangerous? For me, this tackle does not present a danger to the attacker. Clumsy and a tiny bit late, but there was an attempt to play the ball. We often see clips here where that attempt to play the ball is not there. Those I would count as "thuggery" or "a mugging" and something that should definitely be eliminated from games.
This is where we get into the weeds a bit as we need to start parsing the action itself. Because defining what is and what isn't a foul is difficult, and a multitude of factors must be taken into account. It really becomes a matter of opinion (but also positioning. angle of view, and of experience/education). I've already given my opinion: the ball isn't within playing distance, it's not "hard" enough to be misconduct, and because this occurs in the penalty area, I'm not giving a penalty. Not saying others are wrong to award a penalty here, just not for me.