GPS 1 - Baylor 0

[DonCChatt]

While I can certainly support rules that protect players, I am reminded of a collision between a goalie and and an attacking player earlier this year. It involved the Notre Dame Goalie and a forward from Centennial. In that situation, the forward came away injured, and the goalie was carded. While I couldn't (and still don't) believe that was the right call, it seems like people assume that if somebody gets injured, then the other person must have committed a foul. If a ball is between two players (the goalie and some attacking player), it would seem that both have a right to go for the ball. That being said, collisions will occur.

 

As a neutral spectator at the Baylor-GPS game, I thought it was a great game. I hated to see Baylor's goalie injured, and wish her the best on a speedie recovery.

[uncfan13]

I suppose an alternative would be to impose contact rules like they have for girls' lacrosse. Each player is enclosed in a hermatically sealed rules envelope. Play is stopped every nanosecond when a defensive player gets within the other player's zip code. It's really really exciting! I understand they're considering replacing the hard lacrosse sticks with rubber. Another great Title 9 opportunity for mediocre athletes to get college scholarhships. Sorry I digress.

[KeeperFan15]

Hope the keeper heals quickly. When it comes to high school keepers in Tennessee (not just the girls) the refs always, I'm sorry, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS fail to protect the keepers. It's not just collisions. More common is to see the ball be trapped or in the grasp with the attacking team still kicking at the ball, and usually getting shoulder, hip, knee, hand or head. If they do happen to hit the keeper in the head, usually a ref will say something to the player, but only then. What gets me more than anything else, is when a team thinks that they can intimidate the keeper by giving the keeper an "inadvertant" bump with the shoulder as they come back past when the keeper has made a save.

 

That said, it needs to go both ways. If a keeper is wrapping legs when they go for the ball or slide out studs up, that needs to be carded as well. This is rarely called as well. Sort of the two wrongs make a right philosopy of officiating in school ball.

[lukelea]

Let me see if I have this right:

 

It is not necessarily a red card offense to do a flying header as long as the attacking player is seriously going for the ball, irrespective of the position of the keeper and irrespective of whether the attacking player fails to make contact with the ball but accidently heads the keeper square in the chest or shoulder area instead. For purposes of discussion let us assume that the hit is neither late nor early, but rather is simultaneous with the keeper catching or attempting to catch the ball.

 

If there are any qualified refs reading this forum, I would certainly like them to address this question.

 

It could make a difference in how one instructs ones attacking players to play crosses and corners.

[goal!!]

Let me see if I have this right:

 

It is not necessarily a red card offense to do a flying header as long as the attacking player is seriously going for the ball, irrespective of the position of the keeper and irrespective of whether the attacking player fails to make contact with the ball but accidently heads the keeper square in the chest or shoulder area instead. For purposes of discussion let us assume that the hit is neither late nor early, but rather is simultaneous with the keeper catching or attempting to catch the ball.

 

If there are any qualified refs reading this forum, I would certainly like them to address this question.

 

It could make a difference in how one instructs ones attacking players to play crosses and corners.

In the box the player should attack the ball. Not much time to consider the options in terms of results of the play. Just attack the ball.

[uncfan13]

Let me see if I have this right:

 

It is not necessarily a red card offense to do a flying header as long as the attacking player is seriously going for the ball, irrespective of the position of the keeper and irrespective of whether the attacking player fails to make contact with the ball but accidently heads the keeper square in the chest or shoulder area instead. For purposes of discussion let us assume that the hit is neither late nor early, but rather is simultaneous with the keeper catching or attempting to catch the ball.

 

If there are any qualified refs reading this forum, I would certainly like them to address this question.

 

It could make a difference in how one instructs ones attacking players to play crosses and corners.

 

Your question ought to be used in a referee course to demostrate the subjectivity of reffing. Should also be used to demostrate to parents that reffing is a very subjective activity.

[basehits]

Let me see if I have this right:

 

It is not necessarily a red card offense to do a flying header as long as the attacking player is seriously going for the ball, irrespective of the position of the keeper and irrespective of whether the attacking player fails to make contact with the ball but accidently heads the keeper square in the chest or shoulder area instead. For purposes of discussion let us assume that the hit is neither late nor early, but rather is simultaneous with the keeper catching or attempting to catch the ball.

