1. Save 40-80% on great soccer jerseys. Shop today at BigSoccer Shop!

African Cup - Ghana vs Mali: DOGSO?

Discussion in 'Referee' started by Nestapele, Jan 28, 2013.

Moderators: IASocFan, MassachusettsRef
  1. Nestapele

    Nestapele Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2005
    Location:
    MD, USA
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    Sorry for the poor quality recording. I think its still on ESPN3 for those who want to see it.
    There was a heated discussion on whether this was DOGSO on another forum. Thoughts?
     


  2. ChomskyReferee

    ChomskyReferee Red Card

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    What minute is this? The video is down so I'm checking ESPN3

    Found it on ESPN3, 6th minute. My vote is red card, that's obvious enough for me.
     
  3. Nestapele

    Nestapele Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2005
    Location:
    MD, USA
    Club:
    Liverpool FC
    6th minute
     
  4. sm. town ref

    sm. town ref Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    Club:
    Manchester United FC
    I don't know about this level of play.... and I may be splitting hairs;

    I think I'm call "pushing" on the attacker for bashing his way through the defender.... even before the ball gets to the keeper.

    You could also call impeding on the defender, which opens up the DOGSO question again.
     


  5. JimEWrld

    JimEWrld Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2012
    Club:
    Chicago Fire
    First off, that keeper is an idiot. He should have booted the ball. As to the DOGSO..... I have a hard time doing it here.... but is there a way out? The keeper deliberately handles the ball and I am sure that is where the YC came from but... The attacker was through on goal if the keeper didn't handle it (or boot it away..) Maybe the referee couldn't believe his eyes?
     
    soccersubjectively repped this.
  6. bothways

    bothways Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    i see the same thing jimmy. if the keeper does not touch it, the attacker is clean through- hence red card and DOGSO.
    the ref was also way behind the play in my opinion, and probably did not have a good angle
     
  7. fairplayforlife

    fairplayforlife Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    Country:
    United States
    I'm leaning DOGSO. I think the contact with the defender is minimal and just a result of him trying to get around to the ball.
     
  8. Errol V

    Errol V Member+

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2011
    With the benefit of reply, definitely. Absent the handling that is a goal.
     
  9. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    It's got to be red. The contact between players is not a foul at that level--neither player was looking for it and that type of physicality happens all the time. I don't know how/why the referee would justify yellow. Was this initially played as a passback from a teammate? The only reason I ask is maybe the referee thought it was handled in the box, and he went with an IFK rather than DFK outside the area? That would obviously be 100% wrong, but it's the only way I can come up with a justification for not giving a red.

    The lack of red is particularly intriguing given the DOGSO keeper situation that happened three days ago in the same tournament, during the Burkina Faso v Ethiopia match.* I could see a little more debate on this one, but I agree 100% with the decision to go red here (and applaud the AR for being in position and making this call):



    *EDIT: this Burkina Faso : Ethiopia game happened the day after the Ghana : Mali match (I thought the Ghana : Mali game was today, but it was on 1/24). I think that likely tells us all we need to know about how the CAF Referee Instruction staff saw this incident and what the official opinion was.
     
    jarbitro, refinDC, La Rikardo and 2 others repped this.
  10. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Except that the bar is on misconduct, not on just on DOGSO. So if it was a "pass back" there could be no card at all. I&G p. 113: "Inside his own penalty area, the goalkeeper cannot be guilty of a handling offence incurring a direct free kick or any misconduct related to handling the ball."

    I can only assume he got it right -- from the angle of the camera, I can't tell for sure if it was handling at all. That's why we bust our tails, huh?
     
  11. ChomskyReferee

    ChomskyReferee Red Card

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    My only issue with this was the presentation of the card, and the time it took. I feel he should've made the decision more quickly but failing to do that, he could at least display the card in a manner where he didn't look so mean.
     
    sjquakes08 repped this.
  12. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Sure, but I'm sure he could come up with some form of unsporting behavior or delaying the restart that didn't relate directly to the handling of the ball if he felt the pressure to gives some card and felt like a red wasn't an option. But I really shouldn't have introduced that theory because I don't think there's much of a chance that that is what really occurred. Just trying to game out all the possible scenarios.

