A&H

Did I get this right?

M

Monotone Whistle

Well-Known Member
Hi all,

It's a bit after the event, but I had an incident last weekend that I keep going over. However, no one complained or seemed to notice but id like to get it right...

Home team right-back has the ball, and evades a reckless attempted tackle from Away winger. The Home player passes the ball along the line, and as the Away winger runs back past him the Home player has a tiny kick out (with some contact) at the Away player to show his annoyance with the attempted tackle. The ball runs along the line, gets passed on a few times, and then goes out of play for a goal kick a few seconds later.

Now, what I did here was to firstly caution the Away player for a reckless tackle (cue the "but there was no contact" argument which I dealt with). I then cautioned the Home player for the kick-out, which he was fine with.

My question is, did I manage this right? I sort of played advantage to the Home team following the reckless tackle, but should I then have called it back for the kick and given a dfk to the Away team?? Possible red card for the kick?

It bothered me throughout the rest of the game, even though no one said anything. I just like to learn...
 
The Referee Store
Personally sounds like the initial advantage makes sense. However the kick out I'd be blowing for. Mainly because that would have escalated into something bigger, other players getting involved etc. But if no one complained at the time then I'd say you didnt do too badly.
 
Monotone Whistle said:
Hi all,

It's a bit after the event, but I had an incident last weekend that I keep going over. However, no one complained or seemed to notice but id like to get it right...

Home team right-back has the ball, and evades a reckless attempted tackle from Away winger. The Home player passes the ball along the line, and as the Away winger runs back past him the Home player has a tiny kick out (with some contact) at the Away player to show his annoyance with the attempted tackle. The ball runs along the line, gets passed on a few times, and then goes out of play for a goal kick a few seconds later.

Now, what I did here was to firstly caution the Away player for a reckless tackle (cue the "but there was no contact" argument which I dealt with). I then cautioned the Home player for the kick-out, which he was fine with.

My question is, did I manage this right? I sort of played advantage to the Home team following the reckless tackle, but should I then have called it back for the kick and given a dfk to the Away team?? Possible red card for the kick?

It bothered me throughout the rest of the game, even though no one said anything. I just like to learn...
Click to expand...
How did you deal with the "but there was no contact" argument? Wasn't this a "attempted tackle"?
 
By explaining that there doesn't have to be contact for a foul to have been committed. The player's actions were reckless whether he made contact or not (he really did try and take the opposing player out)
 
Attempting to tackle is not a DFK foul though unlike attempting to kick, trip or strike. As it is not a DFK foul, careless, reckless or excessive force does not come into it.
However you can stop play for playing in a dangerous manner with a IFK restart.
 
Last edited:
Yes, and I put the caution through as playing in a dangerous manner. I use the word reckless to give context, had there been contact it would have been a caution. The restart is irrelevant as I didn't stop play at that point, but rather allowed the advantage.

My issue is should I have stopped play rather than played the advantage after the kick-out by the Home player?
 
I can live with it if it was for USB :)
Onto the next point, I think you are correct in your re-think. If you cautioned the home player then you thought its an offence. You could not have played advantage there because the opponents did not have possession of the ball so you should have stopped play immediately.
You then have two options, go to the original offence of PINADM if no advantage eventuated from it or you have completed the advantage play and penalised the kick-out.
 
The positive side is that you sold it well. I would also say not to bug yourself down with if you have made a mistake during the game. It could effect your performance for the remainder of the game. Leave the self-assessment to after the game :)
 
Imo ,you handled the situation pretty well and everyone accepted your decision

but i suppose if were getting a bit Lotg over common sense then the player who kicked out should have been off for VC ..?

thats if i have digested your post correctly ?.
 
I always have an issue with the kick out being a red. I've actually had two of these this season and I've cautioned both times, if we are getting LOTG on ourselves then it wasn't a kick with excessive force so I considered a caution appropriate.

I now the examples on TV (Beckham in 1998, Ramirez for Hull v Spurs earlier this season) seem to always be a red, but I've never quite tied that with the LOTG.
 
yes i agree totally .....give it 5 years and football will be a non contact sport

But on the pitch.... if you see someone having a kick at someone off the ball.... they must be expecting a red card ?

They wouldnt do it in the street or in the pub ?

You must forgive me .i have had a very low tolerance level this season
 
Is playing in reckless manner not a DFK?!
one said:
Attempting to tackle is not a DFK foul though unlike attempting to kick, trip or strike. As it is not a DFK foul, careless, reckless or excessive force does not come into it.
However you can stop play for playing in a dangerous manner with a IFK restart.
Click to expand...
 
If it's a reckless challenge you want it to be a great potential goal scoring advantage if your going to play it in the final third of the pitch with a massive shout of "PLAY ON ADVANTAGE, BLUE 8 I'M COMING BACK TO CAUTION YOU!"

By the sounds of it you played an advantage in your head by using the words kinda, and didn't really make it clear to the players that you were aware of a foul which may of caused the defender to kick out?

It really needs to be an advantage to you, don't try and be clever(even though we all like to be sometimes), just stop play then you will most likely have only one caution and less of a challenge to deal with.
 
Last edited:
I didn't really think of it as an advantage per se, as both events happened so close together (within 3 or 4 seconds) and no fuss was made by any of the players at all.

I think I made the right call in the match situation itself, but I guess officially I should have punished the first offence
 
Monotone Whistle said:
I didn't really think of it as an advantage per se, as both events happened so close together (within 3 or 4 seconds) and no fuss was made by any of the players at all.

I think I made the right call in the match situation itself, but I guess officially I should have punished the first offence
Click to expand...

That's enough time to shout advantage or give the fk though?
 
one said:
Attempting to tackle is not a DFK foul though unlike attempting to kick, trip or strike. As it is not a DFK foul, careless, reckless or excessive force does not come into it.
However you can stop play for playing in a dangerous manner with a IFK restart.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with this at all.

A tackle that a player needs to evade could definitely come under 'attempts to trip'. It could also come under 'recklessly tackles an opponent'.

Anyway, the advantage is sound, as long as it was signalled. The retaliation occurred well after and doesn't cancel out the advantage. There should have been a free kick there though.
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
I don't agree with this at all.

A tackle that a player needs to evade could definitely come under 'attempts to trip'. It could also come under 'recklessly tackles an opponent'.

Anyway, the advantage is sound, as long as it was signalled. The retaliation occurred well after and doesn't cancel out the advantage. There should have been a free kick there though.
Click to expand...
I am not quite sure which part of my post you don't agree with? Are you saying attempting to tackle is a DFK?
For clarification, i am not saying not to give a DFK. I am saying you can not give a DFK for 'attempting to tackle'. Feel free to give a DFK for attempting to trip if you deem it to be that and that would be in line with the LOTG.

How could 'attempting to tackle' (as the OP clearly states) come under 'recklessly tackles an opponent'? He has not actually tackled an opponent. If attempting it is the same as doing it then why is 'attempting' specified for kick, trip and strike and not the rest?
 
CallumRushton13 said:
Is playing in reckless manner not a DFK?!
Click to expand...
No. Law 12 page 122

Playing in a dangerous manner
...
Restart of play
• Indirect free kick from the position where the offence occurred (see Law 13 – Position of free kick)
• If there is contact, a different offence has been committed, punishable by a direct free kick or penalty kick.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top