SoccerFanGMC
New member
Thought I heard that Ohio State told him he needs more bulk to play in the Big 10, so not sure that is an option.
Elder beats Mason in Overtime
- Thread starter lotr10
- Start date
Thought I heard that Ohio State told him he needs more bulk to play in the Big 10, so not sure that is an option.
LOL...........LOL, now THAT is funny!! Dude, that was me. Now, if you want to insinuate something, go right ahead. It doesn't bother me, and it fits right along with this thread.
Now, if you want to know what REALLY happened, here it is: A shot was made on the Mason goal and it was followed up by the players. Those players eventually took the goal off of the line since they are portable goals. Before play was restarted, I went over to make sure the goal was back to where it should have been. The Mason keeper told me that he fixed it and I told him, jokingly, that I didn't trust him and that I wanted to make sure (there was one hit on the HIP). After I fixed it, I told him that I didn't want him bitching at me if a goal was counted because the goal wasn't on the line correctly, and then I headed back to my position (and there was the second hit on the HIP). I've only seen that cat once, and that was one I reffed their game earlier in the year.
Nice try on trying to make a big deal out of nothing. Like I said, it goes right along with this thread.
Darth, or Luke I mean, until you become a certified referee, you will not understand the "ethics" of calling fouls where (penalty box) and when (late in a tournament round). LOTR explained it pretty well, so I won't go into it again.
Do you see those fouls called in the World Cup games? I didn't think so.
At this point, after reading what you have had to say, I'm convinced that you felt it WAS a foul (the push in the back when it was 1-1) and that you WOULD have called it had it been 3 minutes into the 2nd half instead of that late in the game.
Ethics. Pshaw! A foul is a foul is a foul... unless it's a fowl (i.e. center ref). (I am a slick punster, you know.) I've played soccer. I've coached soccer. I've ref'd soccer. Been around the game for 25+ years now. (I'm hoping that's enough "street cred" for me to form this opinion.)
Think what you want, but I would NOT have called it, either. Why would I be defending the fowl's decision on not calling a foul if I would have called it???
Let the kids play it out. If it continues to happen, then the PK will be warranted.
Did the play result in a goal or not? How much more advantage do you want than that? The actual player who was fouled does not have to maintain the advantage as long as his team does there should be no call. Are you the Meyer kid's dad and upset that he didn't get credit for the goal? If that's the case relax, the kid already has Elder's scoring record.
With all the whinning by Elder fans on this thread you would think Elder lost the game. Get over it and move on.
PantherDad
Active member
Sorry, but i'm not Anthony's Dad and his Dad would not be worried about him not scoring that goal.
I'm not whining about the game (my team won), all i'm saying is I think when a player is intentionally fouled in the box to prevent a goal that foul should be called! If a team notices the ref not calling it they will continue to do it throughout the game.
Yes, Elder did score soon after the foul, but the clear advantage was taken away from them with the initial foul. They got a lucky bounce!!!
ColerainWinsAgain
New member
So that's why he just stood there... I couldn't tell from where I was sitting, it's just weird to sit there and see a goalie whip around when the ball hits the post like he didn't even see it. I thought maybe he was still directing players around or something, thanks for that info!
PantherDad
Active member
The goal didn't happen immediately after the foul. The Elder player would have scored a goal if the foul didn't accure. The problem i have with the play is that Elder had to go continue to play after the foul when they would of scored on the original play. The advantage was cleary taken away from Elder on the original foul and they got a lucky break that the ball found a open player. That's all i'm saying...
Well, no offense, but you just proved yourself wrong. There is no such thing as a "lucky break" when the advantage is being played. That's the whole reason that an advantage is played out because the "fouled" team remained in possession of the ball.
Look guys, again you can go back and forth about it forever, but the real answer is that fouls and/or non-fouls are NOT cut and dry, black and white, etc. That's why some officials get to where they are because they can leverage the action to make the proper calls most of the time. We all know that not everyone is going to be happy with what is called or not called, so instead of constantly whining about it, or trying to make a point, or getting the last word in, you need to accept it for what it is and move on. There is absolutely ZERO chance that that specific no call will be reversed, as well as there is absolutely ZERO chance that any call or no call will be reversed because a parent, coach, or player was yelling about it.
Just like I say in my pregame to the players..............I don't tell you guys how to play the game, so don't tell me how to ref. That same mantra goes for every official out there. It also applies to the coaches and parents. We don't tell them how to coach or be a good parent, so don't tell us how to be a good official. You are supposed to be watching the play of the game, not what the ref will call or not call next. Nothing will change so as Taylor says on Kid Nation...................DEAL WITH IT!!
NEXT!!!!!
