Headgear

I agree MS only gets more physical as you increase in age. My daughter is a GK and she took the step from club to college soccer this year and Dang! you talk about physical. My DD is a pretty tough cookie but its pretty intimidating to step into that realm. She's been steamrolled like 2 times already with no calls but she's also been given a majority of calls. College soccer has me cringing a ton and its just the start of the season.. lol!
 
coachrefparent said:
I still don't understand your impeding scenario. Strikers have every right to go for a ball being crossed in as the keeper does, even if they are in the way" of the keeper's path. No parting of the red sea for her. If as you describe the player was moving into the opponent’s path to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction of the keeper when the ball is not within playing distance of either player (hard to believe if the keeper was trying to get ball) then it would be impeding. But if the keeper was trying to get the ball, it was likely"within playing distance. P.S. When defenders shield the ball, blocking the path of the offence till it rolls out for goal kick (or throw in), that's not impeding either.
Click to expand...

What do the rules actually say about impeding? Is it only for out of bounds, or could 3 players shield the ball all the way into the goal? What about three players surrounding a keeper to keep them from moving at all? How much force is allowed to run through impeding players? How close to the ball do you have to be to impede, or does it matter? Does the position of your arms come into play while impeding?
 
Woobie06 said:
Sorry for the long post...All I can say is wow on that slide into the keeper...from the image it looks card worthy.

What I find pretty ironic is that this game the kids play is supposed to be a "non-contact" sport....this thread is on head gear, and we are now talking about knees, protection, etc., the mobs on corner kicks, the jostling, holding, grabbing, poking, and pulling. Not just just keeper, but all players need to know how to protect themselves on the field. What I am noticing about my DD's team and those she plays against, currently u13, is that the games are getting more and more physical all the way around. Some teams are more physical than others. Over the past year and a half I have seen my DD's team learn to be more physical in order to be able to compete. I think there is a fine line between being physical and competing and what some may consider dirty or dangerous...it depends on which sideline you are on. I have seen some rough fouls over the last couple of years, but nothing that I would consider being done with the specific intent to harm or purposefully injure the other player. I've seen kids cry when they took a player down and realized they may have hurt the other kid. I have seen purposeful fouls, but nothing that screamed at me that one kid was going after another to specifically hurt them. The worst I have seen in the last year, was an opposing player pull one of our girls down by her hair when she was beat. Our sideline went nuts. Did the kid mean to pull her down, I would say yes. Did she mean to pull her down by her hair, or was she grabbing for the shirt and got the hair instead...Who know's....I just find it hard to believe that at 10, 11, or 12 year old kid would intentionally try to injure another player. If so, there are other things going on.

.
Click to expand...
It's a bit of a misnomer that soccer isn't a contact sport. Contact is permitted to the extent not prohibited by the laws, such as when coachrefparent points out trifling contact or shielding. Based on a conversation I'm privy to, I can tell you that CalSouth is aware contact is becoming a problem in SoCal and there have been lots of complaints from the parents against the "let it play" and "I don't care" refs. Whether they'll do anything about it is entirely a different question. My own theory is it's particularly a Socal problem based on the 2 national influences we have in SoCal (English and Mexican), both of which football federations have an expansive definition of "trifling"

socalkdg said:
What do the rules actually say about impeding? Is it only for out of bounds, or could 3 players shield the ball all the way into the goal? What about three players surrounding a keeper to keep them from moving at all? How much force is allowed to run through impeding players? How close to the ball do you have to be to impede, or does it matter? Does the position of your arms come into play while impeding?
Click to expand...

Reposting the authority below:


http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/blocking-or-holding-the-goalkeeper-at-a-corner-kick-or-free-kick/
http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/marking-the-keeper-at-corner-kicks/
Law 12: "An indirect free kick is awarded if a player....impedes the progress of an opponent without any contact being made"

Thoughts on the video below. My own 2 cents: No. 1: at first keeper and striker just take space, striker's intent is clearly to impede the goalkeeper though I understand the laws don't mention intent, goalkeeper moves, reality is goalkeeper can't catch if the striker is shielding him (as opposed to the ball) without going over the top of the striker and committing a foul himself, we all know that's why the coach is ordering the striker to do that, once the striker moves with the goalkeeper I think that's impeding, No2: just taking space, No3: very clear it's impeding if not a holding foul

 
I tell my DD to avoid collisions with keepers. Try to make them commit and go around them because she will always get the worst of a collision (5-7 130) But there are some big girls out there who have no problem running through a Keeper.

