|
|
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 19
bench
|
OP
bench
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 19 |
To clarify, nobody from Waccamaw has accused BE player of being malicious, nor has the word "cheated" been used in this thread. The purpose of this thread was to get positive, different, perspectives on the play to better understand the call. Thanks to all who did that.
BE plays to win. So does Waccamaw. As Gamer18 says, it is always a good game.
Re the goalie - what could have been a serious injury is not.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5
bench
|
|
bench
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5 |
I am glad to hear that the keeper is ok. How is the other keeper doing? I heard she was injured in the game against Academic Magnet.
I was not meaning to imply that there was any cheating going on whatsoever. By "cheated" I was trying to say that they felt like it was the wrong call and they were unfairly treated.
The issue about protecting the keeper is prevalent in all levels of soccer. The bottom line is that it is up to the referee and whatever he or she decides is absolute.
I am sure it was a tough call for the ref to make. I am glad, though, that he at least asked the assistant for his take on the situation. I wish that this goal would have not been the game winner. Both teams are too good to have something controversial like this be the deciding factor.
Look out for Waccamaw next year- they'll have a team full of exceptional seniors ready to meet the Bishops' group of great seniors.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 854
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 854 |
In high school matches, this would be called a foul virtually every time. . .attacker had her leg extended. . .bang-bang in real time. . .foul.
I suspect this being a playoff game impacted the tentative no-call.
"Living well's the best revenge." r.e.m.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 855
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 855 |
Quote:
To clarify, nobody from Waccamaw has accused BE player of being malicious, nor has the word "cheated" been used in this thread. The purpose of this thread was to get positive, different, perspectives on the play to better understand the call. Thanks to all who did that.
BE plays to win. So does Waccamaw. As Gamer18 says, it is always a good game.
Re the goalie - what could have been a serious injury is not.
I did use the word, but not in an accusatory way. More say how it would feel to lose a game on a bad no-call. I am by the way fairly impartial having "no dog in the fight" (never a good choice of words on the girls thread  ). I would prefer to see a game won without a questionable call deciding what became the deciding winning score. If the ref let this kind of attack on the keeper go from the begining then it even more highlights my point that he failed to do hi #1 job! And if you are a BE fan and say "OH, it would be ok if we lost this way, well then peraps you have forgotten how it feels to lose, especially when the ref plays such a big part in the loss!
(and please,, I am not saying your girls did not earn a win I am saying the ref allowed a goal that decided a game and he should have not allowed it, you may well have still won but it should have not been on that goal)
Good Luck in your final, and I hope the ref protects your players, and the other teams, becasue everyone deserves to walk away from the game with pride and a feeling of accomplishment (win or lose, really no losers at this level of play just a better team!)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 43
kick off
|
|
kick off
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 43 |
Quote:
Quote:
I did use the word, but not in an accusatory way. More say how it would feel to lose a game on a bad no-call. I am by the way fairly impartial having "no dog in the fight" (never a good choice of words on the girls thread ). I would prefer to see a game won without a questionable call deciding what became the deciding winning score. If the ref let this kind of attack on the keeper go from the begining then it even more highlights my point that he failed to do hi #1 job! And if you are a BE fan and say "OH, it would be ok if we lost this way, well then peraps you have forgotten how it feels to lose, especially when the ref plays such a big part in the loss!
(and please,, I am not saying your girls did not earn a win I am saying the ref allowed a goal that decided a game and he should have not allowed it, you may well have still won but it should have not been on that goal)
Good Luck in your final, and I hope the ref protects your players, and the other teams, becasue everyone deserves to walk away from the game with pride and a feeling of accomplishment (win or lose, really no losers at this level of play just a better team!)
The game was not decided by a questionable call. In your eyes it was decided by a questionable no call. Had the call been mae and the goal taken away then the game would have been decided by a questionable call had Waccamaw won. If a referee and an AR have to confer and concur that no foul was committed I would have to say they were on top of their game.
How anyone can call that a no-brainer call for a foul is astonishing. 50 50 balls are part of the game forward attacking and keeper coming out, had the BE player chipped the ball over the keep rather than drive the ball into her legs and you have contact afterward who's the foul on?
Great game no call was spot on and proper call by the officials. I also have no dog in the fight and unbiased in my opinion.
ROSS!!! For no reason!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 855
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 855 |
I called it a no brainer when you have the luxury of seeing it in slo mo on replay!
And again I will say watch the video and tell me how the fwd will not hit the keep on her charge? In fact look closely and I think you will see the fwd missed the ball with her foot at least she does not strike it with the front of her foot and hit keeper stright on, the ball bounces off the keeper because she was plowed into.
