Another crazy call in Arlington yesterday some of you refs try and explain please

The goal keeper played a great game and had many saves the game was very one sided and she was getting a lot of work. No one was hurt and I think she just got a little fustrated the kick wasnt that bad and I didnt even see the kick it happend fast but the ref saw it and made the call and issued the yellow quickly. The game at this point was 1-0 but the shots where like 30 to 1. I dont think the ref wanted to give a pk but wanted to issue a yellow to help keep the game under control plus his calls had been very onesided during the game so I think he was trying to show that he was calling both sides the calls where probable 12-2 against the fowards team and the only reason it was close was because of the refs calls but more because the keeper made so many good saves and the other team made bad shots. Like I said it was a crazy call and wanted to now what the rules are regarding when the keeper has the ball in her hands

DoubleDDRedux wrote:

twotone wrote:if a GK catches a ball in hands during the run of play, then the ball is still in play. the GK can continue play with punt, throw, or drop ball at feet to dribble inside or outside of penalty area. ball is still in play.

to the OP, the Gk possessed the ball in her hands and committed a foul against an opponent. intentionally kicking an opponent in that situation is Violent Conduct. Procedure is to whistle the foul to stop play and send off the GK. Restart is a penalty kick for the fouled team because the foul occurred in the penalty area (it had to otherwise the GK was handling the ball outside of the penalty area, opening a whole new can of worms). it should be written up as Violent Conduct in the report because there was no possibility to play the ball in that situation. (F couldn't play it cuz it was in GKs hands. GK couldn't play it from F cuz it was being possessed by GK).

wouldn't violent play by goalie in this situation be an indirect kick in the box after keeper sent off? I think so.

No, ball is in play. foul occurred in the box. it's a penalty kick for the restart. it would be an indirect kick if the it was a dead ball, but the ball was live. just because the keeper has it in her hands doesn't make the ball dead.

GGoat wrote:The goal keeper played a great game and had many saves the game was very one sided and she was getting a lot of work. No one was hurt and I think she just got a little fustrated the kick wasnt that bad and I didnt even see the kick it happend fast but the ref saw it and made the call and issued the yellow quickly. The game at this point was 1-0 but the shots where like 30 to 1. I dont think the ref wanted to give a pk but wanted to issue a yellow to help keep the game under control plus his calls had been very onesided during the game so I think he was trying to show that he was calling both sides the calls where probable 12-2 against the fowards team and the only reason it was close was because of the refs calls but more because the keeper made so many good saves and the other team made bad shots. Like I said it was a crazy call and wanted to now what the rules are regarding when the keeper has the ball in her hands

shouldn't really matter if the ref "wanted" to call a pk or not. this offense happened in the penalty area and a player kicked an opponent. be the LOTG, that's a send off for Violent Conduct and the restart is a penalty kick. if you're going to call it ref, then you have to do it correctly.

twotone wrote:

DoubleDDRedux wrote:

twotone wrote:if a GK catches a ball in hands during the run of play, then the ball is still in play. the GK can continue play with punt, throw, or drop ball at feet to dribble inside or outside of penalty area. ball is still in play.

to the OP, the Gk possessed the ball in her hands and committed a foul against an opponent. intentionally kicking an opponent in that situation is Violent Conduct. Procedure is to whistle the foul to stop play and send off the GK. Restart is a penalty kick for the fouled team because the foul occurred in the penalty area (it had to otherwise the GK was handling the ball outside of the penalty area, opening a whole new can of worms). it should be written up as Violent Conduct in the report because there was no possibility to play the ball in that situation. (F couldn't play it cuz it was in GKs hands. GK couldn't play it from F cuz it was being possessed by GK).

wouldn't violent play by goalie in this situation be an indirect kick in the box after keeper sent off? I think so.

No, ball is in play. foul occurred in the box. it's a penalty kick for the restart. it would be an indirect kick if the it was a dead ball, but the ball was live. just because the keeper has it in her hands doesn't make the ball dead.

you're probably right but the odd thing is that players are no longer allowed to dislodge a ball from the keepers hands so I would think the outfield player would get the same protection. But if it's considered live for the outfielders and a keeper does in fact dangerously foul the opponent then a PK balances the goalie protection. Clear and concise!

twotone wrote:
No, ball is in play. foul occurred in the box. it's a penalty kick for the restart. it would be an indirect kick if the it was a dead ball, but the ball was live. just because the keeper has it in her hands doesn't make the ball dead.

with all due respect, this is not correct. If the misconduct occurred while the ball is out of play, the restart is the same for whatever caused the ball to be no longer in play. For example, ball rolls across touch line for a throw-in. Player A then strikes player B. Player A is sent off and the restart is still a throw-in.

