This was from a Q and A on http://www.askasoccerreferee.com/...I'm wondering if others agrees with this. I've never heard of using the 3 criteria discussed to determine foul, foul and card, or nothing. Especially the speed of the slide...are their really slow slides? Does this do a good job answering the question? I feel like I'm a little more confused. Thanks
Dave, a U13-U19 referee, asks:
I have been searching for an answer to my question and I can’t find one anywhere that addresses what I’m asking. I have read that “It is not a foul if a sliding tackle is successful and the player whose ball was tackled away then falls over the tackler’s foot.” What if the slide tackle is successful and the player doesn’t fall over the tackler’s foot, but instead, falls over the tackler’s upper leg or body that has slid in front of the player’s path after the successful tackle? Is it a foul if a player falls over some body part other than the tackler’s foot after a successful tackle?
Answer:
The criteria for a foul which is associated with a sliding tackle is pretty straightforward. Three major initial issues are (a) what was the direction of the slide, (b) what is the speed of the slide, and (c) what did the slider follow up doing immediately after the slider’s contact with the ball.
Regarding the first item (direction of slide), there is basically a “sliding scale” (no pun intended) regarding the degree of potential Law violation. In short, all other things equal, the farther away from coming in directly in front of the slider’s target of the slider, the more likely the slide is potentially dangerous and thus at least a foul if not both a foul and misconduct. The most common element generally is the degree to which the action of the slider is known or knowable by the target. This means that the slide tackle from behind is the most likely to result in a foul and a misconduct (though it can be done legally if it is done perfectly). One of the critical elements here is the degree to which the target can see or be aware of the slide. On the other hand, all other things equal, the slide from the front of the target and assuming the target is also looking at a forward direction, the less likely the action would involve a violation.
Regarding the second element (speed of the slide), the issue is generally fairly simple – the faster the slide, the more likely it will result in a violation and an assessment of danger. Again, note that any slide necessarily carries an element of danger by itself if for no other reason that a slide on the ground generally involves less control by the slider … but adding speed increases this danger.
Finally, regarding the completion of a slide, what happens after the slide has contacted the ball and/or the body of the opponent carries its own set of criteria. For example, the slider comes from the front and not at a high speed, and doesn’t makes contact with the ball or the opponent in any way, it is almost certain that there is no likelihood of a violation. But, change any one or more of these three elements (slow speed, frontal direction relative to the opponent, and contact only with the ball over the duration of the slide) and you have a series of issues which individually will likely involve at minimum a foul and potentially misconduct also.
For example, making contact with the ball is, by itself, nothing more than the objective of the slide tackle but, add any (much less more than one) of the following and there is almost certainly a foul and/or in addition a misconduct – the misconduct element is already primed to be an element because sliding on the ground is almost inherently dangerous to begin with. Perhaps the slider makes contact with the ball and then the slider’s foot continues over the top or from the side of the ball to the opponent’s foot. Perhaps one foot clearly and otherwise legally makes contact with the ball but the other foot is placed higher and makes contact with the opponent.
Not surprisingly, the single most dangerous sliding tackle (foul plus misconduct, with the latter being usually at the red card level) is from behind, at high speed, with one or both feet making contact with one or both legs (or higher) and with studs up.
Dave, a U13-U19 referee, asks:
I have been searching for an answer to my question and I can’t find one anywhere that addresses what I’m asking. I have read that “It is not a foul if a sliding tackle is successful and the player whose ball was tackled away then falls over the tackler’s foot.” What if the slide tackle is successful and the player doesn’t fall over the tackler’s foot, but instead, falls over the tackler’s upper leg or body that has slid in front of the player’s path after the successful tackle? Is it a foul if a player falls over some body part other than the tackler’s foot after a successful tackle?
Answer:
The criteria for a foul which is associated with a sliding tackle is pretty straightforward. Three major initial issues are (a) what was the direction of the slide, (b) what is the speed of the slide, and (c) what did the slider follow up doing immediately after the slider’s contact with the ball.
Regarding the first item (direction of slide), there is basically a “sliding scale” (no pun intended) regarding the degree of potential Law violation. In short, all other things equal, the farther away from coming in directly in front of the slider’s target of the slider, the more likely the slide is potentially dangerous and thus at least a foul if not both a foul and misconduct. The most common element generally is the degree to which the action of the slider is known or knowable by the target. This means that the slide tackle from behind is the most likely to result in a foul and a misconduct (though it can be done legally if it is done perfectly). One of the critical elements here is the degree to which the target can see or be aware of the slide. On the other hand, all other things equal, the slide from the front of the target and assuming the target is also looking at a forward direction, the less likely the action would involve a violation.
Regarding the second element (speed of the slide), the issue is generally fairly simple – the faster the slide, the more likely it will result in a violation and an assessment of danger. Again, note that any slide necessarily carries an element of danger by itself if for no other reason that a slide on the ground generally involves less control by the slider … but adding speed increases this danger.
Finally, regarding the completion of a slide, what happens after the slide has contacted the ball and/or the body of the opponent carries its own set of criteria. For example, the slider comes from the front and not at a high speed, and doesn’t makes contact with the ball or the opponent in any way, it is almost certain that there is no likelihood of a violation. But, change any one or more of these three elements (slow speed, frontal direction relative to the opponent, and contact only with the ball over the duration of the slide) and you have a series of issues which individually will likely involve at minimum a foul and potentially misconduct also.
For example, making contact with the ball is, by itself, nothing more than the objective of the slide tackle but, add any (much less more than one) of the following and there is almost certainly a foul and/or in addition a misconduct – the misconduct element is already primed to be an element because sliding on the ground is almost inherently dangerous to begin with. Perhaps the slider makes contact with the ball and then the slider’s foot continues over the top or from the side of the ball to the opponent’s foot. Perhaps one foot clearly and otherwise legally makes contact with the ball but the other foot is placed higher and makes contact with the opponent.
Not surprisingly, the single most dangerous sliding tackle (foul plus misconduct, with the latter being usually at the red card level) is from behind, at high speed, with one or both feet making contact with one or both legs (or higher) and with studs up.
