2016 Chatham Cup

Also this which for some reason isn't on the NZF site

Miramar with an entertaining 4-2 win over 9 man Wairarapa. 

Chatham Cup Round Four Results:

Universities 0
Cashmere Technical 3 (Aaron Clapham 24’, 45’ +1, Gary Ogilvie 48’)
HT 0-2

Queenstown Rovers 0
Caversham AFC 1 (Lewis Jackson 96’)
HT 0-0

East Coast Bays 3 (Jordan Carter 67’, Dylan Stansfield 104, Judd Baker 115’)
Birkenhead United 5 (Godwin Darkwa 21, David Parkinson 96, Ethan Galbraith 98, Tom Davis 101, Rosussin NKoy 119)
HT 0-1, FT 1-1

Te Atatu 1 (Haidar Jabir)
Three Kings United 2 (Allan Pearce 2 goals)
HT: 0-1

Forrest Hill Milford 3 (Abdulla Khallisy 14’, Ryan De Vries 19’, Andy Boyens 85’)
Bay Olympic 0
HT 2-0

Waitakere City 3 (Dylan Manickum 34, 66, 85)
Waitemata 1 (Craig Wyllie pen 90)
HT: 1-0

Wairarapa United 2 (Paul Ifill 20’, Sam Mason-Smith)
Miramar Rangers AFC 4 (Tom Jackson 9’, 42’, 71’, 88’)
HT: 2-2

Entertaining game over the hill. Miramar went up early through a Jackson penalty. Red card was also given for DOGSO. Rapa looked pretty good after that and got themselve ahead. Ifill looking good and they played 3 at the back so still caused Mar some issues up front. Iffs went off at half time after straining his hammy, and rapa went to a back 4. This allowed Mar more time in midfield, and they used it to patiently probe for opportunities. Eventually took the lead with about 20 to go and looked reasonable comfortable. Mason-Smith got a straight red for a studding a miramar player in the groin/lower stomach area. They they killed it off with a 4th at the end. Crowd of about 200-300 out there weren't happy with the ref. Not really sure why as he had a pretty good game. 

That is some extra time. goals in the 96, 98,101, 104, 115 and 119 minutes. 

Yeah it wasn't too bad.

justice. They didn't deserve to get past Karori, only did due to dodgy hometown refereeing.

*bites tongue*

go on, you know you want to

North Wellington rolled Palmy Marist up there 3-2

big result , good on north welly 

Just felt like the big decisions went Miramars way. The penalty was probably fair, certainly a foul, but probably wouldn't have got the ball anyway. I thought they had changed the rule about having to give a red card if he also gave a penalty, something about a triple punishment, can somebody shed some light on this for me?

It was just unfortunate to lose a man that early.

The next big decision was in the first half when rapa were up 2-1 and Mason-Smith went down in the box. There were shouts for a pen, but he was booked for simulation. The red was oviously much closer than we were in the stands.

The third big decision, although with Miramar up 3-2, the game was slipping away was the second red. It happened right in front of the stand, but most probably had an obstructed view (as I did) because of the benches etc, but I thought both players went in pretty hard. Again the ref probably had the best view of it.

Also Miramar were awarded a number of free kicks in dangerous positions, largely due to the amount of ball they had in those areas.

I thought Wairarapa played really well considering they went down to 10 so early, and looked threatening on counter attack in the first half. Enjoyable match, could have been different if not for such an early red card. 

supposedly triple punishment rule (and others) aren't being used this season (thought I'm not sure all refs know that)

Think it was Chettleburgh? Didn't seem like a pen, but didn't seem like a dive. From my viewing that was the only real complaint Rapa could have.

I don't have any doubt SMS deserved a red. Was late to the challenge and extended his studs into the opposition.

Allegedly there was some homophobic related abuse of the ref down the other end of the stands. I didn't hear so take that as heresay. 

I had a good view of the second red, it was the correct decision. 

Thought the referee had a good game, but the locals didn't think so. 

If Cashmere Tech are drawn to play North Wellington, who pays Siggy's travel expenses? His current club or his new club?
:-P

Sam Mason-Smith just made this post on his facebook page:

"For those who know me on or off the pitch you would know I am not a malicious or nasty person. Last night I received my first ever straight red card for a challenge that in the eyes of a referee was labelled a 'karate kick'. Firstly I don't even do karate, but secondly the referee knows me as a person and left all common sense at home when it came to making a decision. 

As you can see from my face I was utterly shocked and has put a serious dampener on my season. Going out of the cup is always gutting, but last night we looked around to each other and thought we actually couldn't have done much more. Too often do we hear of football matches being ruined by referees in this country at all levels, yet nothing has changed in the 5 years I have been here. I love this country, but my days there are some donuts ruining the game for us all here. 

But good luck to former club Miramar Rangers, go and win the cup!"

Lol... what a load of bollocks. You get judged on your tackle not how you behave off the field.

To their credit, despite the crowd giving the referee heaps, and some visible signs of frustration from the players, they still didn't surround or abuse him (not that I could hear anyway) as I have seen a lot of other teams do in that situation.

The Facebook post is interesting but I suppose you'll always convince yourself that you are innocent in that situation. It was a bad challenge and a red card was correctly given. Saying the game was ruined by the referee is absolute rubbish. 

TLDR version: I went in for a challenge and a referee had a different opinion to me therefore he is a "donut" and now I'm gonna have a hissy fit about it.

"I'm not a malicious person" and "he's not that kind of player" okay sweet the tackle must have been fine then mate. Because only cods make bad tackles

You could be right. Yeah I thought he had a case in real time, and obviously at 2-1 was a big moment. That was the decision for me I was least happy with. The first red was disappointing, but he had little choice.

