Safety & Danger GK takes out player

Discussion in 'Outdoor Umpiring Questions & General Chat' started by Jonny3012, Nov 13, 2017 at 7:03 AM.

  1. Jonny3012

    Jonny3012 FHF Newbie

    Joined:
    Monday
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi there. Just want to get an opinion.

    This weekend a GK comes out at an attacker coming through.

    GK slides and takes both player and ball, ball is not in front of attacker, at best to the side, as was in process of turning so at best simultaneously, at worse player first. GK obviously claimed ball first, attacker says he was first contact.

    Umpire explained that regardless of whether ball was taken or not, going to ground and going through the player, the slide was dangerous and awarded a flick.

    What's the general consensus? Other umpires present also said GK should have got a yellow, would this have been too much?
     
  2. Nij

    Nij FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,705
    Likes Received:
    644
    The PS was correct. There's no argument against YC either - highly reckless and dangerous - but it seems like personal taste whether to give it. Personally, I'm 50% green and 50% yellow, context dependent.
    Guidance to rule 10.3.a from the 2017 Rules specifically marked out this kind of play, because
     
  3. Jonny3012

    Jonny3012 FHF Newbie

    Joined:
    Monday
    Messages:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks Nij.

    I cited 9.13 reckless play but good thinking about the GK specific rule.

     
  4. Mjackson

    Mjackson FHF Newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2015
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    9
    I had this on Sat. GK came out sliding and caught the attacker as he was passing. PS and 10 min YC. My Assessor agreed. the GK has the same responsibility as an out field player. It is high risk high reward/punishment. If a player in the out field went sliding and took ball and player, it would be a 10 min YC.
     
    Jonny3012 likes this.
  5. Diligent

    Diligent FHF All Time Great
    FHF Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    4,215
    Likes Received:
    945
    Location:
    Hampshire (South Coast of England)
    For me, green isn't so good. Either it's not too bad, and the PS is enough, or it is bad and so yellow.

    Which brings us to the next problem: if it's not too bad - a misjudgement, say - then is that not 'unintentional' and therefore only a PC. On the other hand, going PS says we judged the dangerous action 'intentionally dangerous', so surely that's an 'automatic' card: yellow not green.

    For me, I know that, but I don't like 'automatic', preferring to preserve the finely-graduated scale of penalties available to an umpire. If the fair and appropriate penalty needs some slight imprecision in application of rule, so be it. Is that ok, or not ok?
     
  6. murph

    murph FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2007
    Messages:
    2,275
    Likes Received:
    911
    Location:
    Derby
    SmartSelectImage_2017-11-12-20-17-58.png I survived one of these on Saturday (I tweeted the photos!)

    I got my slide to block (note... BLOCK) all wrong and managed to shift my weight into a desperate lunge, taking the player with me.

    PS no card. Rumours of me getting the ball. Think I'd have been angry at the time at double jeopardy (stroke and a card!) but overall accepting.

    They scored the PS - Making it 5-0
     
  7. Nij

    Nij FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    May 22, 2012
    Messages:
    1,705
    Likes Received:
    644
    I was hedging I think. Part of me doesn't want to send off the keeper for a long time, and another part is trying to say the PS is a lot already, why yellow when green makes the point?
    But then as you say, either it was only 12.4.a and no card, or it was 12.4.b and they can get the hell off.

    If only 11.1 and Um1.3.a and Um1.4.a let us do that as necessary...
     
    #7 Nij, Nov 13, 2017 at 9:18 AM
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2017 at 9:24 AM
  8. sanabas

    sanabas FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Messages:
    2,784
    Likes Received:
    1,076
    If it's a PS, it should be a YC. It would have to be very bad for me to give a 10 minute YC. A goalie is entitled to play the ball with their body, a field player isn't. a goalie is generally sliding from in front of the player, attempting to put their body between the ball & the net. A field player is generally sliding in from behind or the side, desperately hoping to get stick on the ball. It's not the same high risk/high reward calculation, and I'm not going to punish them as harshly if it's a little bit clumsy/mistimed.

    If it's not a YC, it should be a PC. For most goalie slide tackles where they foul, this is what I'll give. Only when they've clearly slid through a player, especially a player with back to goal receiving the ball, or near stationary, would I be thinking PS + YC.

    There's no reason for a keeper's slide tackle to ever be a GC.

    Just because the player falls over does not mean the player was taken out by the keeper, despite the description of their teammates/the player themselves. Often the player runs into a goalie who has stopped moving. Which should be play on, or very occasionally should even be FHD.
     