If you call that a 50/50 ball then players are required to play under no control and can plow into any player any time as long as they get the ball first! Is that the kind of dangerous play you would encourage? Had the player chipped the ball over the keeper and then plowed the keeper over I would likely stick to my point that the fwd was creating a dangerous/reckless play. The keep had stopped moving fwd and was going down to get the ball the fwd "charged" on into her. It was the fwd's responsibility to avoid contact, every kid knows since swarm ball as 4 yr olds, keeps are not to be run into on purpose and you have to avoid running into them. This young lady left her self no option but to hit the keeper. If she totally misses the ball (not sure she did'nt) are you saying it was ok becasue she was just trying to get to the ball and until the keeper touches it she can do "anything" in an effort to strike the ball?? How aboutn if the keep was actally severly hurt o the play, a very real possibility with the way the fwd hit her, are you then saying well it was just a 50/50 ball and she was'nt being reckless?
Really?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 855
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 855 |
Oh yea and a no call is a questionable call if there is a reason to think a call should have been made.
Failing to act is in fact maing a choice.
My point is that it would have been less arguable had the call been made, you would have a hard time convincing anyone that the hit was not dangerous. So my point stands that the no call was the worse of the two calls he could have made.!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 81
Throw In
|
|
Throw In
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 81 |
So the premise is the ref made a mistake that led to the goal, possibly costing Wac the game. Well, look at the replay again and ask yourself these questions:
1) Why didn't 17 protect her keeper?
2) Why didn't the coach school the players on protecting the keepers? I guarantee a defender moving to the ball, arms at her sides, but in the way of the striker, will NOT get a hindrance call. I've seen players with both arms out at shoulder level not get called for hindrance when they should have.
3) Why did 21 not clear the ball wide? That clear was as much responsible for the goal as anything.
You'll notice that in the laws and in the high school rules there's that annoying phrase, "in the referee's judgment." The center and the AR conferred; they obviously employed their judgment. You can disagree with their judgment, but blaming the goal on the referees misses a lot of other errors made on the play.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 855
brace
|
|
brace
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 855 |
So the problem was the fact that every one else did the wrong thing so it was ok to crash into keeper.
The play stops with the fould the clearance is a mute point in any argument about the dangerous play. Focus on just the play at hand. True the goal was not caused by the foul but if the foul was given then there would be no goal.
Agian I say look at the video and tell me how the fwd was not acting in a dangerous way? No one is defending her play saying it is ok to barrel full speed into keeper, remember with her angle of attack there is no wayshe will not hit keeper.
As for the ref and his judgement I think we have already settled the fact the we have the luxury of replay. My point his that his judgement failed to keep up his 1st responsibility SAFETY OF THE PLAYER!
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 273
corner kick
|
|
corner kick
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 273 |
So I had this whole thing written up, but I decided it wasn't worth it to post it, so I just have this:
There's a lot more factors involved in this goal than just a questioned call/noncall. I don't think anyone will argue that both teams played and worked hard in this game and I think it's a little much to be using such acerbic language as to accuse someone of "charging" a keeper as if it were an intentional malicious act. Player safety is important, but so is appreciating the game and the players and not putting them down after the fact, whether the act is intentional or not.
The clip looks different depending on the viewer's perspective. To me, it looks fairly obvious that she was going for the ball and then pitched forward off balance as she knocked into the keeper. As a player, I've seen similar things happen and not ever get called. Heck, I had one game with a 1v1 where she was coming at me hard and I was mid-sprint with the ball and as I tried to slip the ball past her, she came down on her knees and her nose collided with my knee mid-step. One broken nose and no goal later, no call.
At any rate, the point is, the rule in the game is that you cannot challenge when the keeper has the ball in her possession, not that you have to back off in a two foot radius when the ball is near her. A good striker continues to challenge the ball until it's in possession of the gk just like a good gk challenges the ball to get it into her possession when it's in her box, then the good striker does whatever they can to get out of the way.
I think we should be applauding the referees for taking the time to consult with each other before making any decision and try to keep away from using such charged language based off of grainy video and personal biases.
These kids played hard and they played their hearts out and I wish BE good luck tomorrow and I know Waccamaw will be waiting next season with even more heart to put into the game.
PS. Before anyone accuses me of not caring about player safety, I say this as someone who will hopefully be in a Orthopaedic Surgery residency in three years with a focus on youth and professional sports medicine for fellowship. And I want to do research on helping prevent ACL injuries in female soccer players.
Last edited by adidaskitten86; 05/21/09 11:25 PM.
Courage is what it takes to stand up and speak; [it] is also what it takes to sit down and listen.
|
|
|
|
