Post-match: Revs v Fire

Discussion in 'New England Revolution' started by Alan, Oct 17, 2009.

  1. Boston Red

    Boston Red Red Card

    Aug 13, 2007
    BOSTON
    There doesn't need to be contact. If the path of the runner is impeded, and there is not a play on the ball, then it is a penalty. Reis clearly took the space in front of Rolfe, without playing the ball. Even if he doesn't touch Rolfe, it is a penalty. I believe a penalty is even awarded if that same situation happens outside of the 18, with the last player back.

    There have also been cases where the offensive player has been shown a yellow for simulation, but also awarded a penalty. I'm not sure if Rolfe deserved a yellow, because it is debatable whether or not the contact forced him to the ground. It still should have been a penalty, regardless of the contact by Reis, or not.
     
  2. Revs in 2010

    Revs in 2010 Member+

    Feb 29, 2000
    Roanoke, VA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    You are right, but.... The fact that Reis obstructed (moving into his path without playing the ball) should have led to a penalty. Rolfe's poor acting job was probably what sold this as a dive to the ref (that and the play being 40 yards away from him).
     
  3. Autogolazo

    Autogolazo BigSoccer Supporter

    Feb 19, 2000
    Bombay Beach, CA
    I've seen quite a few clear-cut penalties over the years not called because the fouled player throws up his hands or dives a bit too dramatically or goes limp as if shot before the contact is made (Rolfe).

    The whistle suddenly freezes in the ref's mouth because too much icing is put on the cake and he is offended by the player and doesn't want to give him the call.
     
  4. patfan1

    patfan1 Moderator
    Staff Member

    Aug 19, 1999
    Nashua, NH
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    We played great. That was the best Revs team ever. We're going to make the playoffs. We're going to win MLS Cup. We're going to win the Shield!

    There, now I won't be accused of being another reason that people don't post on these boards because we're too negative. I feel so great for doing my part.



    :rolleyes:
     
  5. REV-OKe

    REV-OKe Member

    Apr 4, 2001
    Can someone show me where in the Laws or some directive that is spelled out? if that is the case, I've never heard it, and I have never seen it called anywhere on the field, much less for a PK.

    Unless you mean, like, someone ducked a clear punch or intent to injure, and someone missed, but that isn't what this is about.


    In this case, clear penalty, ref missed it most likely because rolfe made a meal out of it, but then if he hadn't he might not have got the call.

    ref blew it in our favor, SJ is now going to owe a red card soon as penance.
     
  6. neophilus

    neophilus Member

    Nov 19, 2007
    Methuen, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Rolfe fell victim to the "Boy who cried wolf" syndrome. It's not his fault and maybe its not fair, but thats what happens when the rest of your team dives too much. I'm sick of seeing players fall to the ground clutching their legs in agony when there is the slightest contact, only to be sprinting up and down the field a minute later.

    This is a game we needed to win to make the playoffs, as we can see even a tie isn't going to be good enough. In my opinion SN did not play for the win because he didn't put Shalrie up front. Maybe I'm way off base here, and I know that Shalrie is more effective in midfield than attacking, but look at our stats - Dube and Joseph are tied for most goals at 8 for the year. Ralston comes in third with 5 but he's out. Jankauskas and Nyassi come in next with a dismal 2 goals, and it just gets more pathetic after that.

    Dube is not very reliable, he's had the most chances to score this season up front and only 8 to show for it, while Shalrie has 8 goals mainly because he's had a few starts playing up front. If you need the win why not go all or nothing? Move Shalrie up, he's a much bigger threat than Jankauskas or Dube. At the very least it would take pressure of Jankauskas and maybe free him up for another volley shot.

    Instead SN kept two ineffective strikers up top when we needed a win and as a result we get a 0-0 tie. A loss wouldn't have been any worse in my opinion.
     
  7. Boston Red

    Boston Red Red Card

    Aug 13, 2007
    BOSTON
    http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/affederation/federation/laws_of_the_game_0708_10565.pdf

    LAW 12 – FOULS AND MISCONDUCT

    Impeding the progress of an opponent

    Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.

    All players have a right to their position on the field of play, being in the way of an opponent is not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.

    Shielding the ball is permitted. A player who places himself between an opponent and the ball for tactical reasons has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept in playing distance and the player does not hold off the opponent with his arms or body. If the ball is within playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.
     
