Straight Red for Goalkeepers?
January 10, 2011 in Articles
This weekend saw an abundance of great football matches and countless talking points, most of them centred around the match at Old Trafford between Manchester United and Liverpool in the FA Cup. Earlier in the day Sampdoria took on Roma at the Stadio Luigi Ferraris and raised another talking point, one that is rarely brought up.
With Roma leading 1-0 away from home, substitute Juan sold his keeper Julio Sergio short with a horrible back pass, Sergio rushed out to win the ball Angelo Palombo skipped past him and Sergio could do nothing but bring the midfielder down. The referee had no choice but to point to the penalty spot and show Sergio a red card. Down to 10 men Claudio Ranieri then had to sacrifice Jeremy Menez to bring substitute goalkeeper Doni on the pitch.
Nicola Pozi made easy work of the penalty and in one fatal swoop Roma had gone from one goal up, the scores now level, first choice keeper Sergio sent for an early bath and one of their best players Menez removed from the field.
It raised the question; is the punishment for a goalkeeper bringing someone down in the penalty area too harsh?
The majority of time the contact is not malicious, of course the goalkeeper has denied a goal scoring opportunity, but does the punishment of losing your goalkeeper, outfield player and a penalty fit the crime.
To raise this point we need to look at alternative punishments.
1) Any non malicious challenge made that is deemed a penalty should see the goalkeeper awarded a yellow card and face a penalty.
This would of course still give the team fouled the advantage of having a penalty but the game still remaining an even contest of 11 v 11. Too often games are spoiled when a goalkeeper is sent off and the team down to ten takes off a striker throwing any intention of “having a go” out the window.
2) The goalkeeper that makes the challenge is dismissed from the game but the 2nd choice goalkeeper from the bench is allowed to take his place without losing a member of the outfield team.
This one is probably a non-starter, it would work when you have your first choice goalie in net, but when you are giving the understudy some match time and he is sent off, it would be unfair for the number 1 to then come on in his place.
3) When the goalkeeper brings down the attacker and denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity, instead of a referee awarding a penalty, the goal is automatically given instead and the goalkeeper remains on the field.
Probably the most controversial option, the arguments would be “players don’t always score.” Etc. However the team is still being punished for committing the foul but no punished with losing a player, the chance is still there for the game to be an exciting even spectacle and the team fouled have the advantage of being a goal up.
The example that stands out is the 2006 Champions League Final between Barcelona and Arsenal after 18 minutes Jens Lehmann brought down Samuel Eto’o outside the box. The referee sent him off and then Robert Pires was substituted in place of Manuel Almunia.
Arsenal of course took the lead but eventually the extra man counted and Barcelona increased the pressure and eventually came out 2-0 winners. Think how different the game would have been if Barcelona had been awarded the goal but Arsenal could have continued with Robert Pires rampaging forward causing Barcelona problems. As a neutral fan it would have been a much tighter spectacle, the last twenty minutes saw Arsenal camped in their own half. Who knows what would have happened if the sides were even.
The point of this article is not to condemn the current system, more to raise the discussion and see what the consensus is amongst the football community. And with every talking point/argument there is always a counter-point, and on the other side of the fence is Scott Johnston from thefootyblog.net
Well for me it is quite simple if you can’t do the time, don’t do the crime! For a keeper decision making is critical & if they get it wrong by bringing down an opponent they deserve to see red.
I don’t buy into the idea that by sending off a keeper you are punishing a team more because they no longer have their number one keeper, have conceded a penalty & need to take off an outfield player. That is simply football at its best, the team choose who to take off, usually a striker for tactical reasons. I have heard an argument but ‘What if the number two is rubbish?’ Well why is he there at all, buy a better number two.
I will leave you with two possible scenarios;
First it’s the Champions League Cup final. Man Utd are two nil up over Barcelona, Messi skips away from Ferdinand and Vidic brings him down… It’s a penalty! Red card for Vidic, penalty to Barca, which they score. What do you do as a manager? Well I think most of us would give Berbatov the hook and bring on a defender, shut up shop, hold on to what you’ve got. Its tactics and no different if your keeper gets sent off in same situation.
