Ref4Me

Coventry vs Birmingham

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
It is dangerous though. And I can't think what other challenges we would have to grade the same.
As I said earlier, if you take the Xhaka example. And the Joe Ralls example and find those threads you will find me vehemently opposing red cards.
The difference for me is that both the Joe Ralls and the Xhaka ones the foul is made from the front of the player or reaching around so they have the opportunity to take defensive action to break the fall. This is just a straight up kicks at the players ankle and the first he knows about it is the taste of mud

Having been the victim of someone just kicking my legs from behind (albeit playing rugby with "friends") I can tell you my safety was endangered by that action. It bloody well hurt for weeks after. It's the surprise element the body can't react quick enough and you just smash the floor with whatever part hits the ground first.
I'm not going to argue too hard, as my overall stance of "if you genuinely think it's SFP then fine" does apply. But I can't get on board with the idea of any trip, even a surprise trip, escalating to the point where it deserves the same punishment or reaches the same level of danger as a straight-legged off-the ground lunge. SFP red cards are typically for tackles that either impact hard with a vulnerable part of the opponent's body, or risk doing so.

I've never once before seen the impact with the ground cited as a reason for going red, you're breaking new ground here! But I just think it opens up too many potential reds - player looking for a high ball getting barged in the back by surprise and falling to the ground for example. Typically that would be a foul and get on with it, but it meets your criteria for red.

There was a lot of chat last year about Kane's habit of undercutting a player jumping for the ball, which often resulted in the opponent landing on their head or neck. And even in those examples which are considerably more dangerous than a player falling on their front from standing, the question was generally "Who should get the FK" rather than "is Kane lucky not to see red?" I just don't see SFP red here as remotely in line with any other SFP in the history of the game.

Again, by all means I'd love to see a specific red card offence created for "stopping a promising attack with no chance of touching the ball", but I don't see how these qualify as SFP without the player getting the challenge seriously wrong (the Bolton example posted above being a good example of this).
 
The Referee Store

deusex

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
As long as the referee issues a red card for every shirt pull, pull back and holding offence for the rest of the game I am fine with this red.

It's a trip, nothing more, seen countless times around England this weekend and nothing more than a caution.
 

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
As long as the referee issues a red card for every shirt pull, pull back and holding offence for the rest of the game I am fine with this red.

It's a trip, nothing more, seen countless times around England this weekend and nothing more than a caution.

A shirt pull won't likely hurt anyone. A lunge like this with no attempt to play the ball might well do, you are comparing apples with oranges.
 

deusex

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
A shirt pull won't likely hurt anyone. A lunge like this with no attempt to play the ball might well do, you are comparing apples with oranges.
1638314218578.png

This is togue in cheek obv but....A lunge? That some stretch to call the OP a lunge.
It's a trip. It's as dangerous as any trip on a player running full speed. Go ahead if you want to start RCing for that every weekend
 

Macca

New Member
I can see a way a shirt pull could be a red, even from that still.
A player gets pulled by the jersey and ends up going down in a heap because of the speed he is moving or an injury to the neck - I'll consider red.
 

Anubis

RefChat Addict
I can see a way a shirt pull could be a red, even from that still.
A player gets pulled by the jersey and ends up going down in a heap because of the speed he is moving or an injury to the neck - I'll consider red.

there is a clue in the still, one of the planets most experienced and talented referees goes yellow...

we see the correct sanction, does not really need our own version of events
 

Macca

New Member
there is a clue in the still, one of the planets most experienced and talented referees goes yellow...

we see the correct sanction, does not really need our own version of events
Maybe you have a better view from that high horse of yours, but a clue in the still? I don't see i) the referee or ii) the sanction.

My point is quite simple - a shirt pull could be deemed excessive force in certain circumstances.
 

Anubis

RefChat Addict
Maybe you have a better view from that high horse of yours, but a clue in the still? I don't see i) the referee or ii) the sanction.

My point is quite simple - a shirt pull could be deemed excessive force in certain circumstances.

no high hirse needed, this fouk is a yellow card offence and was correctly sanctioned as a yellow card offence

if we encounter this foul in our game, we dont need to consider red, if we did, its incorrect, the correct sanction for said foul, is, yellow.


Akin to coaching clips, say, a session on dogso. There is always one, who, despite the coaching notes saying, this is a red card, someone, usually at the back of the room, and undee there breath, mutters, ' am not sendimg off for that"
Rendering the coaching and guideance fruitless.


Constistancy is what we strive for, aided if folk issue the correct sanction when faced with offemces
One of the planets best ever referees correctly goes yellow here.

for background, one of the officials on duty that night was my dogsbody at a tournament back in the day. We worked so wel i was invited to a tournament in his country. Cant claim we are besties but we have kept in touch.
Yellow card.

we all learn from our peers.
 
Last edited:

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
A shirt pull won't likely hurt anyone. A lunge like this with no attempt to play the ball might well do, you are comparing apples with oranges.
Any tackle "might" injure someone, that doesn't mean we should be sending off every time a player is dispossessed. There are situations where someone might be going for a trip, get it wrong and jam their studs into the back of the opponents ankle (as was the case with the foul on Mane in the Atletico game I think, and the Bolton clip posted on the previous page) - in that situation, red would be appropriate.

But the suggestion here isn't that this is what happened in this incident. It's a trip - if you really wanted to describe it harshly, I'd even accept "kick with the top of his boot to the opponents ankle". But none of that would come close to qualifying for SFP anywhere else on the pitch. The only reason SFP has even entered this debate is because some of us "feel" that this should be red and SFP is the closest to a justification for that red we can find - but it doesn't make it right.
 

