A&H

Initial Contact - PK?

B

Bleedaggie

New Member
Had a U17 middle yesterday. Pretty chippy game all the way through but fairly clean on my end. Had 3 advantages given on hard fouls that etched turned into goals, which I was proud of. Worst trouble came with about 5 minutes left in a 5-1 game so it didn’t affect the outcome. Messy (but not wreckless) tackle from two defensive players simultaneously on a striker just as he was entering the box. All 3 landed in a heap, clearly in the penalty area. I was right in position on top of it and immediately blew the PK. Made eye contact with my AR who was right in front of defense’s bench which was going berserk. Then handed out some dissent and dogso greeting cards, did the PK and finished the game.

Afterward, the other team coaches were all over me for blowing the call. Their opinion was that the foul started outside the box and tumbled into it. Unfortunately, the AR sold me out and had agreed with them that it should have been DFK outside the box rather than PK. That’s a different problem.

Here’s my question: both my ARs were confident that if the foul had started outside the area and finished inside it, the call should have been DFK outside. Is that right? I know it’s not that for a “hold” - Law 12 spells that out clearly. Is it the same for a tackle? They were both confident enough that it seemed like something I should know. But I can’t find that in LOTG anywhere. I’m not convinced the tackle did start outside the box, but think my call would have been the same either way. Am I wrong?
 
A&H International
Kent Ref said:
If the foul starts and CONTINUES inside = PK.
Click to expand...
I think that reference is for holding. For that to be the case for a challenge there would need to be a continuation of the fouling offence beyond the initial contact.

Also worth noting that if the offence is on the line, then they are counted as inside the penalty area. In real time and without the benefit of VAR this is sometines very hard to determine.
 
@Viridis1886 is spot on.

Holding offences that start outside the PA and continue into the penalty area are penalty kicks.

Any other foul: trip, push, kick, strike etc are at the point of contact.

If there are multiple attempts to foul, for example 2 attempts to trip, one outside the PA and one inside, then you can (effectively) play advantage and award a penalty kick for the 2nd offence, but this is 2 offences rather than a continuation of 1 offence as with holding.
 
Last edited:
JamesL said:
@Viridis1886 is spot on.

Holding offences that start outside the PA and continue into the penalty area are penalty kicks.

Any other foul: trip, push, kick, strike etc are at the point of contact.

If there are multiple attempts to foul, for example 2 attempts to trip, one outside the PA and one inside, then you can play advantage and award a penalty kick for the 2nd offence, but this is 2 offences rather than a continuation of 1 offence as with holding.
Click to expand...
What if you don't play advantage but the 2 fouls are just a second apart (number 1 out number 2 in)?

I assume you penalise offence one so DFK?
 
Kent Ref said:
What if you don't play advantage but the 2 fouls are just a second apart (number 1 out number 2 in)?

I assume you penalise offence one so DFK?
Click to expand...
Depends if you blow the whistle in between the 2 fouls or not. If you blow whistle play is stopped and therefore you could only award the DFK.

By play advantage I don't necessarily mean signalling it. So long as ball is still in play you should penalise the offence that benefits the non-offending team the most.
 
Bleedaggie said:
Had a U17 middle yesterday. Pretty chippy game all the way through but fairly clean on my end. Had 3 advantages given on hard fouls that etched turned into goals, which I was proud of. Worst trouble came with about 5 minutes left in a 5-1 game so it didn’t affect the outcome. Messy (but not wreckless) tackle from two defensive players simultaneously on a striker just as he was entering the box. All 3 landed in a heap, clearly in the penalty area. I was right in position on top of it and immediately blew the PK. Made eye contact with my AR who was right in front of defense’s bench which was going berserk. Then handed out some dissent and dogso greeting cards, did the PK and finished the game.

Afterward, the other team coaches were all over me for blowing the call. Their opinion was that the foul started outside the box and tumbled into it. Unfortunately, the AR sold me out and had agreed with them that it should have been DFK outside the box rather than PK. That’s a different problem.

Here’s my question: both my ARs were confident that if the foul had started outside the area and finished inside it, the call should have been DFK outside. Is that right? I know it’s not that for a “hold” - Law 12 spells that out clearly. Is it the same for a tackle? They were both confident enough that it seemed like something I should know. But I can’t find that in LOTG anywhere. I’m not convinced the tackle did start outside the box, but think my call would have been the same either way. Am I wrong?
Click to expand...
A tackle isn't a continuing foul though, it's a single point of contact foul. It doesn't matter where the player ends up after tumbling to the ground, it matters where the contact occurs.

If the point of contact was outside the penalty area, it's a DFK outside the area, even if the player's momentum carries them into the penalty area afterwards.
 
There are certainly some fouls that can seem to have multiple points of contact (a tangle of legs for example, or near-simultaneous upper and lower body contact, or a slide where contact is made with foot, then knee, then thigh, then body), so I do think we need to be a little careful about dismissing referees being confused about these challenges. And the challenge discussed in the OP also qualifies - two players challenging, potentially both could commit an offence, one outside and one inside the area.

If the first contact is outside the area, is a foul and then the second contact is incidental contact on an already-falling player then yes, the first point of contact is what should be penalised, with a DFK.
But if you judge that first contact as trifling, or a foul with a valid advantage, and then the second contact comes in and is also a foul, you're absolutely right in going with the penalty kick. It can be hard to judge the difference in reality (particularly if you're caught directly behind the play), but with the right understanding and a good explanation, it should be possible to make the right decision and sell either call.
 
Either way it’s difficult to tell sometimes. For fouls other than holding it’s point of contact. I would not appreciate my AR disagreeing with me to the coaches though. In privates fine, selling you out isn’t right.
 
Gabriel said:
Either way it’s difficult to tell sometimes. For fouls other than holding it’s point of contact. I would not appreciate my AR disagreeing with me to the coaches though. In privates fine, selling you out isn’t right.
Click to expand...
I tend to tell my senior ARs that if it's a minor decision, feel free to tell them you don't agree if that's the answer they're looking for and you genuinely think it's wrong, but don't do it on a major decision! As an AR, you don't want the benches thinking that you're just going to tell them they're wrong every time they query something and back the referee blindly, but things like a penalty decision, the AR should not be telling the dugouts he believes it to be incorrect, even if he does.
 
Depends on which type of AR.

If it's neutral then, if they have the info, they ought to be providing it. Telling the benches and doing nothing is criminal.

Club assistant ref... What can you do? Of course they are but you are only going to accept their advice if a) you really really don't know or b) it's against their team which would lead me more towards accepting their honesty
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top