Not a referee, just a curious fan. Alberto posted this story on another thread: "... The other team had a breakaway and the player was brought down by one of our players at the top of the PA. As he was brought down he managed to get a shot off. A clear case of showing patience and swallowing your whistle for a second. The referee unfortunately blew his whistle. The shot was in the net for a goal. He compunded the mistake by not sending off our defender much less caution him. Thanks again. The kid missed the penalty kick. After the game I spoke to the youth referee and asked him why he blew his whistle and why he didn't allow advantage. I mentioned that in a U12 rec league game it may not matter, but in another year or two it would be a serious issue, particularly at a club level and he needs to think about advantage, as well the resultant of calling the penalty. He should have sent off one of our players for denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity. He thanked me for the advice. " This leads to my question: If the referee did it differently, plays advantage and the goal is scored, why is it proper to send the defender off for denying the goal scoring opportunity? The reason I ask is because the guy did score, so it seems as if nothing was denied. Thanks for any insight
ATR for USSF referees Generally done as part of law 18 and if the play has not entered a 2nd phase of play. Eg a deliberate hand ball by the defender smacks the ball away but it deflects off the post and in for a goal. You apply advantage the ball continues into the goal the effect of the denying the goal was never realized. 12.39 APPLYING THE ADVANTAGE Even if the referee makes use of the advantage clause during an obvious goalscoring opportunity, he can still punish the offender after the fact. If a goal is scored directly despite the attempted intervention by a defender handling the ball, fouling an opponent, or committing misconduct, the offender cannot be sent off for denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity, but he can still be cautioned for unsporting behavior or sent off for serious foul play if the foul involved excessive force. Imagine a shot on goal , defender does the same deliberately handles the ball but it rebounds out to another attacker who shoots and keeper saves it but drops the ball and in the scramble it goes in. This was a new attempt and as such the first offence is still punished by the send off . Harsh ? Perhaps so but many address it with a caution and in terms of the match no one is too excited.
Scrub, you're right. Alberto was saying that since the referee did stop play for the foul (his first error) and disallowed the goal, he then had no choice but to also send off the defender. Alberto was saying that the referee committed a second error by not ejecting the defender, having not been patient enough to apply advantage.