Ask the ref?

soccerdad72 said:
Had an odd situation the other day and was curious what the standard procedure is for this.

Started off the game with a three-man crew. About 10 minutes into game, center ref goes down with a leg cramp. Obviously, clock gets stopped, teams go to their benches and the trainer checks out the center ref.

Game restarts as a two-man system. The really odd part about it was that the crew had headsets from the beginning, and the center ends up sitting on the sideline for the remainder of the game, seemingly still communicating with the two other refs.

Has anyone seen that before? Should the center ref still been able to communicate with the other two during the game?
Click to expand...
Yes, this is permissible. Similar to high level playoff games where they have a “fourth official,” the official not on the field is allowed to give insight/recommend calls/etc.

more commonly at the lower level, if you have a two man JV game and a three man varsity game and the varsity ref shows up before the game begins, you can consult them on things during the game. Final call still stands with the refs on the field, but they can be in communication.
 
I’m curious to get the opinion of our Yapper community here. There’s a D1 school in the SW district that has a varsity assistant coach that is also a referee. Should the OHSAA allow that ref to work games in the same division he coaches? Isn’t that an inherent conflict of interest? Also, what’s your opinion on that same ref telling a kid if he re-enters the game both he and the head coach will be red carded? Since when is substituting a player violent conduct or a serious foul play?

I understand there is a ref shortage but D2, D3, club and girls’ teams need refs too.
 
Wingback Willie said:
I’m curious to get the opinion of our Yapper community here. There’s a D1 school in the SW district that has a varsity assistant coach that is also a referee. Should the OHSAA allow that ref to work games in the same division he coaches? Isn’t that an inherent conflict of interest? Also, what’s your opinion on that same ref telling a kid if he re-enters the game both he and the head coach will be red carded? Since when is substituting a player violent conduct or a serious foul play?

I understand there is a ref shortage but D2, D3, club and girls’ teams need refs too.
Click to expand...
Officiating the same division in regular season is fine. Officiating the same conference would not be.

shouldn’t officiate the same division in tournament.

need more clarification regarding the statement. As presented, certainly doesn’t seem good.
 
hammer89 said:
Officiating the same division in regular season is fine. Officiating the same conference would not be.

shouldn’t officiate the same division in tournament.

need more clarification regarding the statement. As presented, certainly doesn’t seem good.
Click to expand...

ITA - there has to be a story behind that assistant coach / ref and the other team.
 
Some significant high school rule changes this year. Will be interesting to see if all the refs are up to speed by game 1
 
HaaaveYouMetTed said:
My understanding is that if the defender trapped the ball with the intent that the keeper would pick it up, that's an infraction and the ref should award an indirect free kick at the spot where the keeper picked it up. Because there's no "pass" back to the keeper in this situation, it might be difficult for a ref to say the trap was "deliberate" as the rule contemplates the term, but if the ref thinks it's on purpose then it's definitely a violation.

The rule calls for the ball to be placed where the keeper picked it up. In this scenario, that would mean an indirect free kick from 1 or 2 feet in front of the goal. Because the defending team cannot stand within 10 yards of the goal, it would seem that all the offensive team would have to do is touch the ball and pass it into a wide open goal. I'm not sure if the 10 yard rule is enforced so close to the goal though.
Click to expand...
WRONG......try actually researching the NF Rules and/or FIFA's Laws. Any infraction but the defense that would result in IDFK that occurs inside the Goal Area would see that restart take place on the 6 YL of the Goal Area nearest to where the infraction occurred. The wall of defenders would then be permitted to line up ON the Goal Line, in the mouth of the goal.

Secondly, few, IF ANY, officials worth their whistle would consider this a "Pass Back", which requires the ball to be KICKED with the boot.
 
EastYoungstown said:
Me again....

So I have a question concerning the clock and high school soccer. Neither of my sons are old enough to play HS yet so I am not very familiar with how things go at the end of games and the end of halves.

