Parents and thier Sidelines

BTW my dd came back and made the tying goal in the last five minutes to go. We went on to win the division. So in the end the call made my dd determined to score.

InaB wrote:Thanks for the insight Ref. I will read up on the rules. I have one question for you on a call in a Houston tournament. My dd was inside the goal box behind her mark. The mark suddenly pushed back hard as the ball was passed and knocked hard into my dd (deliberately it seemed ) and then turned slightly. She then jumped back as if she had been struck and fell yelling to the ground. The Ref called a foul on my dd for impeading the player. The other team was awarded a pk which they made. I had never heard of this before. So what made the Ref call this?

I'm trying to visualize the situation. I need a bit more information if you don't mind. Also, I need to add the caveat that without being there, it is VERY hard to tell.   

So, I'm inferring that your girl was defending an attack by the other team who was in your attacking third and had possession of the ball.

Your daughter was marking another player, but was behind her rather than in front of her? Was the ball within "playing distance" of the other player when this occurred?

This should give you a better understanding of what impeding is bolded for emphasis:

12.B.2 Impeding the Progress of an Opponent
Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving on the field so as to obstruct, interfere with, or block the path of an opponent. Impeding can include crossing directly in front of the opponent or running between the opponent and the ball so as to form an obstacle with the aim of forcing the opponent to stop, swerve, or slow down. There will be many occasions during a game when a player will be between an opponent and the ball, but in the majority of such instances, this is quite natural and fair. It is often possible for a player not playing the ball to be in the path of an opponent and still not be guilty of impeding.The offense of impeding an opponent requires that the ball not be within playing distance. Physical contact between the player and the opponent is normally absent. If physical contact occurs and the contact is considered careless, reckless or involving excessive dribble, the referee should consider instead that a charging foul has been committed (see 12.A.4). Nonviolent physical contact may occur while impeding the progress of an opponent if, in the opinion of the referee, this contact was an unavoidable consequence of the opponent's momentum.

12.B.3 The Concept of Playing Distance
The referee's judgment of playing distance should be based on the player's ability to play the ball, not upon any arbitrary standard such as a specific number of feet or steps a player is away from the ball. The decision as to whether a player is or is not within playing distance of the ball belongs solely to the referee.

It sounds like your daughter was behind the player making the run. If the ball was passed in front of her, she was running onto it, and was within playing distance, why would she stop and back into your daughter?  If it was the same positioning and the ball was passed BEHIND both of them and she stopped, smashed into your daughter who was behind her in order to retrieve the ball, I don't see the call. Please correct me about the positioning if I am getting it incorrect.

Either way, the correct restart for an impeding call is an indirect free kick. If it was a charging incident called on your daughter, then it would have been direct free kick or a pk (if inside the 18).

InaB wrote:BTW my dd came back and made the tying goal in the last five minutes to go. We went on to win the division. So in the end the call made my dd determined to score.

That's a great example of not shutting down and making up for something that you may or may not have done wrong, but motivates you nonetheless!

 

InaB wrote:Thanks for the insight Ref. I will read up on the rules. I have one question for you on a call in a Houston tournament. My dd was inside the goal box behind her mark. The mark suddenly pushed back hard as the ball was passed and knocked hard into my dd (deliberately it seemed ) and then turned slightly. She then jumped back as if she had been struck and fell yelling to the ground. The Ref called a foul on my dd for impeading the player. The other team was awarded a pk which they made. I had never heard of this before. So what made the Ref call this?

That's a foul.  Falls under unsporting behavior, it's called simulation. It's a yellow card.

Hi ref, my dd was less than a foot behind the other player. The ball was passed forward toward the mark. My dd started to move when the mark seemingly backed into her. I don't know for sure if she was trying to position for the ball. My dd wound up with a face bruise from the contact and almost went down herself.

I couldn't see everything from the ref's vantage point. But the mark was fully able to get to the ball as she was between my dd and the ball.

InaB wrote:Hi ref, my dd was less than a foot behind the other player. The ball was passed forward toward the mark. My dd started to move when the mark seemingly backed into her. I don't know for sure if she was trying to position for the ball. My dd wound up with a face bruise from the contact and almost went down herself.

I couldn't see everything from the ref's vantage point. But the mark was fully able to get to the ball as she was between my dd and the ball.

I have no clue. I don't see at all how your daughter could have impeded the player from behind her. I don't know what the ref saw, but it doesn't sound like a call to me at all. Sounds like a bad call from what you are describing.

At least she put the hammer down in the end!

upper95 wrote:

boilerjoe_96 wrote:I am still amazed that visiting teams show up with White uniforms on... so the home team has to change... sigh...lots of clueless people in this world....

Seems the same set of tournament rules has been borrowed over and over.  "Home team shall wear white or lighter color and visiting team will wear dark or darker color.  In case of conflict home team shall change."   
Tournament directors need to delete the contradicting statement.