    There have been other angles that show pretty conclusively he got the deliberate handling right. The DOGSO portion is obviously a bit more subjective, but I really think it's the correct option. And if you were watching a video of the Ghana : Mali match the night before and having all your assignors and instructors say that they got it wrong, well... even if this was a borderline case in your mind, I think you know which color card is coming out at that point.
     
  13. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Agreed on the presentation, but we all know different referees (and different cultures) have different mechanics.

    As for the delay, this definitely came from the AR. And, unlike most other continents, they don't work in national trios in Africa. So there could be some communication issues to get past. When they are getting it right at the end of the day, I'm not going to fault them over that.
     
    usaref and socal lurker repped this.
  14. ChomskyReferee

    ChomskyReferee Red Card

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Well I hope you are one of the nicer referees who can show some sympathy when eliminating a player from one of the biggest games of his career.

    Actually MassachusettsRef I'd like your opinion on the delay that Burkina Faso takes to get their changes made after the call was made. Sometimes it does take some time but it brought up a question about how much time does it or should it take? I can't remember FIFA giving any guidelines about such things and I'd assume they'd want the game restarted as quickly as possible. Anyone have a story where this happened or an answer?
     
  15. chwmy

    chwmy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2010
    Absolutely. Not dogso-h, but dogso-f.

    I made this call as AR 2 on a state cup semi game, where the keeper makes a 1v1 block with his hands which would have been perfect keeper play had it not been 2 yds outside the box. The CR just gave a dfk.

    Dunno why- the game was pretty much decided, and I guess he didn't want the team that would go through to be without their keeper for the finals...

    I must say that philosophically, I dislike the aspect of the dogso rule as they pertain to the keeper. It just doesn't seem right that a keeper risks a sendoff for doing what they always do, but slightly mistimed or misplaced. I hope they change it sometime soon.
     
  16. La Rikardo

    La Rikardo Member+

    Joined:
    May 9, 2011
    Country:
    United States
    100% red. No justification for yellow here.
     
  17. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    No need to re-open this debate, again, but, per convoluted USSF justifications, sure. Wild guess, but I don't think instructional staff at the FIFA level is going to want the "yes he deliberately handled to stop an obvious goal-scoring opportunity but I'm not writing it up as denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity via handling because... " logic. Distinction without a difference in the end, but so frustrating that we have this distinction at all.

    What could you change? 18.5 yards out is not a red but 22 yards is? I think any change in this realm would add far too much subjectivity to the referee's call. It also would treat goalkeepers, outside the penalty area, differently from field players. It's not a good road to go down. Goalkeepers know where the penalty area is and they take risks when they approach its limits. You can start being careful when you're 16 or 17 yards from goal... you don't have to wait until you literally step on the 18 to start worrying about your location.
     
  18. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    I certainly have a much different presentation style. But I also do think it's important to put some of these referees above this sort of criticism. In this case, you've got a referee from the Seychelles who likely doesn't see a lot of intense domestic competition, with some of the crowds and tense environments you can see in the larger African nations. I would bet, at some point as he acceded to higher-level international matches, he was taught and conditioned to always project confidence and never be seen as wavering, particularly in controversial decisions--and probably for good reason. Should he be able to adjust in a situation like this? Yes. Does it really bother me that much? No, and it didn't seem like the players were reacting that adversely either.

    I didn't see how long the delay actually was. But, everything in a situation like this starts from the fact that you legally need a goalkeeper. And, traditionally, a substitute is almost always used if one is still available. Getting a reserve goalkeeper up and through the substitution process can take time. It's an understandable delay. Plus, the opposing team just went up a man so they are most likely happy with you--you have some leeway to work your man management skills even if the delay becomes a bit excessive. In short, I'd be hard-pressed to do anything unless there was an extraordinary situation like the player being substituted refused to leave. I'd guess, in most situations, a goalkeeper red card takes 2-3 minutes to sort out. Not that big of a deal to me when we're dealing with one of the most critical referee decisions and one of the most critical team tactical decisions all at the same time.
     