Is there any consideration for injury time at all? Does the ref just blow the whistle at the end? Does the ref even blow a final whistle or does a buzzer just go off when time is up?

I ask because we were in Virginia at a big tournament this weekend and the ref actually blew the whistle while a corner was in the air at halftime. I couldn't believe it. None of us could. He literally blew the whistle while the ball was in flight. Remarkable. Why even let them take the corner if your just gonna blow the whistle as soon as the kid kicks it?

I thought this was bizarre and the only thing I could think of is how the clock is handled at the high school level. Maybe the ref also does high school and takes the clock that literal?
Click to expand...
Several answers EY, for your several questions........

There is a great difference between HS soccer & youth / traveling with regard to time keeping. IF the time is on a scoreboard (as is typically for nearly ALL hs matches), it's the "official" time......when the clock hits zero, the ball is instantly dead. IOW, it MUST completely be OFF the GL, in the goal BEFORE "zero". For this reason, I normally ask time keepers IF their scoreboard has a horn or buzzer at 'zero'. If not, then I ask them to say 'zero' while counting as close to the clock time as possible. I also do a mental countdown in rhythm with the clock. For injuries in HS play, we'll frequently check on the player to see if they want out........if I'm close to them already, I'll just ask. If I have some distance to cover, I'll just stop the clock. New Rule this year.......if we stop the clock, and the Trainer or Coach does not enter the field OR we don't beckon them on, the player can remind in the game.

For USSF games, with time kept on the field, it's at the discretion of the Referee when to end a half. As a Standard of Practice, I will NEVER end a half, or the game if it's tied, etc., with a team on the attack. What that referee did in VA is simply horrible 'match management'. Period.
 
A goal was scored but was not counted, whose at fault? The video is from Monday night's game between Bay (at the time 11-1-0) at Avon Lake (at the time 11-1-1) match. As you can/will see, a shot by the Avon Lake player is tipped up by the Bay keeper and it appears to go over the cross bar at normal speed from a far. Ref declares a corner kick. Avon Lake players point out the hole in the top of the netting and state that it was a goal. From the non-VAR approved replay (because high school does not have it), you can see that the ball should have been declared a goal.

The match ended in a draw when it looks like Avon Lake would have won the match with that goal.

The game was at Avon Lake. Who is responsible for allowing or knowing that the giant hole exists in the net? I had a coach say it was the referees fault for not addressing the net before the game. Some folks are saying that it is the Avon Lake's Athletic Director's fault because he was informed about the problem. Some will say it is the Avon Lake coaches fault for not following through and getting it repaired/replaced.

I have a hard time blaming the referees as they are not required to perform maintenance on a field. They can only declare if the field conditions are not safe, etc. I have no idea if they had knowledge before the game of the condition of the net. Even if they knew of the hole, I am not sure that they would have seen the ball pass through the hole. So in my opinion, it comes down to the coach and the AD. To me, the fact that the tie gets hung on the team's won-loss record, it is on the coach to grab a few zip ties and fix the net before the match. Thoughts?

 
I would say that the AD would ultimately be the responsible party for the maintenance (or, at least the party responsible for getting it repaired) at their facility. If the AD knew the hole was there and didn't have someone fix it, it's on them. If the AD instructed someone else to fix it and it didn't get done, it's probably still on the AD.

I had a game last night (Painesville Harvey at Gilmour) where we had a similar situation. I will admit, as ref on the JV game, I walked the field and thought I checked both goals for any holes, but I apparently missed a broken zip tie on the bottom part of one of the goals. Needless to say, naturally a shot ended up going right through that gap. Fortunately for us, it wasn't a hard hit shot (like in that Avon Lake game), so it was easy for both the center and myself to watch a chipped shot go over the goalie, into the goal and through the side of the net. We confirmed with each other, saw the same thing, and allowed the goal.
 
Referees typically do net checks before games. I know it's not every time in HS, but it is in college. This situation was 100% avoidable. Even the coach should have fixed it. It's rather embarrassing to have a net that looks like that, fix it for the sake of your own players.