Yes visiting teams will game the system and show up in white so the home team has to change, just to mess with them, or to have the advantage by wearing white in 100 degree weather.

that rule isn't contradicting. in fact, it's very clear. home team wears light/white; visiting team wears dark.

to me, if the visiting team shows up in white then they have to change to their darker shirts cuz they broke the rule. any TD that doesn't dribble that is breaking his/her own rule. Now, if the dark shirt for the visiting team happens to be a light blue, then we have a problem. but a common sense TD or referee will have the visiting team wear pennies because they've created the conflict, especially if the home team is wearing white.

We all understand the theory behind this rule right? it's based on the professional game where the home team is at home. the visiting team could have been traveling from 500 miles away (or however far). Well, the home team obviously has better access to an alternate uniform rather than the visitors, who can't just drive 500 miles back home and get their alternate uniforms. So the home team 'politely' accommodates the visitors. it's pretty simple. if you have guests and they forget a pen to sign a piece of paper, are you going to make them go find a pen of pull the one out of your pocket and let them use it.

Coach&Ref wrote:

InaB wrote:Hi ref, my dd was less than a foot behind the other player. The ball was passed forward toward the mark. My dd started to move when the mark seemingly backed into her. I don't know for sure if she was trying to position for the ball. My dd wound up with a face bruise from the contact and almost went down herself.

I couldn't see everything from the ref's vantage point. But the mark was fully able to get to the ball as she was between my dd and the ball.

I have no clue. I don't see at all how your daughter could have impeded the player from behind her. I don't know what the ref saw, but it doesn't sound like a call to me at all. Sounds like a bad call from what you are describing.

At least she put the hammer down in the end!

Coach/Ref, there's no way you can answer this. too few details and you're hearing it from a biased POV. you don't know what the ref saw or what actually happened. better to just leave it as "i don't have all the details" than to try and confirm a biased POV from an angle that the ref didn't. Whatever happened, this ref could've completely nailed the decision correctly and you're confirming an incorrect opinion on what happened because somebody gave you their side of things. No reason to represent an opinion on this incident. there's no Law to confirm on "my daughter's mark ran into her and fell down in the box but it got my kid going to the point where she scored the winning goal later on." Please. there were countless other moments in the game that led to the outcome, not just a single one.

twotone wrote:

Coach&Ref wrote:

InaB wrote:Hi ref, my dd was less than a foot behind the other player. The ball was passed forward toward the mark. My dd started to move when the mark seemingly backed into her. I don't know for sure if she was trying to position for the ball. My dd wound up with a face bruise from the contact and almost went down herself.

I couldn't see everything from the ref's vantage point. But the mark was fully able to get to the ball as she was between my dd and the ball.

I have no clue. I don't see at all how your daughter could have impeded the player from behind her. I don't know what the ref saw, but it doesn't sound like a call to me at all. Sounds like a bad call from what you are describing.

At least she put the hammer down in the end!

Coach/Ref, there's no way you can answer this. too few details and you're hearing it from a biased POV. you don't know what the ref saw or what actually happened. better to just leave it as "i don't have all the details" than to try and confirm a biased POV from an angle that the ref didn't. Whatever happened, this ref could've completely nailed the decision correctly and you're confirming an incorrect opinion on what happened because somebody gave you their side of things. No reason to represent an opinion on this incident. there's no Law to confirm on "my daughter's mark ran into her and fell down in the box but it got my kid going to the point where she scored the winning goal later on." Please. there were countless other moments in the game that led to the outcome, not just a single one.

You are absolutely correct. That's why I put that caveat in the beginning of my answer!

Regardless of her POV, if the call was for impeding, the correct restart is an INDIRECT FREE KICK, not a PK.

As far as answering questions about situations about correct or incorrect calls made by referees, please check out:

http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/


It has very good questions and answers to a wide variety of questions from higher grade refs that have more experience than myself.

Hi two, I was not trying to plead a case, just trying to understand the call. Even the line ref on the opposite side of the field went to the Ref on the field after the call and spent two minutes talking to him before walking off. And you are right that it was my dd and my view. I want to understand strange calls that I haven't run into before. And you are right that there were many minutes in the game. Have a great day and stay cool.

Apparently Kernow Storm doesn't read the boards and didn't get the message.

Thanks for the website coach, I will definitely check it. :-)

InaB wrote:Thanks for the insight Ref. I will read up on the rules. I have one question for you on a call in a Houston tournament. My dd was inside the goal box behind her mark. The mark suddenly pushed back hard as the ball was passed and knocked hard into my dd (deliberately it seemed ) and then turned slightly. She then jumped back as if she had been struck and fell yelling to the ground. The Ref called a foul on my dd for impeading the player. The other team was awarded a pk which they made. I had never heard of this before. So what made the Ref call this?

your explanation of how things happened is what made the ref make the call. now the ref could have been duped by the "fouled" player, but he called what he thought he saw.

