Could This Be Correct?

[JohnR]

Saw the following this past weekend -

Player has the ball in the opposition's box. Defender (not final defender) is beaten, grabs his jersey, yanks hard. CR either doesn't see or doesn't want to see. AR raises the flag. CR walks over, confers. CR is not acting very decisive. Eventually ... indirect kick, at the spot of the infraction.

My first thought was, the CR doesn't want to award a PK for "only" a shirt tug so this is his out. But could there be a more legitimate reason?

[gosellit]

First of all, what information was given to the CR by the AR? Any chance of impeding by either defender?

[brhsoccer14]

Well we would probably have to know more about the situation. He can't just decide to give an IFK for holding a shirt. It is a penal foul and since it is in the PA, he must give a PK if he calls the foul. Now, if the AR saw something different depending on the situation, he could be correct in only giving an IFK.

What game was this in? What was the quality of the referees? What was the score? What else was going on in that particular scenario?

[JohnR]

Any chance of impeding by either defender?

No.

[JohnR]

Well we would probably have to know more about the situation. He can't just decide to give an IFK for holding a shirt. It is a penal foul and since it is in the PA, he must give a PK if he calls the foul. Now, if the AR saw something different depending on the situation, he could be correct in only giving an IFK.

Gotcha. Then my first thought was correct, this was a made-up call because the CR didn't like the idea of a PK for a shirt tug.

What game was this in? What was the quality of the referees? What was the score? What else was going on in that particular scenario?

The score was 2-0, in a U12 boys competitive game, a Memorial Day tournament. Refs were pretty decent all things considered, but of course quality was variable. This guy wasn't one of the better ones overall.

Nothing else going on in this scenario; the atmosphere wasn't especially heated and it was a meaningless game, except that the team that was winning was worried about goal differential so that it could advance from bracket play.

[whitehound]

Saw the following this past weekend -

Player has the ball in the opposition's box. Defender (not final defender) is beaten, grabs his jersey, yanks hard. CR either doesn't see or doesn't want to see. AR raises the flag. CR walks over, confers. CR is not acting very decisive. Eventually ... indirect kick, at the spot of the infraction.

My first thought was, the CR doesn't want to award a PK for "only" a shirt tug so this is his out. But could there be a more legitimate reason?
...............otherwise legal tackle not in the vicinity of the ball......................impeding.........dangerous play....................."I cant believe my AR just waved his flag for that BS>>Oh well Ill just give a IFK!

[HoldenMan]

lol, I think WH has hit the nail on the head there!!!!

[brhsoccer14]

OK, so they probably had a new referee on the line that was probably fairly new to the game and called a foul for something he knew was a foul. But in the center's mind this was trivial and shouldn't be called. The center doesn't want to make his AR look like a fool either so he makes up a call or finds an out to make both of them look like they are doing good. The center probably should stress before the game, "If there is something you are going to call in the box, make sure it is a damn good foul!"

Otherwise whitehound did hit it on the nail.

This has happened to me and is one of the reason's why I make sure before I go out there to tell my AR's hey, it better be a good foul.
I am sure it has happened to many of us, no?

[ref47]

i really try to support my ar's' calls. will not waive down anything except an offside call, which was popped too early, clearly going to the defense. in a situation like this, stop play. confer. and make the right call. by conferring and not just waiving the ar down, it adds creditability to the call.

[JohnR]

Are you arguing that a shirt tug should never be a PK?

Let me repeat the situation: The dribbler had the ball, was about 10 yards from goal, open shot, the defender reached from behind and yanked him via the jersey, hard. The ball slipped away from the dribbler as he was hauled backwards and he yelped. AR immediately raised flag. CR looked over, hesitated, then blew whistle.

If this was not a PK, then a shirt tug cannot be a PK because this was as aggressive and effective a shirt tug as is possible. It directly prevented a shot.

[Wa-Soc-Ref]

Are you arguing that a shirt tug should never be a PK?

