Does that have any relevance whatsoever? No. If referees were perfect every game at every level we wouldn't have much use for this forum now would we? I see VC on both throws. aek's thoughts about the ability of her teammate to play the ball are more than enough evidence to support this on both throws.
I guess i just can't believe a player would be stupid enough to do what she did and i was looking for an out. Are players really that dumb?
That's usually ended with "as a woman scorned," but in a game situation, I supposed "as a woman scored upon" fits better.
I'd guess because the referee was shocked that such an uncommon scenario has occurred right in front of him, and, out of fear of being overly controversial, decided that it was a complete accident and took no action. Honestly, I would have had the same disbelief, and made the same assumption, but I certainly would have said to the player, "Please be careful!" upon seeing that she is throwing the ball again. That's not hindsight being 20/20; it just makes sense to say it even if it were an accident (to me, anyway). The second, harder throw leaves very little to no wiggle room for the referee. Now there is no doubt, and a red card will hardly be a controversial decision.
Just for argument's sake. If you decide to go VC on the first or second throw? How would you restart??
I'm not buying ANYTHING...the more I see the video, the more I'm convinced I'm going red on the first one much the less the second. These are COLLEGE level players.....what college level player winds up and delivers a head high line drive bullet throw in if their intended target is their lone teammate 3 yards away? Its a soft toss to the feet at that distance, especially in a womens game. Nor am I buying the "she's playing it off the opponent" bs....that scenario usually happens when the opponents back is turned and the throw is directed below the shoulders in the small of the back, not head high. I guaranteee you there is/was something more going on between these two.
FWIW, college gives the referee an option of going yellow on a an intentional throw of the ball at an opponent. THere is gray area there that is not there in FIFA/USSF. I might be giving him too much credit, but perhaps the ref in this play knew that, so the caution could have been appropriate. Obviously though both he and the AR mismanaged this from the get go. If they have no problem with that kind of throw, let it go both times. If you kind of have a problem with it, they needed to intervene after the first one. If she does it twice and walks with a caution, it is only the refs that look foolish.
I agree, in principle, but have you actually done D3 women? I don't mean to disrespect any college player, but I've seen a lot of D3 women's games where they couldn't beat a upper-middling high school team. It may be true that they just don't have the skills to actually throw the ball to a teammate. But, as I wrote before, you still have to go red on this, if only because of what everyone is going to assume.
Why do you think that is different from LOTG? Per the LOTG, it is nothing unless it qualifies as a striking foul by way of being careless (foul), reckless (yellow), or excessive force (red).
Sure. I've always understood it as a difference. In LOTG if a player throws the ball at an opponent w the intent of hitting him, and he hits him in the head, he is going. College expressly says the referee "may" give a caution or a send off. I'd never thought about it in terms of reckless vs. excessive force, but I guess you might be right. Maybe its less of a difference than I thought.
No, just D1 and D2. Nonetheless, I HAVE seen some D3 rosters and I've been left shaking my head....LOL! That being said, I can't imagine an 18-19 year old female soccer player doesn't know how to take a throw in.
It's a common misunderstanding on striking. Most of the time when I use the word striking people liken that to a send off offense without remembering it falls into the DFK offenses that have to be careless, reckless or excessive force. Think about how striking an opponent with your elbow on an aerial challenge could be a foul, foul+CT or foul+SO (or nothing at all, of course). The main difference is that -- like with many things -- the NCAA is more detailed in the explanation.
I've seen community college teams with players who have clearly never played soccer before in their lives. Some D3 players may know how to technically take a throw in but don't have the hand-eye coordination to actually throw the ball to the vicinity of a teammate. [But apparently one school has someone with the coordination to hit an opponent in the head twice in succession!] At least at some schools, this is a 'no cut' sport. I did one team this year that had 31 players on the roster. One goalkeeper and three line changes of field players. Seriously. In one game, I look over, with 20 minutes left, and I have 10 players waiting to sub in.