Okay. I'm surprised I haven't seen it mentioned here, but here goes: What the dilly-yo with all the PKs in Copa America? There has been a PK called in virtually EVERY Copa America game! Is this just some freakish coincidence? Are South American refs more prone to call penalties? There's really a lot of thoughts swirling in my head on the topic. (Frankly, it has taken some of the pleasure out of watching the games). Any refs who've watched a majority of the games in Copa America care to weigh in with his/her opinion? Have most of these calls been justified from your perspective? Even so, don't you find the sheer number of penalties alarming?
Actually quite the contrary, I find it refreshing. Granted I have not seen all of the games, but the PKs I have seen called seemed pretty legit to me. I think SA players in general tend to play quite a bit more on the edge with regard to physical play and so if that's how you choose to play I think you have to expect more PKs to get called. There was also a play in I believe Mexico's QF where a player was "obstructed" and hit the deck pretty hard. I think the announcers wanted a PK but I thought the ref dealt with it pretty well by only giving them an IFK for obstruction since the ball was on its way out of play and the player who was fouled didn't have a chance of getting to it anyway. Certainly not worth a PK, but he was pretty clearly fouled.
I agree that some of the calls have been legitimate, however I still find the large number distressing. Part of that is because many of the calls could really go either way yet more often than not a PK has been called--many I'd say are rather dubious. A couple times incidental contact from the keeper has awarded the other team a PK. What I find most upsetting is that the sheer number of PKs only encourages diving/simulation. The one call you mention for an indirect free kick and the announcers were sure it should have been a penalty...well it's rather hard to argue that it shouldn't be a PK when compared to the countless other PKs in the tournament. I'm not exaggerating when I say there has been close to one PK per game. I agree that if these calls are warranted, they should be called--that's why I'm asking the "professionals" so to speak.
This is a clarification rather than a response to the thread topic. I saw the "obstruction" play myself -- it's the only game I've watched though so I can't comment on the PK situation. There is no obstruction in soccer. There is impeding, and there is holding. Impeding is when a player maneuvers himself in the way of his opponent deliberately for the sake of getting in his way. THERE IS NO CONTACT IN AN IMPEDING CALL, EVER. Impeding is punished by an IFK. Holding can be fairly precisely defined as "Impeding through contact." If contact is used to impede a player, the punishment is now for holding and restarted with a DFK/PK. However, as with most calls you have to determine who actually initiates the contact. If the player being impeded has the option to move around and get the IFK call, but then carries himself into his opponent to create contact, the call is still impeding.
This does not seem correct, at least in the US. From ATR 12.22, the 2003 version: "A player who charges an opponent in an otherwise legal manner (i.e., not carelessly, recklessly, or with excessive force) but with the ball not within playing distance has infringed the Law. Such an "off the ball" charge is considered a form of impeding the progress of an opponent (even though contact has occurred)........"
Thanks for the clarification Statesman. I guess I should have known this but did not. All I had to do was look it up in the LOTG but rather I was drawing upon my own personal experience as a player and serious follower of the world game, and not as a referee. (I've been a player much longer than I've been a ref) But to me this is splitting hairs. The "de facto" rule known by most players,fans, journalists and commentators is really still known as obstruction is it not? And I've seen contact in most all of these calls and hear the ref yell out "obstruction" - and once even in a national final which I was fortunate to participate in. It is still interesting and puzzeling to me how players and spectators see the game and how refs/assesors can see the same game from a different angle.
The key phrase is without the ball. It legal to shoulder charge an opponent playing the ball, it is not legal if the opponent is beyond playing distance of the ball.