Her GK ran into one of those players in their last game. Took about a minute before she got up and she is a big girl. What surprised me most about it is that she was not subbed out due to concussion protocol. It was hard to tell what happened and the ref did wave the coach over but about that time she got up and motioned she was OK. Seriously.. what GK is gonna take themselves out of a game?
 
Woobie06 said:
What I find pretty ironic is that this game the kids play is supposed to be a "non-contact" sport....
Click to expand...

Please tell me you are kidding....soccer IS a contact sport.

Dangerous fouls are different, unpleasant and forbidden... but have your kids play tennis if you believe soccer shouldn't have contact.
 
Multi Sport said:
I tell my DD to avoid collisions with keepers. Try to make them commit and go around them because she will always get the worst of a collision (5-7 130) But there are some big girls out there who have no problem running through a Keeper.

Her GK ran into one of those players in their last game. Took about a minute before she got up and she is a big girl. What surprised me most about it is that she was not subbed out due to concussion protocol. It was hard to tell what happened and the ref did wave the coach over but about that time she got up and motioned she was OK. Seriously.. what GK is gonna take themselves out of a game?
Click to expand...
It might not be a popular opinion, but next time that girl comes at your keeper I would imagine the keeper will remember who she is and approaches the player a little differently. What the forward(s) need to ask themselves is are they willing to take the contact the next time they come across that keeper, or one of the keepers friends? The keeper will know who it was, keepers talk, and eventually the forward will pay the price.
 
Grace T. said:
It's a bit of a misnomer that soccer isn't a contact sport. Contact is permitted to the extent not prohibited by the laws, such as when coachrefparent points out trifling contact or shielding. Based on a conversation I'm privy to, I can tell you that CalSouth is aware contact is becoming a problem in SoCal and there have been lots of complaints from the parents against the "let it play" and "I don't care" refs. Whether they'll do anything about it is entirely a different question. My own theory is it's particularly a Socal problem based on the 2 national influences we have in SoCal (English and Mexican), both of which football federations have an expansive definition of "trifling"



Reposting the authority below:


http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/blocking-or-holding-the-goalkeeper-at-a-corner-kick-or-free-kick/
http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/marking-the-keeper-at-corner-kicks/
Law 12: "An indirect free kick is awarded if a player....impedes the progress of an opponent without any contact being made"

Thoughts on the video below. My own 2 cents: No. 1: at first keeper and striker just take space, striker's intent is clearly to impede the goalkeeper though I understand the laws don't mention intent, goalkeeper moves, reality is goalkeeper can't catch if the striker is shielding him (as opposed to the ball) without going over the top of the striker and committing a foul himself, we all know that's why the coach is ordering the striker to do that, once the striker moves with the goalkeeper I think that's impeding, No2: just taking space, No3: very clear it's impeding if not a holding foul

Click to expand...

Agree number 3 for sure.
 
We usually have a person in between my daughter and the player running interference. She needs to concentrate on the ball and not worry about anyone else. The buffer helps. I remember a women's US keeper allowed herself to be pushed into the net. It gets crazy in there, and calls are very inconsistent. Really we all just hope for consistency in calls.
 
futboldad1 said:
Please tell me you are kidding....soccer IS a contact sport.

Dangerous fouls are different, unpleasant and forbidden... but have your kids play tennis if you believe soccer shouldn't have contact.
Click to expand...

