Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
[quote "Unfortunate timing and placement, but a clear foul that denied a scoring opportunity."
Then that should have been a red card, right? Was any card issued?
As exhibited in the playoff/championship games last year, some high school refs are not aware of this rule. Or is this one of those rules that don't apply to HS? Coach P???
Not enough info given to make a red card determination. A foul maybe, PK maybe...a card of any color doubtful (based on the description of events).
Post said the foul "denied a scoring opportunity." That should have been a red card unless HS rules don't play it that way.
Wait a minute, my understanding of the rule is that if the last defender commits a foul inside the penalty area that denies a scoring opportunity, then a PK and red card ensue. I did not say that it was the last defender that took away the scoring opportunity. The keeper was in the goal, but the foul by the defender took away the opportunity to take a shot. My reason for saying that the foul took away a scoring opportunity was to point out that it was not a meaningless foul away from the play.
Sorry if my description was confusing.
OK, I don't do HS so it may be different. But in us soccer league play the defender must deny a goal or an OBVIOUS goal scoring opportunity. NOTE the key word obvious. So if in the opinion of the ref it was not an obvious goal scoring opportunity there would be no red card.
Here is a clarification from US Soccer. Hope it helps clear up things.
Law 12 provides that a defender whose violation of the Law prevents a goal or denies an obvious
goal-scoring opportunity must be sent off and shown the red card. The "professional foul" which
is taken in a cynical attempt to prevent opponents from scoring requires a quick, firm response by
the referee. Such misconduct by the defender overshadows the severity of the foul itself.
In order for a player to be sent off for denying an "obvious goal-scoring opportunity," four
elements must be present:
• Number of Defenders -- not more than one defender between the foul and the goal, not
counting the defender who committed the foul
• Distance to goal -- the closer the foul is to the goal, the more likely it is an obvious goalscoring
opportunity
• Distance to ball -- the attacker must have been close enough to the ball at the time of the
foul to have continued playing the ball
• Direction of play -- the attacker must have been moving toward the goal at the time the
foul was committed
If any element is missing, there can be no send off for denying an obvious goal-scoring
opportunity. Further, the presence of each of these elements must be "obvious" in order for the
send off to be appropriate under this provision of Law 12
However, the foul might, by itself, warrant a card -- a caution for unsporting behavior, for
example, if the challenge was reckless or a send off if the challenge was violent. If the foul by the
defender is both violent and qualifies as an obvious goal-scoring opportunity offense misconduct,
the referee should include both facts in the game report but must only list one official reason for
the red card.
Referees are reminded that offenses which deny a goal-scoring opportunity are not limited to
those punishable by a direct free kick or penalty kick but may include technical fouls for which the
restart is an indirect free kick.
"We do not quit playing because we grow old, we grow old because we quit playing."
| 
