A clean reckless challenge??

[pdhmobile]

Hi everyone

I've just seen a very interesting video clip on Instagram which showed a very strong 'clean' tackle that everyone cheered and clapped and then the ref blew his whistle for a free kick and issued a YC for a reckless challenge, claiming he didn't want tackles like that in the match.

Has anyone ever done that before? Thought it was a interesting point of view?

Thanks

Paul

 

[JamesL]

It would be good if you could share a link to the clip which would really help.

A reckless tackle or challenge is one where the offender acts in a way that shows disregard for the danger to or consequence for their opponent.

So what you describe (except for reckless AND clean) is entirely plausible. Whether it applies to your clip we would need to see it

 

[BCMilan]

Sounds like the type of challenge that if their team did it, the supporters would say it was hard but fair, yet if it was the opposing team it, they'd say it was dangerous

 

[Archer]

Can hear the shouts of "get a grip, ref" from here and I've not even seen the challenge*

*like normal, I know

 

[one]

What is a "clean" challenge? Checked the glossary of the lotg but couldn't find the definition.

 

[JamesL]

What is a "clean" challenge?

If you can clean my house in under an hour then you get to keep what's left of the cleaning products... Or something like that

 

[Archer]

If you can clean my house in under an hour then you get to keep what's left of the cleaning products... Or something like that

If James ever says he’s taking you to see Ajax, deny the offer!

 

[RustyRef]

Hi everyone

I've just seen a very interesting video clip on Instagram which showed a very strong 'clean' tackle that everyone cheered and clapped and then the ref blew his whistle for a free kick and issued a YC for a reckless challenge, claiming he didn't want tackles like that in the match.

Has anyone ever done that before? Thought it was a interesting point of view?

Thanks

Paul

There's a common misconception that players can completely wipe out an opponent as long as they win the ball first, but that hasn't been the case for decades. If they win the ball but then go straight through the opponent it is entirely possible that is deemed as careless, or more likely reckless.

 

[BCMilan]

There's a common misconception that players can completely wipe out an opponent as long as they win the ball first, but that hasn't been the case for decades. If they win the ball but then go straight through the opponent it is entirely possible that is deemed as careless, or more likely reckless.

Yep. That was in the 70's....doesn't apply these days !

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Yep. That was in the 70's....doesn't apply these days !

In the laws of the game back then, contact with an opponent before contact with the ball was an offence, so Joe Public assumed that playing the ball then the man was fair . . . which was not what the laws said, but we must not allow that to affect the public perception

 

[Peter Grove]

In the laws of the game back then, contact with an opponent before contact with the ball was an offence, so Joe Public assumed that playing the ball then the man was fair . . . which was not what the laws said, but we must not allow that to affect the public perception

Actually, the bit about contacting the opponent before the ball being a foul wasn't introduced until 1995 - and the wording wasn't removed from the laws until 2008.



Neither when it was added nor when it was removed, can I find any official explanation from the IFAB as to the rationale behind the changes. In fact, somewhat bizarrely, the removal of the wording wasn't even documented in the 2008 minutes and can only be ascertained by comparing the 2007 and 2008 editions of the laws.

However I agree that at the time, it was accepted that the removal was because (based on the previous wording) people were making the incorrect assumption that getting the ball first meant there was no foul.

 

[hungryauthour]

It is either a clean and fair tackle or it is a reckless tackle. It cannot be both.