Copa America: Argentina-Mexico, Goal or dangerous play?

[midmogooner]

First post ever here (a grade 8 newbie). Watch the following clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGtxQZY9Jr8

I have no horse in this race, I just saw the goal on the Fox Soccer Channel News. My question: Would my view that Heinze in scoring that is really close to a dangerous play be right?

[Rufusabc]

At this level, no. The 'keeper does raise his hand looking for some sort of call, but it's clear the attacker is onside when the kick is made, so maybe he is suggesting that PIADM call. I think you may make a case for PIADM at a lesser level, but I would be hard pressed to make that call.

And, WElcome to the board.

R

[DWickham]

Did Heinze's action affect the goalkeeper's effort to play the ball? It believe not. A key requirement for the foul of playing in a dangerous manner is that there be an effect on the opponent: that it caused the opponent to cease active active play for the ball or to be unfairly disadvantaged by not participating in the danger. The keeper never changed his stride.

In addition, what constitutes dangerous play requires the referee to consider the experience and the skill level of the players. At the highest level in the world, much should be allowed to happen that would never be appropriate in a BU12 match. These players, like Mexico's keeper, accept the danger, and play through.

[Alberto]

First post ever here (a grade 8 newbie). Watch the following clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGtxQZY9Jr8

I have no horse in this race, I just saw the goal on the Fox Soccer Channel News. My question: Would my view that Heinze in scoring that is really close to a dangerous play be right?

Not even close. Heinze kicks the ball well ahead of the Mexican Keeper and more important the keeper does not flinch or in any way stop from making an attempt to play the ball. Thin ploy on the keepers part (gamesmanship) to try and sell a non-call.

[refmike]

Welcome aboard.

To judge this play, you have to be at the correct angle.
The first camera shot showed a high kick (at face level) near an opponent and that should be of some concern. The replay, from a different angle, showed the foot behind one opponent and to the side of the other. The attacker threaded the needle very well here and endangered no one.

Now to move this into the fields where you will work, be aware that the comments above about the reaction of the opponents may not apply to children, who may not be aware enough or fast enough to avoid what is really a dangerous play. Err on the side of safety and protect the players. As you (and they) gain more skills, you may not need to call this as often.

[NHRef]

At this level: never.

As pointed out they where a couple of feet apart, the keeper was never in any danger.

You bar for PIADM goes up as the age/skill goes up. You'd be hard pressed to call this goal back on any level that the players have the skill and ability to pull off that play.

[DWickham]

Welcome aboard.

Now to move this into the fields where you will work, be aware that the comments above about the reaction of the opponents may not apply to children, who may not be aware enough or fast enough to avoid what is really a dangerous play. Err on the side of safety and protect the players. As you (and they) gain more skills, you may not need to call this as often.

I agree that play in a dangerous manner should be and is called much more often for U-littles (it may be the most common foul under age 10). I also agree that the referee should err on the side of safety.

But, this doesn't mean that the referee should ignore the reaction of the opponent at any levels. There is no foul called "high kick" or "playing on the ground" and sometimes we serve the game by letting play continue when the players can safely play.

When there is no effect on an opponent, there is no foul. If two u-little teammates might hurt each other because one is on the ground and one is trying to kick the ball, the referee can protect the child by stopping play. But, restart with a dropped ball. There has been no foul.

YMMV.
Dennis

[jkc313]

In order for there to be PIADM 3 things have to occur, 1. The action must be somehow dangerous even if it's to the player performing the action, 2. An opponent has to be nearby, and 3. an opponent has to be somehow disadvantaged. The keeper was clearly looking for an offside call. No way he was at all influenced by the kick or disadvantaged. There;s no rule against a "high kick". Pefectly legal play and a good goal.