 

If there are any qualified refs reading this forum, I would certainly like them to address this question.

 

It could make a difference in how one instructs ones attacking players to play crosses and corners.

A judgement call for the referee....does not the forward have as much right to go to the ball as the keeper...if they are seriously BOTH going for the ball. That is why it is a judgement call.

[KeeperFan15]

A judgement call for the referee....does not the forward have as much right to go to the ball as the keeper...if they are seriously BOTH going for the ball. That is why it is a judgement call.

Based on your earlier post, you indicated that the keeper had caught the ball. At that point, the rules are pretty clear on who has the right to the ball. Even though the rule is pretty clear, enforcement of it in TN is pretty much "play-on".

[basehits]

Based on your earlier post, you indicated that the keeper had caught the ball. At that point, the rules are pretty clear on who has the right to the ball. Even though the rule is pretty clear, enforcement of it in TN is pretty much "play-on".

I was not at the game. I dont think that I said that the keeper had the ball. I do agree with you about the "play-on" thing with the refs. Sometimes I think that they are just afraid to make the call or just do not know how. I believe that the keepers are more protected than most players, again I am not saying that they are protected enough, but keepers can be very mean players also, and calls are usually never made on the keeper they get away with alot.

[LifeisGood4]

The keeper had possession of the ball when she was hit. Collar bones aren't easily broken... it was a foul, and since the keeper had obvious possession it should have been a card whether it was an accident or not.

What happened happened and a card would have done nothing to protect the keeper after she got hurt. A card would, however, have influenced the game, penalizing GPS and causing them to make adjustments (including taking the player who hurt the goalie and later scored GPS's goal off the field). Of course it is possible that another GPS player could have scored, but either way, the game would have been different.

After losing their goalie to an obvious foul, (whether on purpose or accident) Baylor received only a free kick from their six (which certainly didn't penalize GPS in the least.) Nothing, the ref could have done would have brought the keeper back, which is what Baylor truly wanted, but the call he should have made would have influenced the outcome of the game.

Edited October 12, 2006 by LifeisGood4

[KeeperFan15]

The keeper had possession of the ball when she was hit. Collar bones aren't easily broken... it was a foul, and since the keeper had obvious possession it should have been a card whether it was an accident or not.

What happened happened and a card would have done nothing to protect the keeper after she got hurt. A card would, however, have influenced the game, penalizing GPS and causing them to make adjustments (including taking the player who hurt the goalie and later scored GPS's goal off the field). Of course it is possible that another GPS player could have scored, but either way, the game would have been different.

After losing their goalie to an obvious foul, (whether on purpose or accident) Baylor received only a free kick from their six (which certainly didn't penalize GPS in the least.) Nothing, the ref could have done would have brought the keeper back, which is what Baylor truly wanted, but the call he should have made would have influenced the outcome of the game.

You are right. It would have only protected the other keepers that both teams face in the future. Enforcement of the laws of soccer prior to this game would have helped protect this keeper (and all the other players on the field). That is the point that I was trying to make. Inconsistency of the officiating leads to these types of injuries. The same could be said about keepers not being carded for tackling cleats up in the box. Start calling it, and they will quit doing it.

 

Yes, accidents do happen. Since I was not at the game or know any of the players involved, I am not questioning how the play happened. Someone earlier said the player probably closed her eyes as she went to head the ball. While an accident, still a card. I don't believe that a police officer would care that I "accidentally" missed the speed zone sign that dropped it from 45 to 35. Penalty enforced lesson learned. My example is trivial compared to a player closing their eyes prior heading the ball. For her own sake and safety, teach her to keep her eyes open. Even if it means she leaves a game early and misses a game. A goal post won't be as forgiving as a keeper's collar bone.

Edited October 12, 2006 by KeeperFan15

[DonCChatt]

re-match tonight (10/25) at 7:00 at GPS. Since both teams are already advancing to State, it will be interesting to see how this one turns out.