ColerainWinsAgain
New member
Yes, we are talking about the World Cup to these kids.
If you pay attention to soccer there are always multiple fouls committed in the box, but you just don't call them. If you called every foul in the box the same as you called it on the rest of the field the scores would be in double digits every game.
I played defense and took advantage of this. You just have to know what you can get away with, I always played straight up in the box but alot more physical then outside the box, why? Because you just don't give away penalty kicks unless it's a really bad foul.
Actually it was a good no call... I don't care what anyone says, I would much rather have a controversial no call then a controversial call. Especially late in the game in the box.
ColerainWinsAgain
New member
I didn't realize that refs had the discression of calling or not calling a penalty based on where it occurs on the field at a particular point in the game.
They absolutely do. You don't have to call a game by the books, everything is at the refs discression as long as it is within the rules. They do have the right to let the play continue and thats what he chose to do.
Wow, Luke!! Take it easy! You're going to bust a vein!!
I've said before that I'm not going to mention my credentials, but I will have you know that I am highly respected. I don't get to be on a state final crew if I suck.
Anyway, if you think you're so knowledgeable about the game, and not just the rules, as anyone can pass a test, then get out here and better us by joining the referee world. I've also stated before that there is a difference in KNOWING the rules and APPLYING the rules. It's obvious that you don't know much about the APPLYING part.
Good luck studying and I'll see you on the pitch next year.
I've said before that I'm not going to mention my credentials, but I will have you know that I am highly respected. I don't get to be on a state final crew if I suck.
Anyway, if you think you're so knowledgeable about the game, and not just the rules, as anyone can pass a test, then get out here and better us by joining the referee world. I've also stated before that there is a difference in KNOWING the rules and APPLYING the rules. It's obvious that you don't know much about the APPLYING part.
Good luck studying and I'll see you on the pitch next year.
Let me know if you are reffing the Elder/Beavercreek game. If so I'd like to forward this thread to Elder's coaching staff. They can let their defense know that inside of 5 minutes anything goes inside the box.
SWEET! We're on to Page 4 now!!
I wish I was reffing that game because I would definitely want you to forward that to them. It'll make you really look like an idiot seeing how you don't seem to want to read my posts.
Who did you play for Luke?
ColerainWinsAgain
New member
I was at the game, I was rooting for the Panthers, and I didn't get upset at the call... The only calls I was looking for that game were the constant shove offs by the Mason goalie, other then that it was a well officiated game from my POV.
As far as the student fans going back and forth...it was great to see at least that so many fans did show up and support their programs. Reading posts before the game, the Mason fans were taking great pride in their vocal support during their Colerain match, and they came out in full force also for Elder.
After sitting on the Elder side and looking at the huge gay reference banner for a couple of hours, I knew that eventually the Elder kids would retaliate, and unfortunatley they did against the Mason defender. (They started up the USA cheer only after the Mason kids led a cheer about Elder star Anthony Meyer).
Despite that, it was a great match. Well played, well coached, and I think, well officiated.
Now I only hope my Highlanders will find a new coach that will bring Oak Hills back to that level.
After sitting on the Elder side and looking at the huge gay reference banner for a couple of hours, I knew that eventually the Elder kids would retaliate, and unfortunatley they did against the Mason defender. (They started up the USA cheer only after the Mason kids led a cheer about Elder star Anthony Meyer).
Despite that, it was a great match. Well played, well coached, and I think, well officiated.
Now I only hope my Highlanders will find a new coach that will bring Oak Hills back to that level.
epanther08
New member
OK!! This game is over now so let's make a few more statements and move on.
1.) Mason played a ---- of a game and it definately hurt them to not create opportunities off throw ins and corner kicks. They were all very skilled and very quick especially mid-field. Niro played a great game and Elder is deeply sorry for what was said by the cheering section.
2.) Elder needs a stronger bench. They looked dead towards the end of each half. It's crucial to sub throughout the game, especially when you make it this far into the tournament. When you're playing such high-quality teams your players need to have the energy to go all-out the entire game because one person who doesn't get back in time can ruin the game. Too many possible or lost scoring opportunities could be lost because Elder is so tired. If they had a few more players who could step up and go in for a little they would be an unbelievable team.
3.) I completely agree that there should be more freedom in the box. Everything goes in the box for the most part unless it was completely blatant. The two no calls that have been debated should've been called(at least one). You have to call something that blatant especially when it happens twice in a game. Elder got lucky on the first no call and ednded up with a scoring opportunity but they were not given the advantage, the ref chose to just not make that call and eventually Elder found the ball on their foot and put it in the net. Other than that and a few controversial out of bounds calls i thought the officiatiing was great.
