odd USL goal

Discussion in 'Referee' started by GlennAA11, Oct 1, 2020.

  1. GlennAA11

    GlennAA11 Member+

    Jun 12, 2001
    Arlington, VA
  2. SA14mars

    SA14mars Member+

    Jan 3, 2005
    Dallas
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Nope, ball is put into play cleanly. Attacker simply took advantage of being in the right place at the right time.
     
  3. fischietto

    fischietto Member

    Apr 13, 2018
    I saw this clip earlier today.

    for me, this is “too bad so sad”. Nothing wrong with this for me, ESPECIALLY at the professional level. Perhaps I would support a referee in a youth or low level match calling this ...

    The attacker is probably two yards away and makes no movement toward the goalkeeper. Once the ball is released he makes a fair play. In my opinion the goalkeeper already put the ball in play and this is fair game. This is a case of bad decision making and the referee should not be bailing out GK’s in these situations.
     
    Law5 repped this.
  4. fairplayforlife

    fairplayforlife Member+

    Mar 23, 2011
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I’ve said this in other forums but I think this one is going to be split pretty evenly on opinion maybe a smidge more leaning to awarding the goal.

    Traditionally the instruction in the US seems to indicate this is illegal as the player actively intercepts the process of the distribution.

    I know there’s been some clear examples in Europe where similar plays were allowed without even a thought.

    For me this one is right on the line of being legal. I could defend both opinions.
     
  5. SA14mars

    SA14mars Member+

    Jan 3, 2005
    Dallas
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    My conclusion is that the gk put the ball into play there with the knowledge an opponent was within a short distance. If the GK had made any attempt to avoid him but the attacker made a deliberate action to follow, then we call the goal back. This is a careless error by the gk and nothing more. Referee should not bail him out.
     
    sam_gordon repped this.
  6. Pierre Head

    Pierre Head Member+

    Dec 24, 2005
    See NASL Soccer Bowl 1977, video online somewhere I imagine.

    PH
     
  7. sam_gordon

    sam_gordon Member

    Feb 27, 2017
    So if you call a foul and the fouled team decides to take a quick kick, and it goes straight to an opponent 2 feet away (ok, he had to stick his leg out), you'd have them kick again?
     
  8. fairplayforlife

    fairplayforlife Member+

    Mar 23, 2011
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    No, but the crucial detail is the kick out.

    Like I said I’m willing to defend either decision but the opponent watched the keeper like a hawk and stops right in his path.

    Is it stupid of the keeper to try and distribute the ball right where an opponent is, absolutely.

    Do I feel like this isn’t exactly what the opponent was angling for also absolutely.

    There’s just something that feels “off” about this play. I’d be willing to accept the explanation that because the opponent is outside the area when contact is made that pretty much anything goes because at that point there is no scenario where the keeper could maintain possession.

    But if we change this to a punt and the guy jumps in front of the ball as it’s about to be kicked I’m betting people take issue with it. For context the slide that ussf used to use to teach this is below.

    3518A289-7BF9-4EEE-951B-E1F26FED5089.png
     
  9. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    Whether a FK or GK release, to my mind the key is when the opponent makes the move. If the kick out is before the FK is struck or the GK releases, it is probably interference. If the action is after the FK/release/punt, it is not.

    On this play, I thought the timing was quite close. Without the benefit of replay, I would probably call that in a youth game; I think the no-call is the expected call at high levels.
     
  10. Sport Billy

    Sport Billy Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 25, 2006
    I've always hated this provision - it should be rarely enforced these days.
    Back when we had 6 seconds or 4 seconds, the ability of a goalkeeper to move was an issue. That is no longer a concern. If a player is there, the goalkeeper can move elsewhere.

    The only time this provision should be enforced is when someone tries to shadow the keeper. Yes, if you move with him, you are preventing a release.

    But here, it isn't even close. The PA is 44 yards wide. The keeper can go anywhere in that width he wants. The opponent is standing still. The keeper runs up and tries to throw a ball within a yard of that opponent.

    The opponent simply moves a leg while maintaining his position.

    This should never be called. It is not at all within the letter or intent of that law.
     
    Mi3ke and sam_gordon repped this.
  11. LampLighter

    LampLighter Member

    Bugeaters FC
    Apr 13, 2019
    That's a goal.
     
    davidjd repped this.
  12. Kit

    Kit Member+

    Aug 30, 1999
    Herkimer, NY, USA
    Club:
    Everton FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think you mean back when the goalkeeper is required to release the ball within 4 steps. Right now the rule is 6 seconds.

    Interestingly, when I started doing high school games, the rule was the goalkeeper had to release the ball within 6 seconds AND could only take 4 steps!
     
  13. Sport Billy

    Sport Billy Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 25, 2006
    Yes steps
     
  14. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    Just a historical aside: the four step rule always also had a time element. But before 6 seconds it was based on the R’s judgment of what was reasonable, and unreasonable delays were subject to a caution.
     

Share This Page