DOGSO and red cards.

I refereed this weekend at quite a high profile event with teams from all around the country in attendance. Unfortunately I issued a number red cards for offences whereby an obvious goal scoring opportunity was denied. I must admit that I was reluctant to send the players off knowing they had travelled a long way to play in the tournament. The fact that as well as the red card only an indirect free kick is awarded which seldom leads to a goal,  So does the punishment fit the crime? Would it be better to award a penalty when a DOGSO offence occurs? Thereby reintroducing the goal scoring opportunity. A blue card could still be given and the player serve a timed suspension. 

Parents
  • Whilst I agree to a point with your thoughts Mick, I do think that DOGSO and running is down to individual interpretation on the pitch. There are many refs that allow players to move quickly with the ball, and move sideways without saying they are running because of their interpretation of this rule. The same would apply to DOGSO with the potential of any kick towards goal being interpreted as a goal scoring opportunity regardless of where they are on the pitch, due to pitch size. 

    The training (which you have raised in another thread) given to referees does need to be more robust, and there should be a way to actively record on the Whole Game system the walking refs so that the scoring system can be correctly used and feedback provided. Something we in the Lincolnshire League have tried to do over the past few seasons. 

    Flo, a trial within a league would be beneficial definitely! I would be happy to discuss this with the Lincolnshire to be a pilot league. 

  • Hannah, almost every decision made by the referee is a subjective one. A game of football be it walking, regular or futsal will always have grey areas which are down to a referee to decide upon. Not walking should not be judged by the speed of the movement. Many players can walk very fast by using excellent techniques.

Reply Children
No Data