Question Number: 35841

High School 12/19/2024

RE: Comp High School

Peter of Stockton, CA USA asks...

Firstly, thanks for being a great resource to get questions answered.

My son, who is also a referee, shared the following clip with me:

https://youtu.be/qvpYQzOIiFE

We have been discussing it back and forth and so want to get an outside opinion. We have opposing view points:

(1) I think a red card would be warranted but would be willing to bring it down to as yellow. IMO the collision was due to both players going for the ball, however, besides going for the ball both players need to lookout for the safety of the opponent. Based just upon the clip, I do not think that the collision was intentional.

(2) My son believes that the referees got it right. Soccer is a physical game, both players were going for the ball and had an expectation of getting the ball. The rules do not take into account how many stitches, etc are needed. The attacker did make an effort to clear the keeper.

Incidentally, at our High School level my son does agree with my assessment due to the skill levels of the players and the fact that "it is in the end only a game."

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Peter
The goalkeeper was Gianluigi Donnarumma of Paris St Germain who was left with a nasty injury after he was caught in the face by Wilfried Singo during Paris Saint-Germain versus Monaco in French Ligue 1.

After coming out to challenge Singo of Monaco , Donnarumma ended up taking a boot to the face as the Monaco attacker moved towards the ball. Singo's studs left the PSG goalkeeper with multiple cuts on the side of his head and he was ultimately forced off. It was a nasty injury requiring multiple stitches.

I believe that the referee had only two options which was no card or a red card. A caution in my opinion was not credible as by definition if it was deemed cardable it endangered the safety of an opponent which has to be a red card.

So we can say that the incident was an outlier. There did not appear to be intent and it looked liked the player was trying to hurdle the goalkeeper with his raised foot catching the goalkeeper in the face. It does not look like an attempt to play the ball.

Now there is a duty of care to opponents and in my opinion a diving goalkeeper should not have to deal with a raised boot with studs showing while challenging for the ball on the ground. It was an unfortunate incident.
Put it this way. What did the player expect to do with an advancing opponent towards the ball. The player was always likely to make contact and probably showed a lack of attention or consideration and acted without precaution.

Now whatever about Pro level games games at grassroots referees should take a very stern view of such incidents. A strong message needs to go out about safety of opponents.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Peter,
a very Merry Christmas to you and your son.

This is either 1 of 2 decisions!
Red card or a play on injury.
The use of a caution as a soother because the accident seems to warrant something for such an impact? It could be looked at as a form of match control a highly subjective consideration still this is a game of contact and not all of it is automatically foul.

Perfectly legal tackles can create injuries so the effect is not the only criteria of judgment.
Is there disregard in terms of the force, direction and deliberate actions within any challenges create a result that could or should have been avoided?

Studs into the head, if considered as part of this decision, the ONLY conclusion is red card send off as SFP if we are holding the attacker at fault. If this is an unforeseen complete accident of two players coming to together with no fault being attributed then an unfortunate injury.

A striker sliding into a keeper on the ground with extended leg that by direction and force there is going to be contact into the hands or body of the keeper is 100% a foul by the striker. You can not push the ball through the keeper by sheer force as it is a dangerous action.

When the striker is moving around or not trying to force the direction he has every right to take a shot and it is the keeper dictating the movement -into- the striker, chances are the keeper could be at fault unless it is a clean push of the ball away.

The striker is trying to score a goal, the keeper is trying to prevent that! The ability of the keepers ability to legally use their hands to pick up a ball, the opponent can only kick, at creates these situations of controversy. There is no doubt that keepers are at risk diving into the feet of incoming attackers. The safety of each player is in fact a consideration of every player.

Both the keeper and the striker are aware of the possibility of a collision and positioning getting to the ball first plays a large part in how a referee will determine the fault or blame of an outcome! The keeper accepted the fact he might pay a price but the keeper did not trip the attacker, he made a save, ball deflects into touch, the attacker MOVING forward jumped with leg extended and drove the cleats into a stationary keeper! I would be less VC or SFP if the attacker had dived in an effort to avoid even if perhaps a knee or trailing foot could still have made contact.

I am bothered slightly by the referees actions?
Initially I saw him point to a corner, indicating a corner kick. then in the commentary, it claimed Wilfried Singo was cautioned?
If this was a foul then no corner is possible?
Had the ball had exited into touch off the FOP BEFORE the foot of Singo's hit Gianluigi Donnarumma's face? I do not think so? Mind you the ball did pop up and camera angle showed it to be true.
Was this a yellow card caution for that contact as a reckless action after?
Sorry, in my opinion, if so it should still be a red card for VC?

It is certainly believable there was no malicious intent on the part of Singo but if you jump up with cleats extended into the body of a diving keeper, it is an unsafe act better would have been a diving leap then at least some effort to avoid. If the keeper has been standing that catches him groin or high thigh level

If you shoot ahead in the video to the handling call in the PA that led to a PK call, of a ball that bounces up into the hand of a defender which he did not get out of the way of? How can you say the studs delivered into the head lack any less deliberate intentions? Personally, I would not award a PK for that, it deflected off a foot of a team mate into the hand not an attempt to stop the shot. I noted the AR made no flag signal even in support? Or if he did he did it late!
Much better video in high resolution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdlnK1ay_mM

Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Joe Manjone

Hi Peter,

In a high school game this would be a red card as indicated in NFHS Rule 18-1-00 -Serious Foul Play.

A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent uses excessive force or brutality shall be sanctioned as serious foul play resulting in an ejection. Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, the side or behind using one or both legs with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.

Please remember participant safety is the number 1 priority in high school soccer

It is good to hear your son is also a referee. I expect you do get to work games together. I see Stockton's high school season goes into February. Have a successful remainder of the high school season,