oknative

Gatlinburg-Pittman vs Knox Catholic CAK vs Pigeon Forge Notre Dame vs Livingston Academy Station Camp vs CCS FRA vs Columbia Academy Spring Hill vs CPA Game is at 4pm in Spring Hill USJ vs McNairy Central Game is at 6pm at USJ Madison vs Jackson Christian Game is at 7pm at North Park

Devil Blue - didn't see the game, or call, so its hard to give an opinion, but I've seen a lot of different perspectives on the call even in this thread - from shouldn't have even been a call to your description of an agressive and a little blatant - deserving of at least a yellow. Perhaps, just perhaps, the referee saw or heard something you didn't. Doesn't mean the referee didn't use better judgement - its just that his judgment is different from you. Pehaps it was the player who should have used better judgement. But just because its playoffs, doesn't mean a referee should keep the red card in his pocket. Yes, we are aware of the consequences, but so should the players.

MVM, sounds like you've spent a lot of time around the soccer field. Actually, I tend to think of it as just whining. And some of them are getting pretty good at it. They don't know how to discuss the issues without pulling up some call in some game that he didn't like or agree with. And of course its always the ref's fault. Mustcoach said it great "Aren't they all the "worst calls or refs I have ever seen in my life"." The only thing that seems to determine whether it was a good call or a good no-call, is which team they're cheering for.

If the refeee couldn't see what was shown on video - that would probably mean he didn't see what happened, and couldn't possibly make a call. This isn't the NFL with 14 cameras and 6 or 7 referees on the field. I've said it before, but referees don't and can't see everything on a field. To expect them to do so is completely unreasonable. Would you have referees making calls based soley on the comments from the players or spectators? And unfortunately for you, video isn't allowed as a means for appealing a point of fact. Certainly a referee should take input from the ARs. I know as an AR, I would be upset if a referee, who wasn't in a position to see a call, wouldn't take my word that a ball had crossed the goal line.

Good comments DonCChatt. And like you, I don't believe most referees make calls with the intent of controlling the outcome of the game. Certainly if they are, they shouldn't be officials. And you are correct, when I ref a game, I have no real interest or emotional ties as to who wins or loses a game. There are a lot of factors that create such a wide view of what prompts a referee to call a foul or not. Its been mentioned in this thread that some referees were soft or animals while playing. Or did they even play? I didn't, and maybe that is a factor that causes me to be a more technical referee because of it. I tend to believe that referees who played the game tend to allow more physical contact before a call. Referees call different games, depending on the game. When two teams are playing each other where two teams that are both very physical, there's usually an expectation, by both the players and the referees, that more physical play will be allowed. And if this is the case, has the referee given an advantage to either team by allowing a more physical game? Probably not. As for me, when a team that is very physical is playing a team that is very technical, I know I call a much tighter game (right or wrong), because to allow a "more physical" game, as when they are both physical, would be giving an advantage to the more physical team. But on the field- teams style of play are different, weather conditions (rain & cold) change play, angle to play, how close to the play a referee is, the number of players involved in the play, bright sunshine, etc., all affect and influence calls. An extension of the arms in one play might prompt a whistle for pushing, while the same extension of the arms in a different play, under a different viewing perspective, might not prompt a whistle. And I don't think I've ever been compelled to make a call just because someone hits the ground or someone gets hurt. Injuries happen in which there is no foul, but I follow a simple rule - which is - "if I don't see it, I can't call it". If I'm not looking a play, I can't then look in that direction and make a call . Or if I'm screened from a play, how can I make a call? Do you want me to guess at it??? And yes, it makes coaches and players and parents angry, but if I don't make a call because I didn't see it, that doesn't mean I've made a bad call or even made a mistake. The fact is that referees don't, and can't, see every single foul that is committed in a soccer game.

Neither TSSAA or NFHS allows the use of video when it comes to appeals, if the appeal is on a point of fact. My understanding is that "fact" means what a referee sees - most fouls, trips, charging pushing, etc. are "fact". If the ref determines a play to be trip, then its a trip and there is no appeal possible as to whether it really was a trip. Again, my understanding, is video replay could be used if a rule is missapplied. For instance, if a goalie reached outside of the penalty box and picked up a ball, the correct call would be handling - direct kick just outside of the penalty box. However, if a referee awarded a PK based on the same call, this call could be appealed because its a misapplication of the rules.