Anubis

RefChat Addict
Maybe this helps, when considering an elbow as vc, its drummed in,is it being used as a tool, or, a weapon.
Tool being, for leverage, natural etc
Weapon being, intended to inflict woe

here we have a kick, the leg is not being used as a tool, but, a weapon,

trip, is used for those subtle leg out so the opponent falls over it
To trip someone up, is to put your foot in such a place they fall over it

in the vid shown, its a kick.
 

es1

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
Maybe this helps, when considering an elbow as vc, its drummed in,is it being used as a tool, or, a weapon.
Tool being, for leverage, natural etc
Weapon being, intended to inflict woe

here we have a kick, the leg is not being used as a tool, but, a weapon,

trip, is used for those subtle leg out so the opponent falls over it
To trip someone up, is to put your foot in such a place they fall over it

in the vid shown, its a kick.

you could argue that it is being used as a tool to trip the player up, and not not injure / hurt them though
 

Tealeaf

Lighting the darkest hour
Staff member
Level 5 Referee
Maybe this helps, when considering an elbow as vc, its drummed in,is it being used as a tool, or, a weapon.
Tool being, for leverage, natural etc
Weapon being, intended to inflict woe

here we have a kick, the leg is not being used as a tool, but, a weapon,

trip, is used for those subtle leg out so the opponent falls over it
To trip someone up, is to put your foot in such a place they fall over it

in the vid shown, its a kick.

I am blatantly going to plagiarise this!
 

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
you could argue that it is being used as a tool to trip the player up, and not not injure / hurt them though
Exactly this. We're back to my previous post about trying to judge the intent - was he trying to hurt the player (weapon) or was he trying to stop the player (tool)? For me it is clearly the latter, which is why I don't see how SFP can possibly apply here.
 

Anubis

RefChat Addict
you could argue that it is being used as a tool to trip the player up, and not not injure / hurt them though

its more than ok to use the leg as a tool for standing, running etc, thats its football definition of being used as a tool

when its used as per the clip, its a weapon,

not every vc elbow is intended to kill, it can also be a calling card, leaving a mark, a, am here symbol. We still go vc tho.
If the arm naturally flaps when jumping and catches the opponent we can yc
if the arm intentionally is used to batter into the opponent we go red.

same as the clip, substituting the leg for the arm,
 

es1

RefChat Addict
Level 4 Referee
its more than ok to use the leg as a tool for standing, running etc, thats its football definition of being used as a tool

when its used as per the clip, its a weapon,

not every vc elbow is intended to kill, it can also be a calling card, leaving a mark, a, am here symbol. We still go vc tho.
If the arm naturally flaps when jumping and catches the opponent we can yc
if the arm intentionally is used to batter into the opponent we go red.

same as the clip, substituting the leg for the arm,

totally get where you're coming from. i was happy with red but was only playing devlis advocate with your post as i dont think the two examples (intentional elbow vs intentional trip) are quite the same...sounds like i'm talking myself out of giving a red...
 

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
its more than ok to use the leg as a tool for standing, running etc, thats its football definition of being used as a tool

when its used as per the clip, its a weapon,

not every vc elbow is intended to kill, it can also be a calling card, leaving a mark, a, am here symbol. We still go vc tho.
If the arm naturally flaps when jumping and catches the opponent we can yc
if the arm intentionally is used to batter into the opponent we go red.

same as the clip, substituting the leg for the arm,
Completely with you on the principal, but I can't see how you've applied it to reach that conclusion in this particular case. It's not a "kill" trip, but it's also not a "calling card" trip either - the intention is clearly to stop the attack.
 

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
Any tackle "might" injure someone, that doesn't mean we should be sending off every time a player is dispossessed. There are situations where someone might be going for a trip, get it wrong and jam their studs into the back of the opponents ankle (as was the case with the foul on Mane in the Atletico game I think, and the Bolton clip posted on the previous page) - in that situation, red would be appropriate.

But the suggestion here isn't that this is what happened in this incident. It's a trip - if you really wanted to describe it harshly, I'd even accept "kick with the top of his boot to the opponents ankle". But none of that would come close to qualifying for SFP anywhere else on the pitch. The only reason SFP has even entered this debate is because some of us "feel" that this should be red and SFP is the closest to a justification for that red we can find - but it doesn't make it right.

That wasn't a trip, a trip is where someone falls over something that they don't know is there, such as an opponent's leg. This was a lunge with zero attempt to play the ball and the only attempt was to kick the opponent to take him down.
 

GraemeS

RefChat Addict
Level 5 Referee
That wasn't a trip, a trip is where someone falls over something that they don't know is there, such as an opponent's leg. This was a lunge with zero attempt to play the ball and the only attempt was to kick the opponent to take him down.
Yep. And?

None of that meets the definition of SFP or VC, so under current laws anything more than yellow is incorrect.
 

Tim - 2013

Member
Level 7 Referee
Player throws a punch and misses the opponent's head. Player throws a punch and nicks opponent. Player throws a punch and nicely lands it. Player throws a punch and the opponent, definitively decked, is knocked out.

Replacing punch with kick.

Maybe it is a US thing or local thing, but all of these were taught as RC's.

If an opponent punches or kicks an opponent (or tries to), the severity of the contact, or lack of any, still brings the action to RC, especially if there is no ball or no attempt to get the ball.

I gave a YC for striking an opponent and my assessor asked me how do you recklessly punch someone. They threw a punch.

I see kicking an opponent, like throwing a punch, a RC. Serious foul play/Violent conduct. Those words describe it.

2 cents
 
Top