Yeah, my view was obstructed, so quite happy to take your word for it. If late, and studs up, then there is no decision to be made.

As for the homophobic abuse, I didn't hear any myself, but it's a shame if it is true. 

I was pitch side taking photos during the Wairarapa - Miramar game. I was surprised that the ref gave a penalty for Miramar (but everyone else seems to think it was a foul) and even more surprised with the red card. Chettleburg getting booked for simulation was harsh as well. besides that I though the ref was pretty good but after the sending off in the 8th minute he was on a downer from the home fans.

SMS was a red card, don't think he really intended it but it was a bad challenge and was probably borne out of frustration 

I think what actually hurt Wairarapa was Ifill going off at half time, they played well but were hanging back more and seemed to be relying on scoring on the break 

re the Homophobic abuse of the ref - I didn't hear any, although I did hear a lone voice in the stand shout "get up you bloody woofter" when a Miramar player was ankle tapped in front of the dugouts (Miramar got a free kick one of the ones that the home fans weren;t happy about)

Then went to Palmerston North Marist v North Wellington today, another good game. PN Marist could have been 3-1 at half time - scored 1, 1 chalked off for a very close offside and they hit the post. North Wellington's Kieran Cripps scored a fantastic diving header in first half and a pen early in the 2nd. Wantanbe scored a great goal. Marist got one back with about 6 minutes to go which just wasn't enough

Just going through my photos now and will get a write up of both games on my site tomorrow (monday, oh that's today.....maybe tuesday)

Went to Birko v ECB.

5-3 after extra time.

1-1 at FT so 6 goals in extra time.

Birko up 4-1 then Bays got it back to 4-3 before Birko scored 5th in 120th minute.

Entertaining game despite conditions with strong wind coming straight down the ground - can't recall totally but think only one goal (the one in the 120th minute) scored into the wind.

Feisty match although perhaps not to the degree of past encounters. Both sides lucky to end up with 11 on the field. Galbraith has lovely touch for a big man but needs to control his emotions. Broderson lucky to stay on for the duration.

Birko supporters obviously did not read the front page of NZ Herald on Saturday morning about referee abuse .

Just don't mention Electric Ave.

 

Pretty much that. The ensuing comments on Sam's fbook post are quite funny. Equal numbers poking a bit of fun at him and supporting him. A number of "prominent" footballers from around the area (including Miramar) saying the refereeing in Wellington is sh t. 

I do know him personally and played with him for a year in Nelson - he's not the kind of player to do it maliciously, I can attest to that. Doesn't mean it wasn't a bad one off challenge though, I just struggle to see a guy like him being malicious about it at all.

The refereeing everywhere is shark, its not just Wellington!

My old team. Go the Villa!

Siggy factor kicking in?

Not yet - Siggy still playing for Cashmere Tech - be interesting if they draw each other in the next round

Just to clarify this - yes, the LotG have been changed to mitigate the 'triple punishment' scenario, and the default for DOGSO offences in the box is now a yellow card and the penalty kick.

However, there is still scope for referees to send off players for DOGSO in the penalty box in the following circumstances:

• Deliberate handball offence
• The offence is holding, pushing, or pulling
• The offending player does not attempt to play the ball or there is no possibility for the player making the challenge to play the ball
• The offence is one which is punishable by a red card wherever it occurs on the field of play

In essence, the revised law tries to strike the right balance between over-penalising a team and a player who's committed a foul in a genuine effort to fairly challenge the attacking player, and still 'triple' punishing cynical play. However, I can see that this could cause a bit of confusion among players and fans who don't always understand/appreciate the intricacies of the LotG.

I didn't see the Rapa - Mar game at all so this is not a comment on that particular situation by the way, but just wanted to clarify what the change in the LotG actually involves.

Given those criteria you listed, he could justifiably be sent off. At the time I thought it was a fair call, one of those ones where most referees would send him off, but occasionally another might have given him a yellow on another day. 

The second and third bullet points apply for this situation. He pushed him and didn't really attempt to play the ball. 

Don't the new LOTG come into force in local leagues next year?

Both Dale and Boxy are correct in terms of introduction (at the commencement of the summer national leagues) and in terms of the new interpretation. I doubt there will be much discussion yet around this new interpretation until the end of winter competitions.

Unless of course there wasn't actual contact, and the only two people who know that are Sam and the player that was rolling around on the ground.

Without the benefit of replays its tough to know exactly what happened in that split second as a spectator, and its possible Sam's sitting there bewildered at how the kick was labelled and the red if he didn't actually make contact, I wouldn't want to be at the end of that.

And if he didn't make contact but got sent off for making contact then its a little more than "a different opinion".

I always find it hard to believe a player that rolls around in absolute agony then gets up and runs it off seconds later.

A question Chris (Dale's comment intrigued me, so I looked this up). The new LotG has been effective since 1 June 2016. All the Chatham Cup regulations state is that 'All matches shall be played in accordance with FIFA Laws of the Game' (section 9.1). Has there been a circular from NZF to clubs and referees about this? Because on the basis of the Chatham Cup regulations as they are, there is no reason why the new LotG shouldn't be applicable.

Contact is not a pre-requisite for issuing a red card - it's the nature of the challenge. If the challenge endangers the safety of an opponent, that is serious foul play and is punishable by a red card. 

Is that way no one is kicking off backwards yet?

ask ginger eijit - he got told (being a ref) by CF that they weren't to employ the new laws this season 

Or maybe everyone is just super-keen to go forward!

I don't know what the refs have been told, and haven't checked the various league regulations, so not sure what the situation is there. But judging by the Chatham Cup regulations, I wouldn't be surprised if this caught NZF completely off-guard - as difficult as it is to believe that.