Last scenario, its West Ham versus Fulham last game of the season. West Ham are 18th & Fulham are 17th, one point between them. Five minutes to go, its one nil West Ham & Rob Green takes down Clint Dempsey! According to Andrew, Green should be allowed to be allowed to stay on face the penalty. Now Rob Green, known as a keeper good at saving penalties, saves the resulting Fulham penalty. Fulham go down, is that fair?
It would be great to hear your opinions on what you think of the suggestions or what side of the fence you find yourself. All comments welcome.
This is an interesting topic. I wonder whether keepers, in a one on one situation, would go into the star striker with studs showing, knowing they wont get sent off (in options 2 and 3). Ok, they lose a goal, but no striker in their right mind would go near that keeper in a one on one situation again. That fear could stretch beyond that one game if the injury was severe enough. Im not saying it will definitely happen like that, im just wondering whether that could be a tactic used.
What would happen if the keeper brought down a player outside the box?
I think the rules would need to state that any “studs up” challenges, anything like Gerrard’s or Tiote’s would be a straight red. Bascically take away the last man rule for the goalkeeper and judge his tackles like any outfield player. If it is just a clip give him a yellow, if it’s dangerous, give him a red. That for me would be the best solution.
I think the keeper is usually last man or would prevent a goalscoring opportunity. Which is why they get sent off.
I just feel a bit for the goalkeepers, the position they play nearly every challenge puts them in a dangerous positions where as the other 10 players can charge in with numerous late tackles and only see a yellow card for it, even in the box they sometime give away penalties without even getting a booking. Seems very harsh.
It is always a shame when a GK is sent off. The team then both have to face being a goal down (as a result of the penalty) and also go down to ten men. That being said, it is part of the game and I don’t think that any changes should or need to be made. Referees often only give a yellow card when a GK takes down a player if the attacker’s touch is taking him away from goal. It is not always as simple as just being a red card, I find refs are often quite leniant when they can be.
Allowing red-carded keepers to be subbed and the team to keep 11 men on the pitch would be unfair. It would mean that cynical challenges by GKs would increase as their is limited risk if they are simply to be replaced. It may have the potential to ruin games when a GK is sent off, but that doesn’t mean we can change it for our viewing pleasure as a neutral. The game must be refereed fairly and, as Scott says, if a GK brings a player down and prevents a goal-scoring opportunity then it is a red card, as it would be for any other player.
But they dont make as many challenges they decide to run out its all up to them.
I think Andrew’s post at 9.10 is a valid option, except in some ways it almost already exists. Witness Brad Friedel at Anfield a year or so ago.
Clearly impeded Torres and was given a straight red. Villa appealed and it was downgraded to a yellow as Friedel could not possibly have got out of the way.
Very (and typically interesting). Will consider in a bit of depth and get back to you.
RCM
Yeah I can totally see the argument against it, and I did say that malicious and cynical challenges should be punished, however the tackle by Sergio on Sunday wasn’t cynical or harmful just a poor timed tackle like hundreds you see everyweek. Keepers don’t get the benefit of a few bad ones before even a booking.
Look forward to it Rob
Rather than goalkeeper’s being treated more harshly when it comes to fouling the opposition, I tend to think they are overly protected. In my opinion goalkeepers should not be treated any differently to any other player on the field, with the obvious exception that they are allowed to handle the ball within their area. All too often I see fouls given against the goalkeeper which would not be deemed a foul if the player had challenged an outfield player rather the goalkeeper.
I also think that if the referee would give a free kick in other parts of the field then penalties should be given inside the penalty area. The apparent trend of fouls etc needing to somehow be worthy of a penalty is ludicrous in my eyes.
In the end, football is a sport with rules created to ensure a fair game – the rules are not their to ensure a competitive or entertaining game.
All the examples given have been about entertainment not about fairness. If a player commits a fouls that is considered under the rules of the game to warrant a red card then a player needs to decide if the punishment is worth it or not.
Take Suarez in the World Cup, he decided that handling the ball and preventing the goal was worth the red card. I think it was anti-competitive and anti-entertainment but I remember Andy defending that at the time!
That is a great point in certain challenges keepers are very much over protected!
