The Ref Stop

50-50 ref! (Tottenham - Cardiff RC)

CapnBloodbeard said:
there's no good reason to do it, that immediately upgrades it to 'excessive'
Click to expand...

So tripping an opponent with no challenge for the ball is 'excessive' and a red card? Either that is wrong or there are a of refs issuing cations for professional fouls that should be told.
 
The Ref Stop
Big Cat said:
Like i said earlier, the Law does not adequately deal with this common scenario, so i can see both sides. Excessive Force associated with SFP is the closest match imo, even though it's technically not SFP
Click to expand...

It would fall under excessive force associated with VC

JamesL said:
Do you have a reference for that statement? Personally have never seen anything to suggest that is the case.
Click to expand...
Can't think of where I've seen it now, so disregard if if that suits.

I just can't see how a player who goes to that level of force against an opponent in a situation like that deserves to stay on the park.

And sometimes on here, we can get so caught up it words and literal interpretations and pages of text that we forget about the game. As somebody on Reddit said, if it's the sort of tackle that makes you go 'what the f***???', then that's a pretty good indication that he needs to go!

Trip said:
So tripping an opponent with no challenge for the ball is 'excessive' and a red card? Either that is wrong or there are a of refs issuing cations for professional fouls that should be told.
Click to expand...
Don't quote me out of context; I wasn't making a categorical statement.
 
Be interesting to see if it gets overturned on appeal. However, at grass roots, this sort of thing will routinely cause fights so it needs to be addressed
 
GraemeS said:
Exactly. Intent can be one of many reasons to give red for VC/SFP, but is not required to do so.
Click to expand...
I just can’t see it as being violent.
It was stupid and certainly reckless, but putting this in the same category as a punch doesn’t work for me.
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
It would fall under excessive force associated with VC


Can't think of where I've seen it now, so disregard if if that suits.

I just can't see how a player who goes to that level of force against an opponent in a situation like that deserves to stay on the park.

And sometimes on here, we can get so caught up it words and literal interpretations and pages of text that we forget about the game. As somebody on Reddit said, if it's the sort of tackle that makes you go 'what the f***???', then that's a pretty good indication that he needs to go!


Don't quote me out of context; I wasn't making a categorical statement.
Click to expand...
If you're binning him because you see that as actually horribly violent then while I disagree, I accept that it's a subjective call that you have a right to make. The issue I have is the idea that it should be considered more violent simply because the ball is 10 yards away rather than 1. I don't see that supported in law and I don't see a jsutification in law for raising this above a yellow card purely because of the ball's location.
 
Abeverley said:
I just can’t see it as being violent.
It was stupid and certainly reckless, but putting this in the same category as a punch doesn’t work for me.
Click to expand...
So putting it in the same category as excessive goal celebration or leaving FOP without permission does work for you??
 
Big Cat said:
So putting it in the same category as excessive goal celebration or leaving FOP without permission does work for you??
Click to expand...
Putting it in the same category as SPA works perfectly for me. That would seem to be the obvious starting point for any discussion and I can't see any real argument for raising it above that.
 
Big Cat said:
So putting it in the same category as excessive goal celebration or leaving FOP without permission does work for you??
Click to expand...
I don’t see it working like that.
It’s cleaely worse than both of those things but the punishments for those is in the laws and as a ref, if I don’t interpret that that be violent then I’m not sending off for VC.
As there’s no middle ground between yellow and red, it’s going to have the same punishment
 
It's aggravated SPA
I'm on the fence btw
I'm just saying the Law does not adequately deal with this incident
But that's not unusual. In such cases, we have latitude to apply the spirit of the game cr4p, or at least interpret the intention of the law
 
Big Cat said:
It's aggravated SPA
I'm on the fence btw
I'm just saying the Law does not adequately deal with this incident
But that's not unusual. In such cases, we have latitude to apply the spirit of the game cr4p, or at least interpret the intention of the law
Click to expand...
In that case, then, it would come down to how much force was used and if the ref thought it was excessive, surely?
It’s very subjective.
 
If the ball was in playing distance, not one of you would be sending him. So why are you sending him based on the position of the ball? Just because the laws differentiate between violent conduct and SFP by challenging for the ball does not mean every foul off the ball is a red/excessive force.
 
JH said:
If the ball was in playing distance, not one of you would be sending him. So why are you sending him based on the position of the ball? Just because the laws differentiate between violent conduct and SFP by the position of the ball does not mean every foul off the ball is a red/excessive force.
Click to expand...

Youve completely contradicted yourself there

Surely if you make a challenge deemed to be SFP when the ball isn’t in playing distance, it has to be VC.
 
QuaverRef said:
Youve completely contradicted yourself there

Surely if you make a challenge deemed to be SFP when the ball isn’t in playing distance, it has to be VC.
Click to expand...
I didn't say I deemed it to be SFP? Some people were saying because the ball wasn't playable, it is automatically VC, no questions asked.
 
Contact when challenging for the ball has a different threshold than that off the ball (not in law, but in practice)
 
I agree. And if it was 40 yards from play it would obv be violent conduct. But- think about how much contact and from what. No studs touching the player.
He’s done it to stop a promising attack.

It’s very stupid- he should have just pulled his shirt. He deserves the red for being a moron lol
 
Opinions will be immaterial anyway, based on the outcome of any appeal. Assuming there is an appeal
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
Don't quote me out of context; I wasn't making a categorical statement.
Click to expand...

What missing context allows for an interpretation of what you said which isn't that off-the-ball contact is "immediately" (your word) considered 'excessive'.

Here's the full sentence, regarding off-the-ball contact:

Doesn't have to be intent to hurt (which is not supported in the law), doesn't even have to be hard. FIFA's view is basically that because there's no good reason to do it, that immediately upgrades it to 'excessive'.

If you're using that to explain why this is a red card then all professional fouls should be red cards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JH
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top