Is it possible? An attacking player in on a breakaway, with an obvious goal scoring opportunity. Inside the PA, the last two opponents (keeper and 2nd last defender) charge him simultaneously, good ole fashioned sandwhich knocking him to the ground (obvious foul). Who goes ? Both ? Cards? Or just PK and hope it goes away?
If this were ever to truly happen, you'd be hard-pressed to justify making a team play 11 v 9. To that end, I just reject the notion that any two fouls can happen simultaneously. Just as if you'd be one side for a DFK if opponents fouled each other, pick one to send off here--in most situations with normal substitution rules it would make sense to pick the defender.
The person committing the foul is the second player to make contact with the attacker, and thus he would be the one to send off. Sandwiching refers to two players fairly charging one opponent at the same time -- the first charge is fair, the second charge is an act of holding.
I agree with you, assuming that the "first" charge was fair. From the original post, we don't know whether that's true or not.
Well he did refer to it as a sandwich, which to me implies both players fairly charging one player. If the offense is an illegal charge then both people technically wouldn't be involved with one foul, but two people involved in two seperate fouls at the same time. Or for that matter one player illegally charging, the other player fairly charging. In either case you punish the player that causes the foul itself.
It's like a ball goes out of bounds off two opponents. Make a choice and sell it. Rarely are two fouls equal - particularly when one is by the keeper. Possible criteria: first foul, most egregious foul, which player did the attacker go after, which player had the most fouls or dissent previously(most benefit for your card).
out there and far away I agree sending two off would not win you any gold medals and might make you on even par with the highly thought off equadorian referee at the moment but given FIFA's recent directive that a red card is a one game sit out if a referee actually gave two reds, IN LAW, would they stand or would you be asked to only pick one after the fact as in a wrong player approach? Common sense send off one. If two anything anyone can do?
But the setup? If there is a defender other than the keeper who is close enough to the attacker to make contact with him or her before the shot is taken how does the attacker have an obvious goal scoring situation? Jim
Re: But the setup? Clarification as requested [GOAL] OBall ^direction of play D A K defender(attacker)keeper No one else , so keeper is the other defender. The jist of this was it possible for both defender and keeper to be equally quilty off a send off for DOGSO? The rational law 18 conclusion was you pick one probably not the keeper. If a referee actually did give two reds, IN LAW, would they stand or would you be asked to only pick one after the fact as in a wrong player approach? Common sense send off one. If two anything anyone can do? From: Alfred Kleinaitis, Manager of Referee Development and Education Subject: Obvious Goal-Scoring Opportunity Denied (The 4 Ds) Date: September 16, 2002 Law 12 provides that a defender whose violation of the Law prevents a goal or denies an obvious goal-scoring opportunity must be sent off and shown the red card. The "professional foul" which is taken in a cynical attempt to prevent opponents from scoring requires a quick, firm response by the referee. Such misconduct by the defender overshadows the severity of the foul itself. In order for a player to be sent off for denying an "obvious goal-scoring opportunity," four elements must be present: Number of Defenders -- not more than one defender between the foul and the goal, not counting the defender who committed the foul Distance to goal -- the closer the foul is to the goal, the more likely it is an obvious goal-scoring opportunity Distance to ball -- the attacker must have been close enough to the ball at the time of the foul to have continued playing the ball Direction of play -- the attacker must have been moving toward the goal at the time the foul was committed If any element is missing, there can be no send off 12.38 CRITERIA FOR AN OBVIOUS GOALSCORING OPPORTUNITY The referee must consider five criteria when deciding whether or not the conditions during an infringement of Law 12 constituted an obvious goalscoring opportunity: 1. The direction of play (the player must be running toward the opponents' goal, not toward the goal line or the corner). 2. The proximity of the ball (could the player have reached it to play it?). 3. The location and number of opponents able to participate immediately (no more than one defender between the attacker who was fouled and the goal, not counting the defender who committed the foul). 4. The location of the foul (the farther from goal, the less likely it is that an obvious goalscoring opportunity existed). 5. There was a reasonable chance for a shot (not a definite goal, but at least a chance to shoot). Even if all these criteria are met, it is still the judgment and opinion of the referee that determines if the event was an obvious goalscoring opportunity.