ONLYASOCCERDAD wrote:

InaB wrote:Thanks for the insight Ref. I will read up on the rules. I have one question for you on a call in a Houston tournament. My dd was inside the goal box behind her mark. The mark suddenly pushed back hard as the ball was passed and knocked hard into my dd (deliberately it seemed ) and then turned slightly. She then jumped back as if she had been struck and fell yelling to the ground. The Ref called a foul on my dd for impeading the player. The other team was awarded a pk which they made. I had never heard of this before. So what made the Ref call this?

your explanation of how things happened is what made the ref make the call. now the ref could have been duped by the "fouled" player, but he called what he thought he saw.

That's is why the phrase, "In the opinion of the referee" is littered throughout the LOTG. And, as we all know, opinions are likes a$$holes. everybody has one!

 

yeah.... So, "referee discretion" was removed from the LOTG 2 years ago. Like in another thread, a quick Google search find "in the opinion of the referee" listed in FIVE places.

-2 involved offside
-1 involved stopping the game for an injured player
-1 involved celebrating a goal (which is a dead ball)
-1 involved feinting of a penalty kick (another dead ball)

the term "discretion" is listed 6 times, none dealing with active play:
-1 abandoning the match for any circumstance
-1 taking action against bench personnel (other thread)
-1 changing a decision before restarting play
-1 adding time at the end of a half or game
-1 minimum number of players a Federation allows to play
-1 restarting play

Once again, i'm unimpressed with your grasp of the LOTG or rules of other governing bodies. If you're going to be defining things for people on this board, at least make an effort to get it correct.

twotone wrote:yeah.... So, "referee discretion" was removed from the LOTG 2 years ago. Like in another thread, a quick Google search find "in the opinion of the referee" listed in FIVE places.

-2 involved offside
-1 involved stopping the game for an injured player
-1 involved celebrating a goal (which is a dead ball)
-1 involved feinting of a penalty kick (another dead ball)

the term "discretion" is listed 6 times, none dealing with active play:
-1 abandoning the match for any circumstance
-1 taking action against bench personnel (other thread)
-1 changing a decision before restarting play
-1 adding time at the end of a half or game
-1 minimum number of players a Federation allows to play
-1 restarting play

Once again, i'm unimpressed with your grasp of the LOTG or rules of other governing bodies. If you're going to be defining things for people on this board, at least make an effort to get it correct.

I don't know what you have against me personally, but I have offered you another site to ask, "real referees", since you don't believe I am one, to specific questions on your views.

I guess you don't read what other refs have posted on this board as well, agreeing with what I have said, so I guess it is just me you are harboring something against.

Since Google is your best friend to interpret the LOTG, then I suggest you download and read the LOTG, ADVICE to Referees, take a class, then ref hundreds of games. After you have, then come back to me and attack me for offering my OPINION of what one person asks as to why a ref might have made a certain call.

Just call the foul!

SocDad --"Most GKeeper parents go to each end of the field that thier kid is playing and watch/critique.....and most are aware of the fact that 1/2 the game there in Hositle territory."

Yes!!! I have gone into hostile territory to critique and take pictures of my Keeper. It makes things interesting sometimes.

What some parents don't realize is that there are valuable lessons to be learned in defeat. Let your kid experience defeat AND  the sweetness of victory. Making mistakes is how you learn not being joysticked by your parents or in some cases the coach...

I agree Stay on your side!

Never understood why so many keeperdads feel the need to micro-manage their daughters so much. Stay on your side! I can't imagine it helps her with him looking over her shoulder like that.

 

dreadpirateroberts wrote:Never understood why so many keeperdads feel the need to micro-manage their daughters so much.  Stay on your side! I can't imagine it helps her with him looking over her shoulder like that.

Some Keeper Moms do it too. Here is why. The Coach has to watch all players. I have to watch 1 and I know that player well enough to know when she has her head up her butt and I will call her out for it. The Coach will too but I take over when she is busy. I think of it more as loudly encouraging reminders rather than "joysticking". :-)

AKeepersMomma wrote:

dreadpirateroberts wrote:Never understood why so many keeperdads feel the need to micro-manage their daughters so much.  Stay on your side! I can't imagine it helps her with him looking over her shoulder like that.

Some Keeper Moms do it too. Here is why. The Coach has to watch all players. I have to watch 1 and I know that player well enough to know when she has her head up her butt and I will call her out for it.  The Coach will too but I take over when she is busy.  I think of it more as loudly encouraging reminders rather than "joysticking".  :-)  

Yeah, but if you're big enough, fat enough, and loud enough, you can sit on the midfield line and still call her out for having her head up her butt...  

(...not that I've ever done that, just sayin' that it's possible...  )

 bwgophers HAA HAAA Now you are talkin!  

Had two games last weekend where the parents from the other team were hanging out all along the field. Stay on your team's side!