I can’t agree more that goalkeepers get overly protected when it comes to players challenging them for high balls. So many times it’s a 50/50 challenge the goalkeeper loses the battle and the foul is given against the attacker, that’s not right. Totally agree with that.
It sort of leads onto the point I’m trying to make, a challenge that an outfield player makes that most of the time never even warrants a yellow card can often see a keeper sent off and a penalty given to the attacking team, just because it’s in the box. Why not just give the penalty and at the most book the keeper.
Personally I watched football to be entertained, and competative sport is what is entertaining.
Then why send players off at all?
The point of the yellow/red card system to is remove from play those that are spoiling the fairness of the game, i.e. those that are making illegal challenges or otherwise disrupting the game.
Surely the fix is to book/send off more outfield players, not leave more goalkeepers on?
Law 12 clearly sets out the rules on what some one should be booked and sent off for and I don’t see any reason why they should not be applied equally to all players.
I can’t beleive you’ve got the rules out….you geek.
I am aware that by the rules as they stand the goalkeeper should be sent off, that’s the whole point of this, to raise the question…is it right?
I know I have given the side of needing change but I can see both sides, don’t think I’m some loony trying to ruin the game, it’s a factor up for discussion. I have no problem if a goalkeeper comes out and make a point of fouling a player to stop them scoring, like Schumacher for Germany in I think the Mexico World Cup, he was trying to take the player out so he gets a red card.
When a goalkeeper goes to get the ball and a player like Messi for instance who most defenders can’t stop gets past the keeper and the keeper while trying to get the ball dives at Messi’s feet, the ball is gone, he takes down Messi with no malice, of course give the penalty that’s fine, but why does the goalkeeper need to be sent off?
Give him a yellow and the team a penalty and let’s move on. I think it would be better for the game, and that’s why we have rules, they can then be changed. Like clamping down on simulation or tackles from behind etc.
What do you think of my West Ham scenario? Would that be fair Andrew?
If he’s gone for the ball and just mistimed it or the attacker is too quick for him, then yeah I think it would be fair if Green was yellowcarded and able to face the pen. If he’s gone in to take Dempsey out and stop him scoring then he should be off. If Upson made a poor timed challenge he would get a yellow and be able to stay on the pitch and defend his teams lead.
Surely it’s the same scenario, why do GK’s get the extra punishment?
Interesting topic and one which has often been discussed.
Personally I quite like the drama it creates when it happens but I guess if we’re being fair then we should probably look at awarding a yellow card along with the penalty, unless the goalkeeper has clearly made a professional foul.
Good article.
Simon
Cheers Simon, I agree with you. Unless the tackle is a clear attempt to take the player out a yellow card should suffice.
Yep. Completely agree with Norman on this one. As I stated before. I think that GKs are often treated very leniantly. Ultimately, whether it is a GK, centre-back or striker, if you bring down a player who has a clear goal-scoring opportunity then it a red card. Making special exceptions for GKs seems to go against the fabric of the game
But as Norman said they already make special exceptions when it comes to keeper and aerial challenges, two outfield players jump for the ball..nothing happens.
Keeper jumps with a striker…foul, keeper gets a FK.
So if they already make these exceptions now (which I don’t agree with) Why not protect the keeper in an are where they actually need protection, the main reason I would like to see the change is to soften the triple punishment teams get now when a keeper is sent off for what is a nothing challenge, but deserves a penalty.
In a perfect world I would rather no change was made to the rules. If the ‘keeper commits a foul that warrants a red card and a penalty is awarded then that’s no different to a centre back committing the foul.
But we don’t live in a perfect world. We see far too many instances of forwards being picked off by that hidden sniper in the stands; that leftover landmine taking the attacking midfielder to task; the referee being too far away from play to correctly identify what has happened. Until football has a certain moral core returned to it, free of cheating or manipulation of the rules, is it fair to award a penalty and send a player off? I believe it is not fair – not when there are too many variables at work that ensure a decision is not always correct.
I know I’m possibly opening up another argument there.
Call me old fashioned but what about the goalkeeper takes the decision not to foul the opposition player and concedes the goal, but his side still has 11 men.
To go slightly off topic the weekend’s events convinced me that players’ willingness to dupe the referee means technology is an absolute must and not just for goal-line incidents.
