New DOGSO - Bundesliga

Discussion in 'Referee' started by MassachusettsRef, Oct 21, 2016.

  1. fairplayforlife

    fairplayforlife Member+

    Mar 23, 2011
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I voted that we keep the classroom recerts in my state but was denied. People are just too busy to make it to a classroom for that long of a time. Ridiculous.

    Same people then come up to me to say the online stuff is too hard and they can't pass. Wow what a shocker, too bad you don't have someone there to help you.
     
  2. akindc

    akindc Member+

    Jun 22, 2006
    Washington, DC
    Saying as the best, most highly trained refs in the world seem to having trouble with some of the new guidance, I don't see how a classroom is any better than online.
    But then I've always hated the in class recerts, so I may be a bit biased.
     
  3. fairplayforlife

    fairplayforlife Member+

    Mar 23, 2011
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    When these people can't tell me that the restart is a goal kick if a ball is kicked directly into the opponents goal from an IFK I don't have much sympathy.
     
  4. PlayTheWhistle

    Jul 6, 2015
    Club:
    San Jose Earthquakes
    Here in Norcal a Grade 7 recert requires both an online test and attendance at a referee seminar (of which there is at least one per month)
     
  5. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I guess this is the crux of the problem. If this wasn't the type of foul to be excused the Law change, then what was (other than goalkeeper fouls)?

    Yes, you have the Mascherano-type fouls where players disguise the cynical nature of their intentions by cutting across the opponent. But you also have situations where attackers deliberately slow-up to ensure they are clattered into from behind. How on earth are we supposed to distinguish between those two situations? Both are fouls, but the latter is "careless" in the true sense of the word. Are they both still reds, per the new text? Or do we have to parse the difference and read intent?

    If all holds, pulls and pushes are still reds and all fouls from behind where there was no attempt to play the ball are still reds and all tackles that had no legitimate chance to play the ball are still reds, then we're left with what, exactly? We're essentially left with slide tackles from behind that had a chance to play the ball and were an attempt to play the ball, but just were mistimed? That's it, other than goalkeepers. And how often does that actually happen when a defender is chasing an attacker in an OGSO situation?

    I get your argument and the argument of others on this thread. And I totally understand that, per the text of the new Laws, this red is actually defensible. But I think we're kidding ourselves if we don't think this is in a grey area as the application of this new Law evolves. The Law change was a big one and it was made for a reason. A narrow interpretation that limits the effects of this change is not what I had in mind, I don't think it's what the IFAB/FIFA had in mind, and I'm certain it's not what fans had in mind.
     
    cmonref and socal lurker repped this.
  6. Bubba Atlanta

    Bubba Atlanta Member+

    Mar 2, 2012
    Yep, Atlanta
    Club:
    Atlanta United FC
    And maybe that's the answer?
     
  7. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    But it was never advertised that way. We've been talking about the "triple punishment" for a decade and how it was unfair and causing too many players to be sent off. This change came about because the penalty kick restores the OGSO.

    Plus, if it was about goalkeepers only, you could write that change pretty easily with an "except goalkeepers in their own penalty area" provision, which was already used elsewhere in the Laws.
     
  8. Thezzaruz

    Thezzaruz Member+

    Jun 20, 2011
    Club:
    Arsenal FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Sweden
    When a defender is chasing? Rarely, but there are quite a few DOGSO situations that aren't about defenders chasing after a ball that's well out of their reach. And for those situations, which most ones concerning keepers would fall in, there will be a lot less red cards.


    Yea and that's why the IFAB caved and made a change. But I don't think it was a change that the IFAB really liked to make and that's why they made it the way they did. The could easily have just exempted DOGSO in the PA (and emphasised that such an exemption wouldn't excuse SFP/VC) and been done with it. But as they didn't it is clear that there are some fouls/situations that they still want to be red cards.


    I think it's exactly what the IFAB had in mind (per above) and the only reason that it is seen as a grey area is because people had a preconceived notion (hope is perhaps a better word) about what the change would be and are now trying, and failing, to fit that notion with the new wording. The new wording isn't unclear, it just doesn't produce the results that you thought it would.

    I might have less issues with this because I like the distinction of the new wording and I don't see it as a narrow one at all. Challenges where the defender/keeper does his job and tries to play/block the ball but fails are exempt while those that goes for the player aren't.
     
    cmonref and Bubba Atlanta repped this.
  9. Errol V

    Errol V Member+

    Mar 30, 2011
    Maybe there wasn't any intent to excuse fouls on a regular basis, but only a small offering to the cries for a way out of the triple punishment, something we all know as "Play the ball"!
     
  10. RedStar91

    RedStar91 Member+

    Sep 7, 2011
    Club:
    FK Crvena Zvezda Beograd
    To be fair this whole change really gathered steam when the Arsenal goal keeper got sent off a couple of years ago against Bayern Munich like 15 minutes into the game.

    The English press and others started complaining about how excessive the punishment was and how the game "was ruined."
     

Share This Page