You are perfect on everything not in red.

upper95 wrote:

twotone wrote:
No, ball is in play. foul occurred in the box. it's a penalty kick for the restart. it would be an indirect kick if the it was a dead ball, but the ball was live. just because the keeper has it in her hands doesn't make the ball dead.

with all due respect, this is not correct. If the misconduct occurred while the ball is out of play, the restart is the same for whatever caused the ball to be no longer in play. For example, ball rolls across touch line for a throw-in. Player A then strikes player B. Player A is sent off and the restart is still a throw-in.

You are perfect on everything not in red.

what would the call be if the goalie collects the ball then walks to an opposing player standing in the penalty area then punches the outfielder in the temple thus knocking said player out. How do you derive where they play is at and does that influence whether there is a penalty or not?

I also saw a USWNT game where a player shot and it hit Hope Solo in the face. If the attacking player had stated before the game that they were going to try to hurt her by shooting at her face would that be cause for a red card?

DoubleDDRedux wrote:what would the call be if the goalie collects the ball then walks to an opposing player standing in the penalty area then punches the outfielder in the temple thus knocking said player out. How do you derive where they play is at and does that influence whether there is a penalty or not?

Assuming the ball is still in play...

The player who was struck is standing in the penalty area, hence the restart is a penalty kick.

If the player was outside of the area, a direct kick for the opponents outside the area.

In both cases GK still gets a red card.


If the ball was NOT in play... for example, the ball rolled over the goal line for a goal kick. Keeper picks up the ball then walks over and strikes an opponent. The keeper is sent off and the restart is still a goal kick.

DoubleDDRedux wrote:I also saw a USWNT game where a player shot and it hit Hope Solo in the face. If the attacking player had stated before the game that they were going to try to hurt her by shooting at her face would that be cause for a red card?

No.

upper95 wrote:

DoubleDDRedux wrote:what would the call be if the goalie collects the ball then walks to an opposing player standing in the penalty area then punches the outfielder in the temple thus knocking said player out. How do you derive where they play is at and does that influence whether there is a penalty or not?

Assuming the ball is still in play...

The player who was struck is standing in the penalty area, hence the restart is a penalty kick.

If the player was outside of the area, a direct kick for the opponents outside the area.

In both cases GK still gets a red card.


If the ball was NOT in play... for example, the ball rolled over the goal line for a goal kick. Keeper picks up the ball then walks over and strikes an opponent. The keeper is sent off and the restart is still a goal kick.

I still think the difference is whether the ref deemed it unsporting behavior (yellow) or a violent act (red). Apparently he determined it to be the first-perhaps a "kick at" or a "more force that necessary" determination that didn't really do damage.

DoubleDDRedux wrote:I know that ref. he has a lot to say about the feedback after the game

I'd be interested in hearing about it. from an assessor, assignor, or fellow referee?

dadof3 wrote:

upper95 wrote:

DoubleDDRedux wrote:what would the call be if the goalie collects the ball then walks to an opposing player standing in the penalty area then punches the outfielder in the temple thus knocking said player out. How do you derive where they play is at and does that influence whether there is a penalty or not?

Assuming the ball is still in play...

The player who was struck is standing in the penalty area, hence the restart is a penalty kick.

If the player was outside of the area, a direct kick for the opponents outside the area.

In both cases GK still gets a red card.


If the ball was NOT in play... for example, the ball rolled over the goal line for a goal kick. Keeper picks up the ball then walks over and strikes an opponent. The keeper is sent off and the restart is still a goal kick.