4.) Both cheering sections lacked class, NO DOUBT. Elder knows not to start cheers like that and it should never happen again but Mason cannot complain at all. Both cheering sections were saying innappropriate things the whole game. And when you make posters like that..... You're just asking to be torn apart by Elder. Yeah we're used to the homosexual cheers and all but doesn't mean you can make a big --- poster about it so don't complain about anything Elder said or did because you did the exact same thing, that's just how it goes in a high school cheering section. ---- happens so get over it. But nice confederate flag as well Mason.
Now let's stop talking about this game and worry about the next one. Great game to both teams and GO PANTHERS!
1.) Mason played a ---- of a game and it definately hurt them to not create opportunities off throw ins and corner kicks. They were all very skilled and very quick especially mid-field. Niro played a great game and Elder is deeply sorry for what was said by the cheering section.
2.) Elder needs a stronger bench. They looked dead towards the end of each half. It's crucial to sub throughout the game, especially when you make it this far into the tournament. When you're playing such high-quality teams your players need to have the energy to go all-out the entire game because one person who doesn't get back in time can ruin the game. Too many possible or lost scoring opportunities could be lost because Elder is so tired. If they had a few more players who could step up and go in for a little they would be an unbelievable team.
3.) I completely agree that there should be more freedom in the box. Everything goes in the box for the most part unless it was completely blatant. The two no calls that have been debated should've been called(at least one). You have to call something that blatant especially when it happens twice in a game. Elder got lucky on the first no call and ednded up with a scoring opportunity but they were not given the advantage, the ref chose to just not make that call and eventually Elder found the ball on their foot and put it in the net. Other than that and a few controversial out of bounds calls i thought the officiatiing was great.
4.) Both cheering sections lacked class, NO DOUBT. Elder knows not to start cheers like that and it should never happen again but Mason cannot complain at all. Both cheering sections were saying innappropriate things the whole game. And when you make posters like that..... You're just asking to be torn apart by Elder. Yeah we're used to the homosexual cheers and all but doesn't mean you can make a big --- poster about it so don't complain about anything Elder said or did because you did the exact same thing, that's just how it goes in a high school cheering section. ---- happens so get over it. But nice confederate flag as well Mason.
Now let's stop talking about this game and worry about the next one. Great game to both teams and GO PANTHERS!
I disagree 100% here! I've never played the game nor reffed it but in nearly 20 years of watching soccer at all levels (World Cup; MLS; National Team Qualifiers; International Friendlies; Youth Leagues in England; Club and High school soccer) refs differentiate between fouls in the field of play and in the box. And thank goodness they do! Are you trying to tell me that the typical foul called at midfield should result in a PK if called in the box! Wow, soccer would be very interesting with 10 - 20 pk's per game!
The box is different then the field of play. For one, there's a guy allowed to use his hands in the box. This alone completely changes the dynamics of what is a foul and not. The box is also much more congested and it gets especially packed in during throw ins, corner kicks and free kicks. The dynamics of play in the box are completely different for all these reasons and thus fouls can not be called the same way as on the rest of the field. I can't believe we're arguing over something so self evident!
If I was an Elder fan I wouldn't be worried about PK's not awarded in a game I just won, rather I would worry about the lack of depth which had my guys unable to move at the end of the game and how that might affect the next couple of games where the oppenant is likely to have multiple top notch subs.
I am a ref and way to many refs don't call fouls in the box because "the game shouldn't be won that way". Well sorry but that's cr@p. If there is a blatant foul in the box. It should be called. You can't change the rules because you don't want a game won or lost that way. Sorry but Luke's right!!! If you don't call these fouls in the box the defense will find out right away they can get away with it. You may be a "well respected ref" but your wrong.
Anyway, back to the game. I was talking to a friend today at work who is from Mason and he told me that last year the Mason boys coach coached the Mason girls. Now, I'm not trying to start anything but is it possible that the tactical decision to not use aggressive throw ins in favor of playing the ball to the feet was a result of this coach not appreciating/understanding the difference between the boys/girls games?
I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but the inability to execute throw ins into the box was a huge missed opportunity for Mason. My friend agreed and he thought it was a tactical decision NOT the lack of players that could throw it in.
I can think of only two reasons you wouldn't want to throw it into the box:
1) You are weak in the air and have a size disadvantage. My sense after seeing Mason 3 times this year is that they were okay in the air and they also had some big kids.
2) You are afraid of the counter attack coming off a poorly thrown in ball that is headed/kicked to midfield. Again, with Niro playing back on defense, I would have NO fear of the counter attack. I'm not sure I saw anybody get a ball by him.
Just was curious what others thought. Am I nuts or is there something to this?