Not sure how a corner would have been picked as the proper outcome. The ball never went close to being at that height. The goalkeeper was basically on the goal line. No way that could have ended in going over the bar, especially if the AR was looking and could see it went through the net.

On another note, I'd have to find it, but a non-goal is making its rounds on X (Twitter) from an English non-league match where a penalty beats the GK, but hits a bottom corner frame inside the goal and immediately ricochets out diagonally -- as if it just hit the post on the outside/slight inside. No goal given. It was so quick and only making its rounds on X because of a goal line video that clearly showed where it hit inside the goal.
 
From what i recall of the bay/avon lake play, there was a deflection on the shot that pushed it high(er). I could not tell live that it went in the net. It only was super obvious on the replay. For how obvious it was on replay, there was relatively limited "live" protest of the situation.
 
bucksman said:
From what i recall of the bay/avon lake play, there was a deflection on the shot that pushed it high(er). I could not tell live that it went in the net. It only was super obvious on the replay. For how obvious it was on replay, there was relatively limited "live" protest of the situation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the goalie deflected it up. That's why the assumption of a corner kick. In real time, it did look like it went over the crossbar instead of underneath it.
 
It’s a requirement of the refs to check the nets (and the rest of the field/equipment) before the game. If the refs were unaware of the hole, that is on them.

if they were aware of it, alerted the home team, and decided to play the game anyways (couldn’t be fixed, whatever) that’s slightly less on them. Live, that’s an incredibly hard call to make. This video is a great example of why as a ref you’d have to stand firm and say we can’t start the game until this is fixed.
 
sportsfanofyear said:
A goal was scored but was not counted, whose at fault? The video is from Monday night's game between Bay (at the time 11-1-0) at Avon Lake (at the time 11-1-1) match. As you can/will see, a shot by the Avon Lake player is tipped up by the Bay keeper and it appears to go over the cross bar at normal speed from a far. Ref declares a corner kick. Avon Lake players point out the hole in the top of the netting and state that it was a goal. From the non-VAR approved replay (because high school does not have it), you can see that the ball should have been declared a goal.

The match ended in a draw when it looks like Avon Lake would have won the match with that goal.

The game was at Avon Lake. Who is responsible for allowing or knowing that the giant hole exists in the net? I had a coach say it was the referees fault for not addressing the net before the game. Some folks are saying that it is the Avon Lake's Athletic Director's fault because he was informed about the problem. Some will say it is the Avon Lake coaches fault for not following through and getting it repaired/replaced.

I have a hard time blaming the referees as they are not required to perform maintenance on a field. They can only declare if the field conditions are not safe, etc. I have no idea if they had knowledge before the game of the condition of the net. Even if they knew of the hole, I am not sure that they would have seen the ball pass through the hole. So in my opinion, it comes down to the coach and the AD. To me, the fact that the tie gets hung on the team's won-loss record, it is on the coach to grab a few zip ties and fix the net before the match. Thoughts?

Click to expand...
As an official I'd be heavily embarrassed if we let a game get to that point with a giant hole in the net. We can get zip ties or tie the hole together or SOMETHING before the game. That being said, that hole didn't show up between the JV and Varsity game. The school should have known about that.
 
cincyeaglefan said:
Why do you say no card is shown? If you watch long enough #6 White is clearly now on the sidelines before the restart of play. So SOME card looks to have been shown as it wasn't a substitution opportunity.
Click to expand...
Exactly. She went off the field, and with the referee's demeanor and actions, it seemed to be a yellow -- or, play would not have restarted with her still on the sideline. CR would have ensured she leaves the area. We truly don't know though, as we don't see who may have subbed on for her on the yellow card as well. If it were a red, then CR didn't fully complete it by removing the player from the area either.