I still think the difference is whether the ref deemed it unsporting behavior (yellow) or a violent act (red). Apparently he determined it to be the first-perhaps a "kick at" or a "more force that necessary" determination that didn't really do damage.

yeah, not really. the ball was in the GKs hands. the forward couldn't have played the ball in any legal manner. only the GK can legally continue playing at that point. kicking the attacker is not a legal play. it's a foul, which was correctly called by the referee. in the description provided, the GK had possession of the ball and then kicked an opponent. that is Violent Conduct and the GK must be sent off.

we can acknowledge a grey area when a GK goes up to catch an air ball and "protects" himself with the high knee, a technique taught by goalkeeping coaches and widely accepted by the sport. but if the GK uses that knee or studs to initiate contact with an attacker that has conceded possession to the GK, then it can still be viewed as a send off offense. It will more likely be Serious Foul Play, but a red card nonetheless. nothing about kicking an opponent with no intention of winning the ball is a yellow card.

upper95 wrote:

DoubleDDRedux wrote:I also saw a USWNT game where a player shot and it hit Hope Solo in the face. If the attacking player had stated before the game that they were going to try to hurt her by shooting at her face would that be cause for a red card?

No.

if it were me shooting and say... It hit her hair instead of her face i think Hope would probably be pretty mad.

I believe the AR and ref believed that the ball is out of play when the keeper had it and I guess in their minds if the keeper has the ball she can kick, hit, spit do what ever and get a yellow card or a red but the ball goes back to the keeper and she gets to punt it, because that is what they did.
She picked the ball up in play committed the foul was given a yellow card then given the ball back to punt it.
But it sounds like everyone on this post believes that there should have been a PK and that play is not stopped if a keeper has the ball in her hands.

GGoat wrote:I believe the AR and ref believed that the ball is out of play when the keeper had it and I guess in their minds if the keeper has the ball she can kick, hit, spit do what ever and get a yellow card or a red but the ball goes back to the keeper and she gets to punt it, because that is what they did.
She picked the ball up in play committed the foul was given a yellow card then given the ball back to punt it.
But it sounds like everyone on this post believes that there should have been a PK and that play is not stopped if a keeper has the ball in her hands.

You are right GGoat, that is what people think, but I have seen weird things happen when the keeper is holding the ball (fight on the other end etc.) and after sorting out the mess, the ball goes back to the keeper and starts off again-just like when there is an injured player or an unruly coach. In those cases, the ref stops the play, addresses the situation, returns to the previous spot, and turns the ball over to that possession. To me, the ref saw the keepers "foul" as separate from the play...imagine that she trips the girls as she turns around to leave...there wasn't a penalty on the play, thus no PK...That seems to be the only way to explain this.**

**unless there was a delayed yellow for an infraction-play on, then go back and card offender...like an advantage on a break where the ref lets it play, then comes back to the offender at a stoppage...which still begs the question about the stoppage/non-stoppage for keeper possession.

dadof3 wrote:

GGoat wrote:I believe the AR and ref believed that the ball is out of play when the keeper had it and I guess in their minds if the keeper has the ball she can kick, hit, spit do what ever and get a yellow card or a red but the ball goes back to the keeper and she gets to punt it, because that is what they did.
She picked the ball up in play committed the foul was given a yellow card then given the ball back to punt it.
But it sounds like everyone on this post believes that there should have been a PK and that play is not stopped if a keeper has the ball in her hands.

You are right GGoat, that is what people think, but I have seen weird things happen when the keeper is holding the ball (fight on the other end etc.) and after sorting out the mess, the ball goes back to the keeper and starts off again-just like when there is an injured player or an unruly coach. In those cases, the ref stops the play, addresses the situation, returns to the previous spot, and turns the ball over to that possession. To me, the ref saw the keepers "foul" as separate from the play...imagine that she trips the girls as she turns around to leave...there wasn't a penalty on the play, thus no PK...That seems to be the only way to explain this.**

**unless there was a delayed yellow for an infraction-play on, then go back and card offender...like an advantage on a break where the ref lets it play, then comes back to the offender at a stoppage...which still begs the question about the stoppage/non-stoppage for keeper possession.

No question about it, that's not a stoppage in play. The only time there is a stoppage is when the ball has been whistled dead or when the ball crosses the touch line. No other time ever.

This sounds like a miss-application of the LOTG.

This string has made me wish for another uTube post. There are 3 sides to every story... Your side, their side, and the truth. At least when we get a uTube video we get to see the truth.

I'm sure the call was confusing but getting brief summaries from emotional parents isn't the right place to start a reasonable debate. Was the ref right or wrong? I really have no idea but right now we're only hearing one side of the story.

I know bad calls happen, that's a part of this game, but we need to stop making the referees our scapegoats for every little thing. Post a video on uTube and let's really fire this thing up but until then it's all speculation and exaggerated emotionally-charged stories.

bigtex75081 wrote:This string has made me wish for another uTube post. There are 3 sides to every story... Your side, their side, and the truth. At least when we get a uTube video we get to see the truth.