If cricket is getting 90%+ of decisions why not football? Introduction of technology will add to drama and stop players diving and will give referees help for red card decisions.
And what about greater accountability from referees? I’m mystified why they don’t come out and explain decisions to media after a game.
That’s my point Andy, I don’t think every challenge a keeper makes – even if he is the last man – warrants the red card, especially as you say with snipers and landmine’s taking out the strikers.
Yeah I think your opening a whole other can of worms there, not getting into that one haha.
Yeah I think that’s a valid point, don’t rush out, don’t go to ground and if it goes in the net, unlucky but it’s still 11 v 11.
After this weekends play, after watching numerous angles of the Berbatov “incident” everyone still hasn’t come to the same conclusion, so I’m not sure technology is the answer to everything. Deep down I think we all enjoy the discussion and talking points these incidents create. Would technology take that away?
I have said for a long time if referees had the chance to explain key decisions after the match if would increase their credability and give the fans an answer. If Howard Webb had come out on Sunday and said
“From my angle it looked clear that Agger had made contact with Berbatov’s leg and that is why I gave the penalty. From seeing the slow motion the incident looks less clear cut and it was a hard call to make.”
Would we have more respect for him? I think I would.
Agree with you on that point about Webb/credibility/respect. Need for greater understanding at all levels and that referees are just as fallible as goalkeepers, defenders, midfielder, strikers, coaches. Just come out and explain the decision. I don’t understand why it took five weeks for Howard Webb to say this about De Jong/Alonso incident in World Cup – http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/8944445.stm
The problem with your suggestion in this article is that it basically says to goalkeepers – it’s OK to commit a foul, just as long as it’s not malicious.
Is that the right message to send out?
The other issue I can see is what if the goalkeeper is for some reason not the last man, what then? How close does the next nearest player have to be to for the goalkeeper to be classed as the last man?
As far as I see it, the rule is very simple and is easy for everyone to follow right throughout every level of the game. If you commit a foul that is punishable by a free kick or penalty and this denies an obvious goal scoring opportunity due to you being the last man then you should be sent off.
The only argument that you can put forward seems to be that in a few scenarios the game would have been more entertaining.
I just can’t see any justification as to why a goalkeeper should get extra protection to foul other players. If the goalkeeper cant time his tackle properly then he shouldn’t be making it, just like any other player.
Perhaps the change that needs to be made is not the law governing sending goalkeepers off but the advise and guidance given to referees? Perhaps the changes is one of how much contact does a goalkeeper need to make for it to be considered a foul.
They used to, why did that change?
This quote really stood out for me
“The decision not to red card him was not based on me not wanting to send someone off in the World Cup final, it was based on the viewing angle I had got.
“What I couldn’t see was the actual contact on Alonso through his back, with [Mark] Van Bommel just to his right, the view was obstructed somewhat.
“I could see the foot was high and from Alonso’s reaction there must have been some contact even though I couldn’t see the contact, and being 25 minutes into a World Cup final I wasn’t prepared to guess.
“I wasn’t prepared to fill in the blanks in my head to say that was possibly a red-card offence, I wanted to base it on what we could see so therefore I decided to show a yellow card.”
If Howard comes out and says this an hour or so after the match I think the football world would have much more respect for him. With 22 players on the field it is ok if your vision is impeeded now and again. They are just human. And I think a lot of people would have accepted that. To say it five weeks later just loses all the meaning to his comments.
“The problem with your suggestion in this article is that it basically says to goalkeepers – it’s OK to commit a foul, just as long as it’s not malicious.”
But this is the exact principles the outfield players get judged by. So why do fouls with less contact carry much tougher punishments for goalkeepers.
We don’t want a no contact sport. You say the goalkeeper shouldn’t get extra protection, however this is the same protection that outfield players already get.
if a goalkeeper brings down a player in the box then it should be a foul that shouldn’t change, the punishment just doesn’t need to be a red card, penalty and then the sacrafice of an outfield player. Taking away the entertainment factor this punishment seems very high for a foul that would deem no more than a free kick if outside the box.
