Відео

for sure. if it's actually a foul, it's gotta be a PK!

@@trukweaz you can see however, PKs were not being given that day: ua-cam.com/video/dyFiLKhg1eE/v-deo.htmlfeature=shared

The trip itself is pretty clear (sticks foot in, misses ball, catches attacker's foot) and the referee seems to be looking right at it. From this angle we can't tell if it's on the line or outside. But not calling it at all is pretty surprising.

@@tonylorinser4116 outcome of the game or the incident. I believe the incident was just the one yellow card. Marshall won the game. The bigger issue was the missed red card earlier on

I think the post-incident piece is critical. Referee confirmed it was to the face with the AR b/c his attention was caught by the foot initially. But making sure nothing pops off after is really important and they got lucky here. Good learning opportunities in this video!

@@danwest3340 he didn't actually signal advantage but did wait to see if it materialized, but, as you can see, it did not.

I'm very confused. He was 25 yd out, so the distance was far away. He kicked the ball before the goalkeeper even made contact with him. The ball was headed. To the left, not even towards the goal. He would have had to book it to even catch up to the ball. very, very soft on this call.

@@paulrisdall that dude is a handsome hero!

@@probaddie456 you've raised an interesting point. Is he "challenging for the ball?" If so, then this is serious foul play. Ostensibly, Red is going for the ball; however, is this a soccer challenge? Do players go in with elbows locked, at head level, and into the opponent's face to challenge for the ball? No. This type of behavior doesn't have anything to do with challenging for the ball and, therefore, he's not challenging for the ball--it's VC. The ball is on the ground. It might be too broad to say this universally for SFP, but it seems like SFP is almost always involving the legs or feet. He does also commit what looks like a yellow (maybe) by getting White's foot too.

According to IFAB, "Hand = possession" From Law 12: "A goalkeeper is considered to be in control of the ball with the hand(s) when: -the ball is between the hands or between the hand and any surface (e.g. ground, own body) or by touching it with any part of the hands or arms, except if the ball rebounds from the goalkeeper or the goalkeeper has made a save -holding the ball in the outstretched open hand -bouncing it on the ground or throwing it in the air A goalkeeper cannot be challenged by an opponent when in control of the ball with the hand(s)." Note that "in control" includes "...touching it with any part of the hands or arms...".

@@davidvalbright I'm pretty confident the ball didn't cross the goal line, but this clip is exactly why the AR always needs to finish the run to the goal line and stay on their toes! There's a great one in the state tournament last year where the keeper totters and tosses the ball back on the field.

@@davidvalbright this one would be tough for an AR who is in the correct position to see. Blue is angled and turning his back and the contact is kind of blue arm/torso to GK arms. He's also got another White defender moving in. AR might get this one, what could the referee be doing in this clip? (Also, even if not a foul, pretty sure the attacker's hand touches the ball so this goal won't stand)

@@refereeadventures391 Center referee can be seen walking well behind the play before the final ball forward is being played. This is very poor anticipation of play by the center referee. He should have seen this big kick coming and been sprinting forward to be ahead of it, ideally with a slight angle on his run so that he could have seen the play in the box clearly.

Take care of the business in HS soccer with these studs exposed tackles and the games are just easier!

@@andrewkoehler2273 it's 100% red for violent conduct. It's excessive force, elbow to face, not a soccer play, creates a serious risk to the opponent, etc. This MUST be red! The challenge to the foot is probably only reckless on its own. It's not well timed, he is challenging for the ball, contact is between feet,, it disregards the opponent's safety, and it's a lunge. Quick clarifier: reckless is yellow. Referee cannot issue red for reckless. Must be excessive force/SFP for a challenge to get to red From IFAB definition (which I believe NFHS uses or something similar): Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and/or endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

@@thomas_delaney yes! If elbow first lunges are okay, the hand won't last long!

For sure--never really want to see a player grabbing the ball from near another player or leaning over a downed opponent. Usually, not much good will follow. For example ua-cam.com/video/0DTIgmnit3k/v-deo.html

Red card is sufficient here. It's an aggressive and careless tackle, but the red player then appears to check on the white player, and seems a bit surprised to have gotten him in the face. Clear red, but it's not malicious enough to warrant further action IMO.

@@pyrophoria2206 It wasn’t a tackle at all. The defender tried to, but never touched the ball. He got dribbled badly by an inside drag move. Also are you telling me that you can’t feel your elbow ramming into a guys face. Sure you can and he slowly turn around. Banned for the season at least.

@@rasclotify please encourage them to sign up to referee. A lot to be learned from this game and how to handle things. But unfortunately the players didn't set a great example for youth. But that's all the more reason to make sure we have good referees working games!

@@bmac6721 I heard he retired immediately after! 😂

The UMass was trying to get the ball which is allowed in soccer.

​​​​@@blm479 that was not allowed lol If she did what she was allowed to do she would have been smarter And took the kick quick from a yard back from where she started the fight from being mad her teammate was fouled from behind. OR she could have had a little more patience to ask the reff for ten yards. Two wrongs. -former D1 soccer player

@@blm479 The first foul wasn't a red. White jersey has NO right to escalate to a full on shove because she couldn't take the kick at the pace and spot she intended to. Girman reacted inappropriately back and actually didn't really throw punches as she definitely could have. Two reds without a doubt. The reff did call two reds btw

Get serious - what a pathetic review. Stick to the couch

I disagree. Your pov is biased. The first foul wasn't a red. White jersey has NO right to escalate to a full on shove because she couldn't take the kick at the pace and spot she intended to. Girman reacted inappropriately back and actually didn't really throw punches as she definitely could have. Two reds without a doubt. If you don't think two reds then you're saying if Girman didn't retaliate to the two hand shove then it would be a yellow?.. no

@@lydiabowman7629Ultimately, both players were sent off which was really the only action the ref could take. With that said, you both gave excellent descriptions of the incident and definitely made the other commenters who posted to this video look juvenile and uninformed.

Looked like she cheap spotted her to me! All mass did was go to pick up ball. She was all pissed off cause of fowl, Mabey. Good job ref??? The assistant almost ran away 😂😂😂

😂 Nice pickup!

I heard that too lol