Italy vs France [R]

[GOOOOAL!!]

Well we already have a send off..... DOGSO and a PK.

Pretty cut and dry decision IMO. All of the elements were there. No one from France seemed to protest.

[code1390]

Yep. The only protest is in the game thread where someone said DOGSO was "FIFAs poorest rule".

Anyway, heres the video.

http://www.d1g.com/video/show/?id=2056699

[Kebbie Gazauzkas]

I think that there wasn't too much contact, it seemed like a clumsy rather than deliberate challenge and the tackle wasn't endangering the safety of the opponent, maybe a yellow could have sufficed..tough luck for the French team.

[CanadaFTW]

Is it correct to say that if you award a penalty in this spot that you must give a red card as well?

[ManiacalClown]

It's not the spot but the circumstances of the foul. It does not matter if a foul is just clumsy or totally deliberate. If it denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity, he's got to go.

[code1390]

Is it correct to say that if you award a penalty in this spot that you must give a red card as well?

Only if it meets the requirements below.

Heres what FIFA says.

Referees should consider the following circumstances when deciding
whether to send off a player for denying a goal or an obvious goalscoring
opportunity:
• The distance between the offence and the goal
• The likelihood of keeping or gaining control of the ball
• The direction of the play
• The location and number of defenders
• The offence which denies an opponent an obvious goalscoring
opportunity may be an offence that incurs a direct free kick or an
indirect free kick.Heres what USSF ATR says:



Number of Defenders -- not more than one defender between the foul and the goal, not counting the defender who committed the foul



Distance to goal -- the closer the foul is to the goal, the more likely it is an obvious goal-scoring opportunity



Distance to ball -- the attacker must have been close enough to the ball at the time of the foul to have continued playing the ball



Direction of play -- the attacker must have been moving toward the goal at the time the foul was commit

[CanadaFTW]

I meant "spot" as the circumstances. This clearly IMHO meets every criteria for a goal scoring opportunity, so the red card is required if you call the foul (you can't give a yellow for example). Right?

[code1390]

I meant "spot" as the circumstances. This clearly IMHO meets every criteria for a goal scoring opportunity, so the red card is required if you call the foul (you can't give a yellow for example). Right?

ATR says:

"Even if all the criteria are met, it is still the judgment and opinion of the referee that determines if the event was an obvious goalscoring opportunity."

[refereejoe]

I meant "spot" as the circumstances. This clearly IMHO meets every criteria for a goal scoring opportunity, so the red card is required if you call the foul (you can't give a yellow for example). Right?If the referee decides there was a goal scoring opportunity that the foul denies, no matter how "small" the foul might be, it is automatically a send-off offense. A caution cannot be awarded in this situation.

[CanadaFTW]

ATR says:

"Even if all the criteria are met, it is still the judgment and opinion of the referee that determines if the event was an obvious goalscoring opportunity."

But this was an obvious goalscoring opportunity. What I am t \rying to get at is that the referee really had no choice but to give the red card and justifying any other decision would be impossible.

[code1390]

But this was an obvious goalscoring opportunity. What I am t \rying to get at is that the referee really had no choice but to give the red card and justifying any other decision would be impossible.

I think he had no choice.

[Nesto]

Well we already have a send off..... DOGSO and a PK.

Pretty cut and dry decision IMO. All of the elements were there. No one from France seemed to protest.

Spot on...

but can I still dislike the embellishment that Italy seemingly must apply to every touch or foul?

[Ref Flunkie]

Spot on...

but can I still dislike the embellishment that Italy seemingly must apply to every touch or foul?

Yes you may....and I think you will find plenty of others that agree with you!

[Alberto]

But this was an obvious goalscoring opportunity. What I am trying to get at is that the referee really had no choice but to give the red card and justifying any other decision would be impossible.

He could have given the penalty and issued a caution and then in the post match assessment he would have been criticized and asked repeatedly why he did not send the player off. He would also receive his marching orders back to the Slovakia the following morning and see the likely end of his FIFA career. Does that answer your question?

[ManiacalClown]

He could have given the penalty and issued a caution and then in the post match assessment he would have been criticized and asked repeatedly why he did not send the player off. He would also receive his marching orders back to the Czech Republic the following morning and see the likely end of his FIFA career. Does that answer your question?

Isn't he Slovakian? Surely he wouldn't be exiled from his country, too!

[superdave]

1. It was a good call.
2. It was a game-killing call.

Really, is there anything worse than a highly anticipated match in which, early in the game, there's a PK and a sendoff? Just to be clear, I'm blaming Abidal for a very stupid play, not the referee. But man, what a game-killer.

[Alberto]

Isn't he Slovakian? Surely he wouldn't be exiled from his country, too!


Yeah he's Slovakian. So sue me. I guess Vaclav Havel would not give him honorary citizenship.

[Alberto]

1. It was a good call.
2. It was a game-killing call.

Really, is there anything worse than a highly anticipated match in which, early in the game, there's a PK and a sendoff? Just to be clear, I'm blaming Abidal for a very stupid play, not the referee. But man, what a game-killer.

Agreed it was the right call, but the match was effectively finished with the converted penalty.

[GlennAA11]

I'm not sure I necessarily agree with that. The French still created some chances after the send off. You see teams come back with 10 players all the time. Their problem was that their players just weren't up to snuff no matter if they had 10 or 11. Number 9 just kept on coughing the ball up every time he had it. Losing Riberry was a much bigger blow IMHO.

[Alberto]

I'm not sure I necessarily agree with that. The French still created some chances after the send off. You see teams come back with 10 players all the time. Their problem was that their players just weren't up to snuff no matter if they had 10 or 11. Number 9 just kept on coughing the ball up every time he had it. Losing Riberry was a much bigger blow IMHO.


Riberry was gone before the penalty if my memory is correct. That is why I stated that the game was over.