England v. Holland U21

Discussion in 'Referee' started by Rufusabc, Jun 21, 2007.

  1. Rufusabc

    Rufusabc Member+

    May 27, 2004
    As you may be aware, England went out to Holland on penalties 13-12 yesterday. There was a bit of controversy as the 11th shooter for England walked to the ball. He was a player who had already participated in the taking of the penalties, and the Dutch coach ran onto the pitch to protest to the CR, who was blissfully unaware of a problem. England's 11th shooter had been hurt in the overtime but had remained on the pitch gamely. Fortunately, for our referee, he was able to right himself and identify the proper shooter before allowing the kick. The injured player made his penalty!

    I have 3 questions....

    1. If the referee had allowed the improper shooter, what would have been the consequences if Holland had lost?

    2. If the injured English player had been unable to continue in, say, the 119th
    minute, and he left the FOP, does the reduce to equate come into play, or is that just on dismissals?

    3. What would have happened if England had told the referee the 11th player was unable to continue after the final whistle?


    R
     
  2. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think I know the answers, but welcome corrections if needed
    This is the least obvious, because it doesn't deal with the laws. But my understanding is that, since the match is technically completed, it cannot be abandoned or terminated. Therefore, the competition authority would order the penalties replayed. Or, if they felt it was done through malice on England's part, I'm sure they'd be within their rights to award the game to Holland. But under no circumstances would the entire match be replayed.

    Reduce to equate applies to send offs and injuries that occur before full-time.

    This is also a bit tricky. If it is after the final whistle and before penalties commence, I believe you still reduce to equate (this is where I welcome a correction or documentation). If it's after penalties begin, then England goes with a 10-player rotation and Holland goes with 11 players.

    Which leads me to ask, why didn't the England player just insist he couldn't take a penalty if he had a legitimate injury? Was there any debate from the English about this?
     
  3. Englishref

    Englishref Member

    Jul 25, 2004
    London, England
    Just to clarify, England played nearly the whole of extra time with 10 men because Onouha got injured and couldn't continue, and we'd used all our subs. Steven Taylor was also injured but Stuart Pierce didn't want us playing with 9 men, so Taylor bravely carried on despite not really being able to run.

    When it came to the penalty shoot out, Taylor was our 10th and final penalty taker. However, it seems he declared himself unfit to take one, and on consulting with the AR in the centre circle, started to head of the pitch, as if told by the AR to therefore leave the FOP if he couldn't take one. The Dutch coach saw this, threw a wobbly, stormed on to confront Kircher, who then reversed the ARs decision and forced Taylor to take his penalty, which he scored anyway.

    Another shambolic episode featuring guest stars the England U21s and Knut Kircher, and I guess they'll both be glad to see the back of each other after this week!!!
     
  4. Shackleton

    Shackleton New Member

    Sep 13, 2005
    N. Texas
    This seems like a slippery slope to me. If a player can simply insist that he is unable to take a penalty because of injury and thereby be excused, doesn't this open up the PK shootout to gamesmanship and abuse? Why not have your worst PK taker claim injury? Obviously, Taylor had a legitimate injury, but it was not so bad that he couldn't continue. If he was healthy enough to continue playing in extra time, then it seems to me he's healthy enough to take a PK and shouldn't be excused from the rotation.
     
  5. Rufusabc

    Rufusabc Member+

    May 27, 2004
    I agree with that last post about the slippery slope...there could certainly be a devious coach or two over here in a youth tournament that would conjur up a twisted ankle right after the final whistle...

    I would hate to be put in that position, making that decision...

    Thanks to our friend the English ref for the correct details on the game, and the 10th shooter (as opposed to the 11th!)

    R
     
  6. SIR-T

    SIR-T New Member

    Feb 22, 2006
    If we want to talk about sportmanship maybe the referee could of had a word with Hollands goal keeper who stepped out about 3 yards before every england player took a PK.
     
  7. Englishref

    Englishref Member

    Jul 25, 2004
    London, England
    Yeah, it was an interesting take on the PK law by Kircher and his AR.
     
  8. onfirst

    onfirst Member

    Jun 7, 2002
    I have a question about "reduce to equate." If a team has gone down to 10 or less men for whatever reason during play, then the opposing team is allowed to pull one player of their choice off the pitch prior to penalties? Is this player red carded by the ref to get him out of the game, or is he just allowed to walk off the field, and if red carded is he eligible to play in the next game?
     
  9. falcon.7

    falcon.7 New Member

    Feb 19, 2007
    Unless the player has done something to warrant a send-off, this would be a gross misinterpretation of the rules. The captain of the team which must reduce simply chooses a player who does not participate in the kicks. He still must stay in the center circle with the other players. His status beyond that game is not impacted.
     
  10. IASocFan

    IASocFan Moderator
    Staff Member

    Aug 13, 2000
    IOWA
    Club:
    Sporting Kansas City
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No need to talk about sportsmanship! Just have a re-kick until he stays on the line or the kicker scores!

    Or he could just mention the possibility.
     

Share This Page