"Non-Contact" in quotes was meant to be sarcastic or snarky, at least that is what I think air quotes are for. Never said there should not be contact.
 
socalkdg said:
We usually have a person in between my daughter and the player running interference. She needs to concentrate on the ball and not worry about anyone else. The buffer helps. I remember a women's US keeper allowed herself to be pushed into the net. It gets crazy in there, and calls are very inconsistent. Really we all just hope for consistency in calls.
Click to expand...

Here's where coachparentref has a normative point. By doing that the defender is now impeding ( or pushing if the order is "push him out") the striker. The defender is entitled to his/her space, even if it's in front the goalkeeper. My point being I agree that the impeding rule comes into conflict with a defender is entitled to his/her space. This isn't a new problem....it's a problem that's been going on for decades which is why this Law is constantly being rewritten. But to go full circle, where I object is where refs are inclined to rule against keepers for things like knees (not saying Surfref's call was wrong under the circumstances) but not give them the benefits on impeding conduct like the video or playing a ball in possession of keeper.
 
vegasguy said:
curious about the or not. I know the picture doesn't tell the whole story but here it is. Keeper holding the ball at his feet. Field player charges starting outside the 18. Keeper picks ball up player still not to ground. Keeper stands his ground. Player slides cleats up at mid shin and keeper leaps over him. Cleats up is the act that is cardable correct or am I wrong.
Click to expand...
If that's what happened, I'd give a card.
 
Woobie06 said:
Sorry for the long post...All I can say is wow on that slide into the keeper...from the image it looks card worthy.

What I find pretty ironic is that this game the kids play is supposed to be a "non-contact" sport....this thread is on head gear, and we are now talking about knees, protection, etc., the mobs on corner kicks, the jostling, holding, grabbing, poking, and pulling. Not just just keeper, but all players need to know how to protect themselves on the field. What I am noticing about my DD's team and those she plays against, currently u13, is that the games are getting more and more physical all the way around. Some teams are more physical than others. Over the past year and a half I have seen my DD's team learn to be more physical in order to be able to compete. I think there is a fine line between being physical and competing and what some may consider dirty or dangerous...it depends on which sideline you are on. I have seen some rough fouls over the last couple of years, but nothing that I would consider being done with the specific intent to harm or purposefully injure the other player. I've seen kids cry when they took a player down and realized they may have hurt the other kid. I have seen purposeful fouls, but nothing that screamed at me that one kid was going after another to specifically hurt them. The worst I have seen in the last year, was an opposing player pull one of our girls down by her hair when she was beat. Our sideline went nuts. Did the kid mean to pull her down, I would say yes. Did she mean to pull her down by her hair, or was she grabbing for the shirt and got the hair instead...Who know's....I just find it hard to believe that at 10, 11, or 12 year old kid would intentionally try to injure another player. If so, there are other things going on.

At the end of the day nobody wants their kid to get hurt by a dangerous play or see a kid get intentionally injured. I agree, the ref's can't see everything. There is also a difference between kids playing physical, competing, and wanting to win versus being overly aggressive and playing dangerously. Some of that can be managed by a good coach not allowing that type of play and parents not rewarding or promoting that style of play. If I saw my kid go out and intentionally try to injure another kid she would need to worry about a lot more than a foul call or a card by the ref.

I agree with what many have said that in order to change the physical play the rules need to change, or how the rules are interpreted needs to be standardized. Neither is simple, easy, and hopefully it will happen while our kids are still playing.
Click to expand...
Soccer is not a non-contact sport.
 
Grace T. said:
Here's where coachparentref has a normative point. By doing that the defender is now impeding ( or pushing if the order is "push him out") the striker. The defender is entitled to his/her space, even if it's in front the goalkeeper. My point being I agree that the impeding rule comes into conflict with a defender is entitled to his/her space. This isn't a new problem....it's a problem that's been going on for decades which is why this Law is constantly being rewritten. But to go full circle, where I object is where refs are inclined to rule against keepers for things like knees (not saying Surfref's call was wrong under the circumstances) but not give them the benefits on impeding conduct like the video or playing a ball in possession of keeper.
Click to expand...
I don't believe there is any such overall bias or inclination among referees. Nearly all referees call it fairly both ways. You just only see what happens to your keeper because that is all you are watching 90% of the time.
 
coachrefparent said:
I don't believe there is any such overall bias or inclination among referees. Nearly all referees call it fairly both ways. You just only see what happens to your keeper because that is all you are watching 90% of the time.
Click to expand...

