Return to EMSOA home page

GET YOUR HEAD IN THE GAME©
Just the Facts ...

 In a high school soccer game, the law is enforced by two highly trained and well paid individuals. This story is true. The names have been left out to protect the guilty.

 The veteran and the rookie were working the day watch on a Saturday afternoon. The weather was clear; the field was perfect, with crisp white lines. Suddenly, and without warning, a midfielder lofts a long ball into the opponents' penalty area. The defenders are caught up field.

 The veteran, at midfield, looks and sees that there is no problem. The keeper has plenty of time to gather the ball. Two attackers, at full speed, are bearing down on the keeper. Under the pretext of playing the ball, they stand in front of him, blocking his release.

 The rookie, hugging the touch line, shouts, "Let him go!" but gets no response. Was he not heard or just ignored?

The keeper takes one step to his left and his followed by one of the attackers. Again he takes a step and again he is followed by the same attacker.

 "Back Off!" yells the keeper, and forcefully, with the ball, pushes the attacker, landing him on his back.

 The rookie whistles, runs into the penalty area, points to the penalty mark and cautions the keeper for the deliberate act of unsporting behavior. All hell breaks loose! The game ends 1-0.

Questions:

1. Did the rookie referee read the game correctly?
2. Did the rookie referee read the play correctly?
3. Was the outcome technically correct?
4. Was justice served?
5. Advice for the rookie?

Possible Answers.

1. The referee read the game correctly. His initial decision to let the game continue was commendable, after all, the keeper had punted the ball 80 yards before
   
   
2. His reading of this particular set of events was however incorrect. The goal keeper had the ball. The only possible intentions of the forwards were interference or intimidation.
   
   
3. Although technically correct, the penalty kick, not to mention the caution, were grossly unjust.
   
   
4. Actions he could have taken:
1. Get away from the touch line
2. Interference of the goalkeeper warrants immediate intervention.
3. Calling from 30 yards away is not an effective deterrent.
4. Whistling as soon a he got no response to his verbal directions would have been timely.
5. The advantage of preventive mechanics is a huge tool in the referee's bag of tricks.