First of all, I think a cynical last man tackle deserves a penalty and a sending off. Accidental isn’t, last man or not. Goalkeeper or defender. Red and Pen is a double punishment.
One suggestion which won’t happen but is good for a hypothetical debate – use something similar to the Rugby penalty system. (They can kick for the posts and get virtually guaranteed points if they have a good kicker, or they can go for touch and try to score a try.) Well how about the attacking team can choose whether they get a penalty and the other team keeps their keeper, or the player gets sent off and they have the rest of the game with a man advantage?
Can I point out it all depends on the ref! Some keepers dont get sent off!
An example of a game not been ruined with a sending off of the Goalkeeper is the Bolton v Birmingham game this season. Birmingham leading 1-0 when Jaaskelainen over reacted and Love slapped Birminghams Roger Johnson which resulted in a red card.
Bolton had to sacrifice Playmaker Martin Petrov and replace him with reserve keeper Adam Bogdan. Birmingham increased their lead to make it 2 and the game looked dead and buried.
Bolton pressed and pulled the game back to draw the game and the sending off of Jaaskelainen ended up making the game and entertaining one.
Outfield players don’t get more protection, apart from what is clearly already written in the rules. If the goalkeeper wants to foul but not get sent off then he needs to be foulign away from his own goal.
It looks harsh on first glance as goalkeepers have a far higher tackle to red card ratio due to the nature of their position and the rules as they stand. If they can’t hack that ratio then they shouldn’t be goalkeepers.
The fact ias it isn’t harsh at all. Goalkeepers get treated the same as other positions, just the nature of their position means they are statistically more likely to get sent off as a proportion of tackles they make. Surely this means more tackling practice or better decision making drills, or simply that the goalkeeper makes fewer tackles to minimise the risk of beign sent off.
Also, remember that there is not necessarily a need to sacrifice an outfield player… The coach doesn’t need to sub off an attacker for a goalkeeper. they can play without a goalkeeper entirely or play with an outfielder in goal.
First of all, thanks for all the comments, never envisioned there would be 35 comments on this issue, pretty amazing.
There is no wrong or right answer and I just wanted to see what the feeling towards it where. Seems the majority think the punishment is fair and nothing needs to change, a few people on twitter and on here sort of agree that the punishment is harsh but without a concrete way how to fix it.
I totally agree that some games become more exciting when a team goes down to 10 men, but of course some don’t. And I suppose that’s why we love football as we never know what can happen. If for instance more yellow cards were given instead of red’s there’s no guarantee the game would be more exciting but there’s no guarantee that it wouldn’t.
Please keep the views coming. Maybe instead of just saying I’m wrong
if something was to change what what you do?
Interesting that this story should appear from the German media today
http://www.bild.de/BILD/sport/telegramm/sport-telegramm,rendertext=15446216.html
Here is a badly translated version.
“Double jeopardy by a red card plus a penalty to it as requested by the German Football Federation (DFB) no longer exist in the future.
The Association has the world governing body Fifa submitted an application, to abolish this kind of punishment. is the background: who prevents a clear scoring chance, absolutely gets red, regardless of whether the foul was committed inside the penalty or-out.
In the latter case, there is a penalty. According to DFB was then shown a red card offenders spared the. Because the penalty will clear chance to the team of the fouled returned Froehlich said DFB referee coordinator Lutz-Michael on ZDF.”
Great to see most people agree with me but even better to see the debate the article has caused!
Quality not quantity mate. I’ve got Janusz and Derek from ESPN, Raphael Honigstein and the German FA on my side.
Who have you got……Hayden?
Joking…nah delighted it has cause such a response been brilliant, any other rules of the game I can try and change to cause offence.
The German FA don’t agree with you entirely. They don’t want to see the rule applied only to goalkeepers!
To be honest, I think that removing the clause from law 12 about denying the goalscoring opportunity is an automatic red card – if applied equally to all players – would not necessarily be a bad thing.
Although it does raise the question as to whether that would encourage some more recklass last ditch tackles and cynical fouls. Not sure “serious foul play” would be enough to deter some people.
[...] a lengthy debate with a good friend of mine over at Gibfootballshow about whether the automatic red card given to goalkeeper’s who foul an opposition player when [...]