Tackle

Paul Spacey said:
Red makes sense in the circumstances, despite the last defender somewhat getting back to cover.

The challenge itself is not a red. In real-time or slow-mo, it’s clear that the keeper is only slightly off with his timing and it’s not a malicious challenge and wouldn’t warrant a red by an outfield player.

The keeper was actually correct in choosing to come for the ball IMO and in this kind of situation I ask our keepers to do the same. A split second sooner to react and the keeper would have intercepted/tackled the player. Of course, many coaches (and parents) are horrified at the idea of a keeper leaving their penalty area and so the reaction to this would be to ask the keeper to hold back. No right or wrong answer; every situation has to be judged by the keeper on its merits.
Click to expand...

I agree the keeper should have come for the ball. I disagree that the keeper should have slid feet first...not only is it dangerous but the percentage of successful saves that way is incredibly minimum. The main problem though was the keepers's starting positioning: near the spot. If the keeper had been back on the arc, the run could have been timed to intercept with the hands at the top of the PA and the bigger danger that far out is getting chipped. If the keeper had been near the top of the PA, he would have been in a position to standing tackle or even intercept the through ball before the striker gets there. But because he was hanging near the spot, he was in a position to do neither except DOGSO and could have also been chipped.

I still say that PA looks very narrow, particularly when you compare it to the PA on the field at the top of the screen...though it could just be on optical illusion
 
Grace T. said:
I agree the keeper should have come for the ball. I disagree that the keeper should have slid feet first...not only is it dangerous but the percentage of successful saves that way is incredibly minimum. The main problem though was the keepers's starting positioning: near the spot. If the keeper had been back on the arc, the run could have been timed to intercept with the hands at the top of the PA and the bigger danger that far out is getting chipped. If the keeper had been near the top of the PA, he would have been in a position to standing tackle or even intercept the through ball before the striker gets there. But because he was hanging near the spot, he was in a position to do neither except DOGSO and could have also been chipped.

I still say that PA looks very narrow, particularly when you compare it to the PA on the field at the top of the screen...though it could just be on optical illusion
Click to expand...
I agree that his starting position was poor but that's pretty normal for most youth keepers. Rarely do I see keepers outside of their PA, ready to anticipate and intercept through balls, primarily because many coaches don't coach their keepers to play that way. His starting position should have been as an absolute minimum on the edge of his PA, for me possibly up to 5 yards further out. Even starting on the edge of the PA, the interception for him would have been comfortable.

This past weekend at State Cup, our keeper intercepted 2 or 3 through balls in a row, around 25 yards from her goal. The opposing coach shouted to his goalkeeper, "See, that's exactly what I want you to be doing." The only problem was that it was very clear the opposing keeper hadn't been coached or taught to do that and it's a skill that takes time to learn.

Across the 7 teams at our club, I think the GK's have been red-carded 3 times in total this season, all for DOGSO when mistiming an interception 20-25 yards from goal. However, the amount of interceptions they have made (and goals prevented) hugely outweighs the cost of the occasional red card or goal conceded from being chipped. Plus, they are learning a timing/interception skill that will prove useful for as long as they play the game.
 
Grace T. said:
I still say that PA looks very narrow, particularly when you compare it to the PA on the field at the top of the screen...though it could just be on optical illusion
Click to expand...

Silverlakes turf field. I don’t know about the dimensions but it’s definitely more slip ‘n slide than it was. A few years ago.
 
So what result here guys for stops #2 and #3 by the keeper? Unlike the original clip, here the keeper slides cleanly with his feet (not body) and gets to the ball first. Both are outside of the box, so the keeper cannot smother with his hands. From what I've read online and in the training, there seems to be a sharp division of opinion on whether such slide tackles should be allowed or considered reckless play.

 
#2 is a tough one. I think you could argue either way; yes he wins the ball but comes in potentially dangerously from a high angle (and studs showing). This one will get lots of different opinions.

#3 is easier IMO. Won cleanly with no danger to the attacking player (looks like he wins the ball with his knees/shins and no danger in terms of studs showing). Yes it’s aggressive but it’s a great tackle for me.

Good sweeper-keeper btw!
 
Grace T. said:
I still say that PA looks very narrow, particularly when you compare it to the PA on the field at the top of the screen...though it could just be on optical illusion
Click to expand...
NickName said:
Silverlakes turf field. I don’t know about the dimensions but it’s definitely more slip ‘n slide than it was. A few years ago.
Click to expand...
Silverlakes turf fields (#1-4) are the biggest fields most youth players will ever see 75 x 120=9000 yds/sq.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top