Let me repeat the situation: The dribbler had the ball, was about 10 yards from goal, open shot, the defender reached from behind and yanked him via the jersey, hard. The ball slipped away from the dribbler as he was hauled backwards and he yelped. AR immediately raised flag. CR looked over, hesitated, then blew whistle.

If this was not a PK, then a shirt tug cannot be a PK because this was as aggressive and effective a shirt tug as is possible. It directly prevented a shot.Your last post seems to clear it up for me (just at face value), up to then I was of the WH opinion. How many previous calls had the AR assisted on up to this point in the match? What was the temperature of the match? Could it be that the AR didn't stand up and sell his call to the CR? Is it possible the CR thought the forward lost the ball before the shirt tug? Inquiring minds.

[MassachusettsRef]

To answer your question as directly as possible John, the CR got it wrong if the situation is as you described. With that said, it could have happened for a number of reasons. Anything ranging from the CR just being incompetent (it happens) to something like the CR not trusting the AR.

Some strangely incorrect calls occur in lower-level games where referees might be just starting out. I wouldn't waste too much energy trying to figure out exactly what happened. You were there, you know he got it wrong. Without knowing the personalities involved, finding out "why?" seems both impossible and pointless.

[Wa-Soc-Ref]

Well said, play-on.

[JohnR]

Thanks, guys.

I could be wrong, but in other sports I think controversies come down to either a foul or no foul (say, pass interference in football, charging vs. blocking in basketball), not "yeah there's a foul but it's a different type of foul than you first thought."

And yeah, the coach was livid! If he gets the PK, he's up 3-0 in a tournament where goal differential is capped at 3 goals. Instead, he's up by 2-0 ... and 10 minutes later the CR gives the opposition a soft PK (I think the player dove, in truth), the game ends 2-1, and his team does not advance out of the bracket due to goal differential.

Not my team; I was with the guys who did advance. So I didn't completely mind this particular turn of events. However, I couldn't blame the coach for being annoyed.

[brhsoccer14]

Are you arguing that a shirt tug should never be a PK?

Let me repeat the situation: The dribbler had the ball, was about 10 yards from goal, open shot, the defender reached from behind and yanked him via the jersey, hard. The ball slipped away from the dribbler as he was hauled backwards and he yelped. AR immediately raised flag. CR looked over, hesitated, then blew whistle.

If this was not a PK, then a shirt tug cannot be a PK because this was as aggressive and effective a shirt tug as is possible. It directly prevented a shot.

Well the way you explain here, of course it is a PK. I thought it was a slight tug that has been going on all game and was of the sort you let go if the referee thinks he has a better chance at goal. At first, I didn't know he lost the ball due to the tug. So yea, the CR is wrong while the AR was right. How they came up with IFK is anyone's guess.

[gosellit]

Austin Gomez would call this CR a "KFC" ref..........chicken in the box.

[brhsoccer14]

:rolleyes:
I guess that would be a correct thing to call him.

[whitehound]

Just remember that the USSF says the AR should call fouls that are not in the view of the referee while the LOTG says that he should call fouls that he sees better then the referee. If the reff saw it and it was in the penalty area............I would hope the AR would stay out of it.

[Wreave]

As an AR, I've made those calls in the box when I shouldn't have, though this particular case sounds like the CR just didn't want to give the PK.

A few games ago, the last defender (before the keeper) slide tackled the ball away from a breakaway attacker, taking out the attacker in the process. I was too quick to the flag - 1, the tackle was probably OK, maybe a little dangerous for a U12 game, but not flagrantly so, 2, the CR was right there and saw the play and saw everything I saw, 3, not until after the CR blew the whistle for my flag did I notice the event was just inside the top of the PA. :eek:

After a quick conversation we settled on an IFK from the top of the PA for dangerous play, the ball went out for a goal kick, everything worked out OK. But I learned an important lesson on not being so quick to the flag!

[gosellit]

You settled on a IDFK for "dangerous play"???
What information did you give the CR that convinced him to make that decision. The CR from what you said saw NO foul on the play and only stooped play because of your flag.