Question about PK's

[DrJo]

Okay, so USA v. Ghana -- For those of you who saw it Onyewu supposedly knocked some guy over in the box and a PK was awarded, however he was not issue a card of any sort. Can you do that? My dad & I were wondering if there's a PK does the player who committed the foul automatically get a card???

[Wreave]

Okay, so USA v. Ghana -- For those of you who saw it Onyewu supposedly knocked some guy over in the box and a PK was awarded, however he was not issue a card of any sort. Can you do that? My dad & I were wondering if there's a PK does the player who committed the foul automatically get a card???

No. No automatic card for a foul resulting in a PK. In fact, more often than not, a foul resulting in a PK is not carded.

[JoseP]

This from the Laws of the game:
A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off and shown the red
card if he commits any of the following seven offences:
1. is guilty of serious foul play
2. is guilty of violent conduct
3. spits at an opponent or any other person
4. denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity
by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a
goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
5. denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving
towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick
or a penalty kick
6. uses offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
7. receives a second caution in the same match

By number 5, it would seem an automatic red. But, the refs are definitely inconsistent on this. I thought marquez for Mexico should have'nt gotten a red yesterday, per #4.

Maybe, the ref realized he made a terrible call and just decided not to compound the problem by throwing a red.

[envisionz]

it was not an obvious scoring opportunity

[JoseP]

it was not an obvious scoring opportunity

What do you call it when a player is about to get the ball right in the penalty box in front of the goal? I call it an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

[Ref Flunkie]

What do you call it when a player is about to get the ball right in the penalty box in front of the goal? I call it an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

Umm no, not an obvious goal scoring opportunity. Just becase a player is in the area does not make it obvious. COULD it be a goal scoring opportunity? Sure. But it had not developed into one as of yet (shoot, he didn't even have possession of the ball at the time of the foul, it was coming to him).

[DrJo]

I still think the PK was ridiculous. But thanks for the clarification.

[JoseP]

Umm no, not an obvious goal scoring opportunity. Just becase a player is in the area does not make it obvious. COULD it be a goal scoring opportunity? Sure. But it had not developed into one as of yet (shoot, he didn't even have possession of the ball at the time of the foul, it was coming to him).

Not that I agree it was a foul, but assuming it was a foul, of course it was not developed because the fouler denied him the opportunity.

Regardless, what do you think of the non-red in the Marquez case? The ball was directly to the head of the Portugal players in front of the goal and he put his hand out to deny him the shot.

[Wreave]

Not that I agree it was a foul, but assuming it was a foul, of course it was not developed because the fouler denied him the opportunity.

From a referee perspective, for a foul, even one that leads to a PK, to rise to the level of a red for Denying an Obvious Goal Scoring Opportunity, certain requirements have to be met. Losing an opportunity for a 50/50 header doesn't qualify. Even if you believe the foul call was correct (which I don't, and expect there will be a near-total consensus on this), a red for DOGSO is not called for.

[jkritchey]

Not that I agree it was a foul, but assuming it was a foul, of course it was not developed because the fouler denied him the opportunity.

Regardless, what do you think of the non-red in the Marquez case? The ball was directly to the head of the Portugal players in front of the goal and he put his hand out to deny him the shot.
I'm also waiting for some type of clarification on the Marquez hand ball. I think that got botched somehow.

[Craig P]

Regardless, what do you think of the non-red in the Marquez case? The ball was directly to the head of the Portugal players in front of the goal and he put his hand out to deny him the shot.
All I know about officiating, I know from this and the referee forum, so take it for what it's worth, but...

...specifically for this case, I didn't think it was obvious that the ball that Marquez poked was going right onto the head of an unmarked player (which made the action all the more puzzling), although that opinion is a day or so old and I didn't review the play that carefully. Generally, I wonder, if that had been the case, if it would count as an official OGSO, since the criteria generally seem to revolve around possession of the ball or a player running onto the ball, or handling a ball that's heading into the goal.

[DadOf6]

What do you call it when a player is about to get the ball right in the penalty box in front of the goal? I call it an obvious goal scoring opportunity.

The criteria for OGSO if the foul is for any foul which would result in a DFK (except handling) are called the 4Ds.

1. Distance from the goal
A breakaway at the mid is not as likely to be an OGSO as one 25 yards out.
2. Distance from the ball
The ball must be withing playing distance. This disqualifies your scenario of a player *about* to receive the ball in the area.
3. Defenders
If there are any defenders (other than the one making the fouls and the 'keeper) in a position where he could cover the attacker or play a shot then it is not an OGSO.
4. Direction
The attacker must be headed directly to goal. That means between the crossbars. If the direction is at all oblique to the goal it is not an OGSO. A player with his back to the goal will *never* have an OGSO.

If it is for handling the only criteria is if the ball is headed into the net.