Region 6 Spring Hill 4 - Richland 3 on a water-logged field

BigG, you are correct that the coaches can, if in agreement, shorten a half or an entire game, but I believe the mutual agreement has to be made before the game begins, or before the 2nd half begins.

I found an article on a mercy rule for football and basketball, but soccer was not mentioned: http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2007/Jun/06/tssaa-shows-mercy/ TSSAA passed it in June, which is also when they put in the two game suspension rule for ejections.

In some rec leagues, when a team goes up by five, they have to start taking players off the field for each goal the differential increases above the 5, up to a maximum of three players off the field.

I thought previous few postings on the discussion were commenting on the disparity between Nashville and Williamson County soccer in general, not just playoffs, which is why I commented. Sorry

Madison's no longer at Hollywood???? Where do they get to play now?

I would think the argument would carry over very nicely since football is a boys only sport, and soccer is one of the major (kind of) sports for girls. You can't compare boys football to girls football, but it would apply to the treatment of girls sports to boys sports - regardless of what that is.

Other than the football coach. I've seen soccer teams who have to play in fields just above a cow pasture rating, because the football coach won't allow the soccer team on "his" field.

Didn't see the game, so can't comment other that it is the coach who controls whether or not a team with a big lead will continue to score, or play keep away. With many JV on some teams better than the Varsity of others, simply putting JV in and letting them loose, can be just as unsporting as leaving the Varsity in. Can't blame the players if the coach doesn't rein them in.

It all starts and ends with TSSAA. Until they mandate it, it won't happen. But how many footballl games have you seen played on a field that was 90 yards long and 40 yards wide and dirt and gravel patches in the middle of the field? None - soccer is simply one of the red-headed stepchildren of high school sports.

Are you sure of this fact? NEVER??? Does that include this season? McGavock (District 12) beat Hillsboro (District 11) 1-0, and beat Overton (District 11) 4-0

Kickgrass, I would agree that some post season should not be on football fields - regionals, sectionals and beyond. However, its not very practical to have district playoffs not be held at a particular site just because they have to play on a football field. They've deserved to host a district game by virtue of their record, and should be allowed on their home field, even if its a football field. BigG gives some very valid reasons above why we'll be doing this for some time.

Congratulations Madison Academic.

You're right that Hendersonville did look very good, but had, what, 10 or 15 shots on goal go everywhere but in the goal. Beech had two shots on goal in the first half - one off the upright, one in the net. 1-0. That's Soccer. But, were you even at the game? That "very questionalble 50/50 (non-shooting) penalty in the box" was anything but that. Beech gave the game away by playing directly to one of Hendersonville's strengths - their speed. Beech kept pushing up all the way to the midline, allowing 50 yards of space in which Hendersonville took advantage with their speed and long pass throughs into the space. Hendersonville's last two goals were both scored as a result of long runs into the space vacated by the Beech players pushing up. The winning goal - the PK - was a well deserved goal, resulting from a blatant, reckless knockdown tackle in which the defender made absolutely no attempt to play the ball. She simply ran right through the attacker. There's was no 50/50 ball - the attacker had control of the ball in a direct run in on the goal, in the box. The attacker could have made a play for the ball, but chose to play the player instead resulting in a hard knockdown - PK. Good Call And, yes it was in the 39th minute of the 2nd half, but don't pin that on the referee. The only thing about the play that would have been unfair, would have been NOT to call the PK. The Hendersonville player made a legal run into the box and had a fair opportunity to take a shot to win the game and was fouled to prevent that attempt. She deserved the PK. I think Hendersonville does have the ability to move deeper into the tournament, but they're going to have to take advantage of those scoring opportunities.

The Jackson Sun if very favorable to girl's soccer - if you happen to play for the University School of Jackson. Otherwise, you get a box score - maybe.

Yes, it would be a shame if Alcoa didn't make it back for the rematch

They'll have to learn to find the back of the net more often in order to continue very deep in the tournament. At Beech they dominated play in the first half and had a lot of shots on goal, but still trailed 0-1. They are a quality team with a LOT of speed, and are going to have to take a game, rather than rely on the other team to give it away.

Well, perhaps we should outlaw kicking. Then the players could get down on their hands and knees and blow the balls down the field - it would certainly be much safer. And yes I was joking, or at least making the point that it might be easier to outlaw headers than it would be to require headgear. I don't think either will happen.

Goalies should be allowed to slide tackle just like anyother player on the field. No more or less rough than anyone else.