I'm sure the call was confusing but getting brief summaries from emotional parents isn't the right place to start a reasonable debate. Was the ref right or wrong? I really have no idea but right now we're only hearing one side of the story.

I know bad calls happen, that's a part of this game, but we need to stop making the referees our scapegoats for every little thing. Post a video on uTube and let's really fire this thing up but until then it's all speculation and exaggerated emotionally-charged stories.

Ding-ding-ding! We have a winner!

bigtex75081 wrote:This string has made me wish for another uTube post. There are 3 sides to every story... Your side, their side, and the truth. At least when we get a uTube video we get to see the truth.

I'm sure the call was confusing but getting brief summaries from emotional parents isn't the right place to start a reasonable debate. Was the ref right or wrong? I really have no idea but right now we're only hearing one side of the story.

I know bad calls happen, that's a part of this game, but we need to stop making the referees our scapegoats for every little thing. Post a video on uTube and let's really fire this thing up but until then it's all speculation and exaggerated emotionally-charged stories.

Yes, we all love to review those video clips...good idea.

dadof3 wrote:

GGoat wrote:I believe the AR and ref believed that the ball is out of play when the keeper had it and I guess in their minds if the keeper has the ball she can kick, hit, spit do what ever and get a yellow card or a red but the ball goes back to the keeper and she gets to punt it, because that is what they did.
She picked the ball up in play committed the foul was given a yellow card then given the ball back to punt it.
But it sounds like everyone on this post believes that there should have been a PK and that play is not stopped if a keeper has the ball in her hands.

You are right GGoat, that is what people think, but I have seen weird things happen when the keeper is holding the ball (fight on the other end etc.) and after sorting out the mess, the ball goes back to the keeper and starts off again-just like when there is an injured player or an unruly coach. In those cases, the ref stops the play, addresses the situation, returns to the previous spot, and turns the ball over to that possession. To me, the ref saw the keepers "foul" as separate from the play...imagine that she trips the girls as she turns around to leave...there wasn't a penalty on the play, thus no PK...That seems to be the only way to explain this.**

**unless there was a delayed yellow for an infraction-play on, then go back and card offender...like an advantage on a break where the ref lets it play, then comes back to the offender at a stoppage...which still begs the question about the stoppage/non-stoppage for keeper possession.

ref may have seen it like that, but those situations are different. if the OP is right, this situation the GK committed the foul herself, not 2 other players or a coach across the field. this is a misapplication and the referee should know the rule, application of it, and the proper restart.

Im not right or wrong. Im just asking a question about a crazy call that happened this weekend. I don think we need to video it and it is pretty easy to understand. The keeper picked up the ball commited a foul in the ref eyes he stopped play and issued a yellow card then gave the ball back to the keeper to punt and said the reason for that as because play had stopped when the keeper had the ball in her hands. The ball never went out of bounds and no one else but the keeper got a foul or a yellow card. I just want to ask all the refs on this post if that is what should have happened and to find out if when the keeper has the ball is play stopped and why.
It appears that most people agree that play is not stopped and it should have been a pk. So now I know thanks for the info yall.

Sorry yall I was answering DDreflux post that said he knows the ref and has lots of feedback afer the game but he deleted the post

What feedback? I dont know if it is the same game, because no one that I saw ever talked to him. The team that didnt get the Pk won anyway and no one was that upset it was just really weird. I wish he would say why he called a pentlty and issued a yellow then gave the ball back to the keeper. It may shed some light on all this. I may have missed something that could explain it better.

No matter what he called, he blew the restart, so no explanation is really possible.

Like I said earlier I think he made the right call with the yellow and not throwing the keeper out and I think he could see that the game was very one sided and the keeper was taking a lot of shots and played a great game but he wanted to warn her but didnt want to give a pk. I guess he should have just talked to the keeper without calling a penalty and giving the yellow and there wouldnt be an issue about play being stopped when the keeper has the ball and the Pk wouldnt have been an issue it would have been just another missed call. I think he saw the penalty and was quick to give the yellow but didnt want to issue a pk because I dont think any ref really wants to call that. 2 weeks ago we had a game where the foward got around the keeper and the kepper caught her from behind and with both hands pushed her out of bounds the ref and Ar where looking right at the play but didnt call anything because they were winning I think.