Jump to content

White House vs CAK


Bump11
 Share

Recommended Posts

I was at the game and I saw what Mack6 describes. He was called for a foul and threw the ball in disgust and got the yellow and then the ref went to the sideline and pulled the red, no second yellow shown. I wasn't completly sure that it wasn't on CPA's coach, but he never left the sidelines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

let me clear it up BigG and bump11. when I said it was a straight red, I was meaning the second time. Yes, he got a yellow, and then a straight red. it was NOT 2 yellows. (my source read the report) also.......................................... bigG, I believe you are incorrect. if he would have been given a 2nd yellow, he would be allowed to play in the championship. Cak should still be fine. they had to do this last year also because of Creel's red card:)

 

I wasn't there, so you have a better understanding of the events.

 

Talking with fellow coaches around the state, they all said that you still serve a one game suspension on a soft red, as well. I think no matter if it were a soft or hard, I think he was out. We could be wrong, of course... They have changed the soft red rule, so it gets confusing. MVM might know better being a ref.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The TSSAA rule makes no distinction between a straight red and two yellows. All the TSSAA cares about was how the player got ejected. Additionally, there is a caveat for the type of foul / offense that occurs that results in the ejection.

 

"On the ejection of the student-athlete, the school will be required to submit a report on the action of the player and any disciplinary action taken by the school. The minimum penalty will be as follows:

 

 

Soccer – 2 Game Suspension except for the following offenses which shall result in a 1 Game

Suspension:

 

a. A player anywhere on the field (other than a goalkeeper within his/her own penalty area)

who deliberately handles a ball to prevent it from going into the goal.

 

b. A foul by a player against an opponent who is moving toward his/her offensive goal with

an obvious opportunity to score."

 

In other words, the "professional foul" to save a goal is the only ejection that does NOT result in a 2 game suspension. All others are 2 games. All TSSAA cares about is HOW the player got kicked out of the game.

 

A second yellow for dissent is worse than a straight red to deny a goal, in the eyes of the TSSAA.

Edited by DeanDome
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...was called for a foul and threw the ball in disgust...

 

What a shame!! With sportsmanship like this (disrespecting an official), he doesn't deserve to play (whether yellow-yellow, yellow-red, straight red, etc.). How can a player let his team down two years in a row in games of significant importance?

 

Welcome to college soccer this fall, look forward to seeing how he fares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

let me clear it up BigG and bump11. when I said it was a straight red, I was meaning the second time. Yes, he got a yellow, and then a straight red. it was NOT 2 yellows. (my source read the report) also.......................................... bigG, I believe you are incorrect. if he would have been given a 2nd yellow, he would be allowed to play in the championship. Cak should still be fine. they had to do this last year also because of Creel's red card:)

 

No, he still would NOT be playing friday. I am a ref. if a player is shown red, whether it be straight red or 2 yellows, that player is SUSPENDED from play. 2 yellows = SOFT red which = a ONE game suspension. No matter what the yellows are for. Straight red = HARD red which = a TWO game suspension. No matter what the straight red is for. Regardless of how a player gets a red card, he or she does NOT play in the teams next game. (Next 2 with hard red). And with the teams next game being the state finals, regardless of how he got the red, Creel will not and would not play today under any circumstances

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, he still would NOT be playing friday. I am a ref. if a player is shown red, whether it be straight red or 2 yellows, that player is SUSPENDED from play. 2 yellows = SOFT red which = a ONE game suspension. No matter what the yellows are for. Straight red = HARD red which = a TWO game suspension. No matter what the straight red is for. Regardless of how a player gets a red card, he or she does NOT play in the teams next game. (Next 2 with hard red). And with the teams next game being the state finals, regardless of how he got the red, Creel will not and would not play today under any circumstances

 

Not that it matters with only one game left in the season, but...

 

TSSAA does not care about the "soft red"/"hard red" distinction. The manner in which the ejection occurred is the issue. To be fair, soccer is the only sport besides football (of course) that has the lesser one-game suspension possibility. But that is ONLY invoked when an ejection occurs because of the denial of a goal-scoring opportunity. To be clear, under TSSAA rules, two yellows for dissent -- a "soft red" -- is a 2 game suspension. Under TSSAA rules, two yellows for anything (which results in ejection) is a 2-game suspension.

 

However, commit the straight-red card offense of denying a goal-scoring opportunity, and this is the only case where a player sits out for only ONE game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Not that it matters with only one game left in the season, but...

 

TSSAA does not care about the "soft red"/"hard red" distinction. The manner in which the ejection occurred is the issue. To be fair, soccer is the only sport besides football (of course) that has the lesser one-game suspension possibility. But that is ONLY invoked when an ejection occurs because of the denial of a goal-scoring opportunity. To be clear, under TSSAA rules, two yellows for dissent -- a "soft red" -- is a 2 game suspension. Under TSSAA rules, two yellows for anything (which results in ejection) is a 2-game suspension.

 

However, commit the straight-red card offense of denying a goal-scoring opportunity, and this is the only case where a player sits out for only ONE game.

 

Im sorry. I am not a tssaa ref i did mot realize the suspension rule was different. Regardless, What im tryimg to say is it does not matter how the red was given, he can not, would not, and will not play today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

Announcements


  • Recent Posts

    • Won't happen. College coaches will back the coach every time and it cost this young lady her senior season. Looks like the player may be right on this one. School let her  go after one season. This stuff happens more than you think. 
    • “No college is going to offer a scholarship to a player that is kicked off of the team.” For language? I’m not seeing that as a dealbreaker. 
    • Why did the coach get rehired after she was let go as an assistant by the former Warren County coach and the current AD?? Is that accurate?? I am very familiar with situations like this. Suprised lawsuits haven't happend before. If the coach unfairly let the player go, I think she has a shot because it cost her a scholarship. No college is going to offer a scholarship to a player that is kicked off of the team. Not going to happen. There are bad hires like this a bunch and kids are treated unfairly by coaches that can't coach a lick and have super long ropes somehow. Amazing how some of these coaches get hired and keep their job. 
    • I am going to assume you are not a lawyer, and most reasonable lawyers would not say the lawsuit has a zero percent chance in court. I agree with you that a coach has the ability to dismiss anyone from a team. However, Ms. Winfree was never presented with the opportunity to present her witnesses and have them tell the coaches and administrators what they heard. A lawyer could better explain the lawsuit and the grounds to you. Before you start making wild assumptions about the lawsuit, would it be too much to ask that you do a little legal research first? The lawsuit is dealing with due process, loss of property, and defamation.   You can read the lawsuit here: https://bdnewsletter.files.wordpress.com/2024/04/doc-1-complaint-filed-4-18-2024.pdf  
    • The administration took the path of backing the coach and whispering to people that the kid was a problem. The reality is that the kid was never a problem on a team or classroom. The player says she has witnessed who back her not saying the f-word.  Why did the coach make that story up and other stories? I am not Sigmund Freud and do not have an answer for the ex=-coach's behavior..  
×
  • Create New...