  19. fairplayforlife

    fairplayforlife Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2011
    Country:
    United States
    Is that concept much different than any other defender on the field that makes a DOGSO foul? They are doing that they always do, just in the wrong place at the wrong time.
     
    Eastshire repped this.
  20. chwmy

    chwmy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2010
    Agreed! I just mention it because I (and, I think, others?) used to get hung up on not giving a sendoff here because the ball is not obviously going straight into the goal, which is what we were told (by jim allen) to be the measure of dogso-h.

    Well, I just think that (again, philosophically) if the purported goal of the Dogso rules was to eliminate the callous professional foul that is antithetical to the game, the goalie and his actions have gotten caught up in a logical extension of those rules that has little to do with their intent. Plus, I like watching brave and aggressive goalie awesomeness.

    It was last year that FIFA took this up: http://www.bigsoccer.com/community/threads/fifa-rules-panel-meeting.1840720/#post-24588492

    I guess it didn't get much traction :)
     
  21. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    But when it was a very discretionary spirit-of-the-law concept, the perception was that it was not adequately enforced . . . leading to specified criteria that are necessarily going to be over- and under-inclusive.

    My favorite "cure" remains the DOGSO is an upgrade concept: if an othewise cautionable offense (generally reckless or tactical, but could be other species of USB) denies a goal or OGSO, it becomes a red instead of a yellow. A merely careless foul would not (but would perhaps be an auto yellow). But I don't think it's gonna happen.
     
  22. ChomskyReferee

    ChomskyReferee Red Card

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    It took 10 to 12 mins and it even took the coach coming out onto the field to stop his players surrounding the referee and yelling at him the whole time. They wouldn't let up after, they kept following and complaining constantly, it was just ridiculous.
     
  23. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Oh, wow. I had no idea.

    Well, I'd consider that extraordinary. Not sure what you do in a situation like this, though. The match has to be played and there is a match commissioner on-site to help facilitate that and make sure it happens. I suspect he'd be leaned on some in a situation like this. Without seeing it, I have no idea if doing things like dismissing personnel or issuing cautions would have helped or exacerbated the situation. I suspect the latter, but that's just a guess. Waiting it out might really be the only option.

    Now, in a situation where the match doesn't have to be played (I fully understand that no match really must be played, but there is certainly a reality that sets in at a certain level), I think at some point you set an ultimatum for abandoning the match and you follow-through if that ultimatum isn't adhered to in time. It's probably greatly preferable to just handing out cautions, though you might have to dish out at least one to make your initial point.

    I presumed you were talking about delays in substitution and finding the new goalkeeper. I had no idea this was a mass dissent issue. Two entirely different animals, in my opinion, as a mass dissent issue like this can obviously occur on a call that doesn't involve a red card for the goalkeeper.
     
  24. ChomskyReferee

    ChomskyReferee Red Card

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Oh I forgot also that their fans were throwing things out onto the field and they had to get that cleaned up. Yeah there was just a ton of things going wrong and much of them caused by a keeper who decided he was going to try and kung fu kick another player and then refuse to get up and accept his punishment. I don't really have much of a issue with the referee handing out a card to a player on a stretcher at that point, since it was pure theater.

    What was funny was the keeper was ready, and warming up on the line. The delay came in trying to decide which player he would replace, no one wanted to go off and it was clear even with the coach telling them to leave the referee alone that he wasn't in charge.
     
  25. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2001
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    Country:
    United States
    Wait. Which match/incident are we talking about?

    There was a third goalkeeper red card, earlier in the tournament, involving a late challenge (definitely for SFP and not DOGSO). Is that the one you were talking about? Because I don't think "kung fu kick" describes either of the two situations in this thread.
     
Moderators: IASocFan, MassachusettsRef

Share This Page