    Pippinn and adam00 like this.
  9. Stephen65

    Stephen65 FHF Legend

    Joined:
    May 11, 2010
    Messages:
    548
    Likes Received:
    141
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    I've slid hundreds of times and never got a YC for it even when I've taken out ball and attacking player simultaneously. But then I am always intending to play the ball. I have, rarely, had a PC awarded against me but I can't remember
    ever giving away a PS for a mis-timed slide. If I did slide out into the back of a player facing away from me I would expect that to be at least a PC and a YC but I don't do things like that.
     
  10. sanabas

    sanabas FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Messages:
    2,784
    Likes Received:
    1,076
    Off the top of my head, I can remember two PS given against me after a player fell down, neither of which I should have been penalised at all for, and 2 I got away with, which should have both been PS + YC, but resulted in 1 PC and 1 play on.
     
  11. philthy

    philthy FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2007
    Messages:
    3,956
    Likes Received:
    417
    Location:
    Oxford, UK
    I've never had a card for it (which still amazes me!) and i've been penalised for some (PC & PS) which I think were clean - and got away scot-free with ones where I know full well I've got it very wrong.

    It's a really hard area to judge for the umpire - it happens so quickly, and it can be hard to judge who caused the contact - did the keeper slide through, or did the keeper go to block and then the forward just fell over them. A pile of bodies on the ground is likely to go against the keeper (in my experience) even if actually the keeper wasn't the one at fault.
     
  12. scmods

    scmods FHF Regular Player

    Joined:
    May 1, 2017
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    Western Australia
    Clear yellow card. Number 6 has obviously pushed the poor goalkeeper to the ground and is now body slamming him in order to prevent him from getting up again.
     
    AnonUmp and Beardymanbristol like this.
  13. Gingerbread

    Gingerbread FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    541
    For me, taking out a player is either PS (for the foul preventing a potential goal) or PS + YC for dangerous play (or if they do something naughty like using the stick to trip the player)
     
  14. CH.ump

    CH.ump FHF Top Player

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2013
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    49
    probable rather than potential
     
  15. Gingerbread

    Gingerbread FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    541
    Yeah I wasn't quoting the rule exactly
     
  16. phi11ip

    phi11ip FHF Top Player

    Joined:
    May 28, 2012
    Messages:
    222
    Likes Received:
    63
    If the keeper is carded, then no time should be allowed for a player to put the full kit on, right?...

    On the back of this, has anyone ever seen an umpire successfully implement this punishment? I've now seen two keeper YCs and a RC all 'fixed' by the game being held for someone else to re-kit.
     
  17. CH.ump

    CH.ump FHF Top Player

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2013
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    49

    Yes, I've done it, twice
     
    phi11ip likes this.
  18. Gingerbread

    Gingerbread FHF All Time Great

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,735
    Likes Received:
    541
    Correct - see 2.3g


    time is stopped for substitution of goalkeepers (ie wearing full protective equipment) but not for other substitutions.
    Time is stopped briefly to permit a goalkeeper who is wearing full protective equipment to take part in a substitution. The time stoppage is not extended for a goalkeeper to put on or take off protective equipment as part of a substitution including following a goalkeeper injury or suspension. If necessary, play should continue with a player with goalkeeping privileges and wearing a different coloured shirt or only with field players while a substitute goalkeeper puts on or takes off protective equipment.

    Yes I do it if a keeper is sent off, offer the team the choice of player in face mask or field player but we will be restarting immediately. Not had it for a while, last one I saw the GK was sent off by my colleague and again restarted. Pitch time is often tight and 2x 5 minute delays for kit off and on again is too long
     
    phi11ip likes this.
  19. redumpire

    redumpire FHF All Time Great
    FHF Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Messages:
    10,634
    Likes Received:
    2,757
    Yes, that’s right.
    Yes.
    The umpires should have been stronger and insisted the game re-started immediately.
     
    phi11ip likes this.
  20. Diligent

    Diligent FHF All Time Great
    FHF Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2007
    Messages:
    4,215
    Likes Received:
    945
    Location:
    Hampshire (South Coast of England)
    Historical note: before 2007, each team must have a full-kit GK, so time was stopped while all the kit changed over (no team at ordinary levels had a spare keeper waiting to go on). Since 2007, the rules have provided other options, so the team picks an option and the match continues.

    In some jurisdictions, there were/are regulations requiring a full-kit GK, for youth hockey for example, (maybe applies to matches @phi11ip saw?) and of course there was/is no alternative but to hold play while all the kit changed over, and then again to change it back. Green card the GK anyone? :confused:
     
    phi11ip likes this.

Share This Page