It's not my keeper and the incident I'm citing was not my keeper nor was the video, though I confess I probably have more empathy for keepers just given I've been one and have one (which I can't say about most other refs). That's not a bad thing, given that the position is so different. I ref too (as I've said several times), and while I am no doubt far less experienced than you, I would hope you would extend me at least a little professional respect and courtesy. And while I keep trying to give you the benefit of the doubt that you aren't intending otherwise, you are making it very difficult.
 
coachrefparent said:
I don't believe there is any such overall bias or inclination among referees. Nearly all referees call it fairly both ways. You just only see what happens to your keeper because that is all you are watching 90% of the time.
Click to expand...
I was watching my DDs U12 team play. Her keeper came out late but got to the ball before the attacking player did. The keeper got kicked and her coach yelled out to the CR about protecting the keeper but the CR just told him to calm down. The AR turned to me and said that if the keeper got hurt it would've been her own fault for coming out so late...
 
Multi Sport said:
I was watching my DDs U12 team play. Her keeper came out late but got to the ball before the attacking player did. The keeper got kicked and her coach yelled out to the CR about protecting the keeper but the CR just told him to calm down. The AR turned to me and said that if the keeper got hurt it would've been her own fault for coming out so late...
Click to expand...
Not sure how it’s late if she got there first? So what are the refs looking for if the keeper and striker are going for a ball? In this scenario I would think the striker would be at fault if they got hurt because they were late getting to a loose ball.
 
PaytoplayinLancaster? said:
Not sure how it’s late if she got there first? So what are the refs looking for if the keeper and striker are going for a ball? In this scenario I would think the striker would be at fault if they got hurt because they were late getting to a loose ball.
Click to expand...
The part that blew me away was that the AR said anything to me. It wasn't as if I was having a discussion with him about it. He just decided to give me his opinion.
 
Mystery Train said:
I was skeptical about that too. But I did some research on them. Apparently VA Tech has a group that's been involved in helmet testing for football for some time, and created a ratings system to try to measure effectiveness in concussion prevention. This was their first study for soccer headgear. A quick google search shows several studies that they had published in peer-reviewed research publications, so it's not a total sham. Whether or not VA Tech gets anything out of this deal, I have no clue, but it does appear to be independent of manufacturer's control.

After a more careful study of their test methodology, I think it's probably as thorough as they can devise, but I think the star-rating system definitely skews the results to seem more impressive than maybe the numbers show. It's not a bad comparison of products, relative to each other, but there is quite a lot of guesswork being used on calculating the "probability" of the rate of concussions given the one type of collision they are simulating. It's hard for me to believe a Storelli headband (rated 5 stars) can reduce probability of concussion to almost zero, which is what is suggested by their rating table. Not even a NASCAR HANS device could do that.

I think it would be less misleading to state that headgear A is 20% more effective in reducing lateral forces than brand B, etc. But giving out star-ratings makes it seem like a consumer product test rather than a scientific analysis for concussion prevention.
Click to expand...
Yeah...I thought the same thing about the star system and the "probability" of rate of concussions. It does seem logical to me though that there is some level of reduced risk and their study at least shows that.
 
socalkdg said:
Exactly. Gave up a goal where she was kicked in the arm and the ball went into the net. Really? :(
Click to expand...

If the keeper has any level of possession of the ball between body part or body and the ground, then I would penalize with dangerous play (indirect free kick) the player that kicks the ball out of the keepers possession. Maybe even a Yellow or Red Card if there is any contact and the level of contact. Keepers a vulnerable when on the ground even when they have the ball fully secured. I have had attacker’s try to kick the hall out of keepers possession and missed and kicked the keeper in the face and body. Those very few players got a Red Card. Referees must protect the keeper once they obtain possession of the ball. Before the keeper has possession they are just another player.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top