I know I'm beating a dead horse here, but the inability to execute throw ins into the box was a huge missed opportunity for Mason. My friend agreed and he thought it was a tactical decision NOT the lack of players that could throw it in.
I can think of only two reasons you wouldn't want to throw it into the box:
1) You are weak in the air and have a size disadvantage. My sense after seeing Mason 3 times this year is that they were okay in the air and they also had some big kids.
2) You are afraid of the counter attack coming off a poorly thrown in ball that is headed/kicked to midfield. Again, with Niro playing back on defense, I would have NO fear of the counter attack. I'm not sure I saw anybody get a ball by him.
Just was curious what others thought. Am I nuts or is there something to this?
Okay, so every foul you call in the field of play is "blatant". No one is suggesting that blatant fouls in the box shouldn't be awarded pk's, but in a game much of what is called in the field of play should never result in a PK.
On EVERY corner kick I've ever watched there is some pushing in the box by the defenders. That same pushing gets whistled as a foul 50% of the time in the field of play but NEVER in the box.
Fouls in the box and those in the field of play are different and should be called different.
I'm not saying that. What I am saying is too many refs say they will not call fouls in the box because they don't want to award a pk because they don't want the game "won that way". If there is a blatant foul in the box then it needs to be called or defenders know they will get away with it. That's all. It's a judgement call period. but there are refs that won't call fouls in the box and that's cr@p!!!
I don't know a single ref who has said that they would never call a foul in the box, and I don't think that is what phatneff was saying either.
One good description that I have heard a ref say is that a foul in the box better be a felony and not a misdemeanor. Many refs will not call a foul in the box to award a PK if they don't think that at that point or play that the offense had a legitimate goal scoring opportunity. Not what that play could have led to, but what was happening right there. Where the player was and which direction the player was facing is tow main factors of the call.
I was on a game last Tuesday night and the CR called a PK. The defender had jumped up to cut off a through ball and totally took out the striker keeping him from playing the ball right in the middle of the box while they were moving toward the goal. It was definitly the correct call to make.
The fact is that fouls are called differently inside the box compared to outside the box.
Some officials may think that a call needs to be made, but it doesn't warrant a PK. If the foul is close to the edge of the box, the foul can be called as it happened outside the box and issue a direct free kick. Or if that is not available, then if the ref things that he can sell it as a dangerous play, then he can issue an indirect free kick.
No matter how these situations are handled, someone is not going to be happy. It is not the refs job to try to keep everyone happy.
Statechamps02
New member
"Pound those -----cats" in size 10,000 font.
charlemurphy
New member
Delete This Thread Now!!!!!!!!!
I go to Mason
New member
Mason really doesn't have anyone that can throw the ball in that far so they really couldn't do anything with the throw ins. As far as Reedy is concerned, you can't say anything about his coaching style. His overall record and amount of GMC titles speaks for itself. His team went 17-1-2 this season, I'd say that's pretty successful. And no, I'm pretty sure they weren't afraid of a counter attack, they always kept the three backs back which is one thing I didn't understand because their outside backs were their biggest players yet they never sent them up....that's my only question???
Last post for me on this debate and then my horse is dead...
Trip/Push from behind by a defender inside the 18-yd line on the striker going to goal, 3 minutes into the 2nd half. Score is tied. Do you make the call?
Trip/Push from behind by a defender inside the 18-yd line on the striker going to goal, 3 minutes left in the 2nd half. Score is tied. Do you make the call?
One instance, you have 42 minutes left to play.
The other instance, you have had 42 minutes to play, and the ref "doesn't want the game decided on a PK."
What happens if a PK is awarded 3 minutes into the 2nd half of a tied game and the score stands up? Didn't the ref DO just that? Or does the fact that a team has 42 minutes to tie it back up make a difference? Why doesn't that same difference stand if they already had 42 minutes to score in the first place.
Simply put, it sounds like a double standard.
A foul, is a foul, is a foul...
Trip/Push from behind by a defender inside the 18-yd line on the striker going to goal, 3 minutes into the 2nd half. Score is tied. Do you make the call?
Trip/Push from behind by a defender inside the 18-yd line on the striker going to goal, 3 minutes left in the 2nd half. Score is tied. Do you make the call?
One instance, you have 42 minutes left to play.
The other instance, you have had 42 minutes to play, and the ref "doesn't want the game decided on a PK."
What happens if a PK is awarded 3 minutes into the 2nd half of a tied game and the score stands up? Didn't the ref DO just that? Or does the fact that a team has 42 minutes to tie it back up make a difference? Why doesn't that same difference stand if they already had 42 minutes to score in the first place.
Simply put, it sounds like a double standard.
A foul, is a foul, is a foul...