Schools need to ensure their videographers get the "action." That way things are viewable/reviewable. It's common practice to ensure there's ability for everyone to learn from the situation and to ensure that any possible issues are caught on camera.
 
soccerdad72 said:
Yeah, the goalie deflected it up. That's why the assumption of a corner kick. In real time, it did look like it went over the crossbar instead of underneath it.
Click to expand...
In what real time? From the stands 70+ yards away? In real time on video, and surely on the field, it would have been a goal. If anyone were truly looking at the action and play.
 
belied dat said:
In what real time? From the stands 70+ yards away? In real time on video, and surely on the field, it would have been a goal. If anyone were truly looking at the action and play.
Click to expand...
I just meant on my first watching of the video that was posted, it was hard to tell if it went in or over. Center probably should have had a proper angle to see it better than the video, however, I agree.
 
belied dat said:
Exactly. She went off the field, and with the referee's demeanor and actions, it seemed to be a yellow -- or, play would not have restarted with her still on the sideline. CR would have ensured she leaves the area. We truly don't know though, as we don't see who may have subbed on for her on the yellow card as well. If it were a red, then CR didn't fully complete it by removing the player from the area either.

Schools need to ensure their videographers get the "action." That way things are viewable/reviewable. It's common practice to ensure there's ability for everyone to learn from the situation and to ensure that any possible issues are caught on camera.
Click to expand...
Players do not need to leave the area when they receive a red card, only coaches.
 
soccerdad72 said:
I just meant on my first watching of the video that was posted, it was hard to tell if it went in or over. Center probably should have had a proper angle to see it better than the video, however, I agree.
Click to expand...
Same here. Didn't see the goal until the slow motion.
 
hammer89 said:
Players do not need to leave the area when they receive a red card, only coaches.
Click to expand...
Yup:

A soccer player or bench personnel is considered “ejected” upon receiving a straight Red Card (NF Rule 12-8-3) and shall be ineligible for all contests for the remainder of that day. In addition, the student shall be ineligible for all contests at all levels in soccer until two regular season/tournament contests are played at the same level as the ejection. The player is to remain with the team under the jurisdiction of the head coach for the remainder of the contest
 
belied dat said:
Schools need to ensure their videographers get the "action." That way things are viewable/reviewable. It's common practice to ensure there's ability for everyone to learn from the situation and to ensure that any possible issues are caught on camera.
Click to expand...
Most schools use Hudl for their video systems. It's an automated video system, so there's usually no "videographer"
 
soccerdad72 said:
Most schools use Hudl for their video systems. It's an automated video system, so there's usually no "videographer"
Click to expand...
Most? Do you have the data to show that? I would agree that Hudl is largely used, but it's also largely used by either A) a manual camera operator or B) a VEO camera. At either rate, the video is then uploaded to Hudl. With the zooming that the video that's being talked about, it was most definitely a videographer.

That camera was clearly operated manually. An automated video system normally tracks the ball, it doesn't track a CR who's walking around the field (even if it did, it would have tracked to show the referee offering the card). Additionally, a lot of the automated video systems shoot in wide angle, that allow for the capturing of events across the field.
 
belied dat said:
Most? Do you have the data to show that? I would agree that Hudl is largely used, but it's also largely used by either A) a manual camera operator or B) a VEO camera. At either rate, the video is then uploaded to Hudl. With the zooming that the video that's being talked about, it was most definitely a videographer.

That camera was clearly operated manually. An automated video system normally tracks the ball, it doesn't track a CR who's walking around the field (even if it did, it would have tracked to show the referee offering the card). Additionally, a lot of the automated video systems shoot in wide angle, that allow for the capturing of events across the field.
Click to expand...
No data - just that in my experience, Hudl seems to be commonly used by many schools. In a ref meeting this weekend, it was discussed that a general account be set up for referees in Hudl so that game videos could be requested for review after a game. That's not to say that everyone has that video system, just that it's the most widely used.

You're right, however, in that Copley video, the zooming and panning seems to indicate that someone was working the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top