  8. REV-OKe

    REV-OKe Member

    Apr 4, 2001
    the ball was within playing distance of both players in this case, not sure it applys in this case.


    I can't imagine this foul you are listing is ever called unless contact is made. I can't recall it.
     
  9. Nick Katz

    Nick Katz New Member

    Nov 22, 1999
    Boston
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    I've seen obstruction called when the defender shielded an opponent ridiculously far from the ball.
     
  10. REV-OKe

    REV-OKe Member

    Apr 4, 2001
    with no contact made? i've never seen it called where the obstructed player did't push the case by initiating contact.
     
  11. NFLPatriot

    NFLPatriot Member+

    Jun 25, 2002
    Foxboro, MA
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Fantasy is thinking that the team can release and not have to pay injured players still under contract.
     
  12. Boston Red

    Boston Red Red Card

    Aug 13, 2007
    BOSTON
    The ball was not playable by Reis, which is why he didn't touch the ball. At the time of the impeding, Reis was clearly making an attempt to cut off the path of the player. That is a unquestionable obstruction call.


    I've seen it call almost once per week. Obstruction calls are very common. There does not need to be contact to call obstruction.

    Also, the debate over the rule regarding contact should not apply in this case, because there was contact (as minimal as it may have been).

    I can't tell if you are being sarcastic or intentionally obtuse, but the definition of the law is pretty clear in this instance.
     
  13. REV-OKe

    REV-OKe Member

    Apr 4, 2001
    It's clear i pointed out that this is a clear penalty.

    You made some non-sequiter reference to non-contact obstruction calls, to show off your vast knowledge of the game.

    This play was a clear foul due to trip (or attempt to trip) - resulting in a direct free kick or penalty.

    Your non-contact obstruction call (or contact obstruction) results in an indirect free kick. So, your case, at best, could have been a red card for DOGSO, and an indirect free kick.

    The only time i have seen obstuction called when no contact is made, it called (as written in the laws) is when someone intentionally prevents the keeper from releasing the ball from his hands.

    it's pretty rare that a ref will call obstrction if a player can't be bothered to actaully challenge for the ball and make contact.
     
  14. NHRef

    NHRef Member+

    Apr 7, 2004
    Southern NH
    Figured this would be here somewhere!

    I had a good view of the play, was there with a group of youth refs as part of a development program for young promising refs. Anyway, we where glad it happened cause otherwise, from a "teaching refs" point of view the game was incredibly boring.

    If you want to call impediing, its an indirect kick as mentioned, not a PK, however in my view Reis took him out and the only question was the color of the card, we were all (including 2 very experienced refs) shocked when the yellow went to Rolfe for diving.

    There's also no way this is a red card. Yes Reis took him out, but one of two of the requirements for a red card here are: direction of the play has to be towards the net, it wasn't it was diagnonal, and two: distance to the ball, the touch by Rolfe put it pretty close to out of his reach, he may not have been able to catch up to it. Which probably contributed to the dive call. The CR was pretty far back from play, this caught him off guard becuase the ball should have been cut off by the defender, the break never should have happened and the ref was moving to his next location for what should have been coming, then found himself sprinting to catch up to an unexpected break.
     
  15. peabrainedidiot

    peabrainedidiot New Member

    Nov 21, 2005
    wessagussett
    Club:
    New England Revolution
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    BTW, even worse than the Rolf flop was Browns defensive flop in the early 1st half. shameless. shitcago even turns honest players into cheats.
     
  16. rkupp

    rkupp Member+

    Jan 3, 2001
    I watched video clips several times and not only did Reis NOT "take him out", it's questionable whether there is *any* contact at all - one view appears to show daylight between Reis' gloves and Rolfe's legs.

    One thing that is VERY clear is that Rolfe deliberately stops moving both legs to let himself fall - he was trying to let his momentum carry him into Reis. There is no way he (or any player) should be awarded a penalty kick when they make no attempt to *play*. Heaven help the game if players regularly get rewarded solely for drawing the foul (as in basketball).

    I thought the Ref was exactly right and it's a shame that such cynical play from Rolfe get defended by anyone other than a fire fan - for playing like Blanco or Ruiz.
     

Share This Page