The Ref Stop

I Got The Ball Ref

Trip said:
Trying to explain to players that getting the ball has no bearing on whether it's a foul is not going to get you anywhere. Everyone "knows" that if you get the ball first it's not a foul. I've seen premier league referees making the 'ball' gesture.

My own rule of thumb is that tackles from behind must be clean but tackles that the attacker can see coming can involve contact after the ball is played (provided it's not reckless or dangerous).
Click to expand...

That just isn't right. On that basis you can lunge from the side and as long as you win the ball that is OK, whereas law was updated to specifically reference lunging from the side or front as being offences.

If it is careless or reckless it is an offence, doesn't matter if it wins the ball, or from what direction it comes from, it is still a foul.
 
The Ref Stop
one said:
I found a few examples here for discussion. If we think these are not even a free kick, we should re-think our refereeing career - imo of course.
Click to expand...

All of those examples are - at the very least - reckless.
 
JamesL said:
You for got lunging "with excessive force" is serious foul play.
You can lunge, carelessly and recklessly too.
Click to expand...

Haha, ok, show me an example of a 'careless' lunge from the front that wins the ball first but should still be a foul.

Rusty referenced the change in the laws which mentions lunging from the front or sides. That law change is specifically about lunging with excessive force.
 
socal lurker said:
I think it is simply wrong in Law to say that a tackle from the side or front has to rise to the level of reckless before it can be a foul if the defender gets the ball first.
Click to expand...

I said it was my personal rule of thumb, not a paraphrase of the laws. In practice I think this is a pretty sound basis.

Show me an example of a tackle from a position where the attacker can see the challenge coming, which is not reckless or SFP, and which you think is still a foul. Maybe I'll be persuaded.
 
Trip said:
Haha, ok, show me an example of a 'careless' lunge from the front that wins the ball first but should still be a foul.

Rusty referenced the change in the laws which mentions lunging from the front or sides. That law change is specifically about lunging with excessive force.
Click to expand...
I haven't got time to be scrolling through hours of clips to find you an example, however, I can say that in my game this weekend, I gave a free kick for a foul that came from the front, won the ball first but then took the player so I know from my own game it can be.
You can't write "lunging is serious foul play", (well obviosuly you can because you did 😁), because that is just plainly wrong, lunging along with some other conditions, namely excessive force and safety endangerment is serious foul play. You can lunge and not do these two things which would mean it was not SFP.

I do actually get what you are saying, I agree that a lot of challenges that win the ball first particularly from the front tend to be more than careless but it certainly is not a blanket outcome to all challenges of this nature.
 
Trip said:
Haha, ok, show me an example of a 'careless' lunge from the front that wins the ball first but should still be a foul.

Rusty referenced the change in the laws which mentions lunging from the front or sides. That law change is specifically about lunging with excessive force.
Click to expand...

That was because you said anything that wins the ball unless from behind is fine, and that is clearly a total nonsense and not at all supported in law.
There are loads of occasions where a player tackles from the front or side, wins the ball but then takes out the opponent, or contacts the opponent before winning the ball. If that is deemed to be careless or reckless then it is a foul, winning the ball is in no way a justification to allow any kind of challenge.
 
RustyRef said:
That was because you said anything that wins the ball unless from behind is fine, and that is clearly a total nonsense and not at all supported in law.
Click to expand...
In fairness, he said unless it was reckless. @Trip agrees there can be R or EF fouls from the front or side that get the ball first, but doesn't believe there can be a merely careless foul by a player who wins the ball. It's still an overstatement, but it's not the same as saying it can never be a foul.

To me it is pretty obvious that you can play the ball before going through the player from the side in a way that is careless but not quite reckless. But I do agree with Trip to the extent his real point is that there is not a lot of space between no foul and a foul that warrants a caution on a side/front tackle that gets to the ball first. But IMO there clearly is some space.
 
RustyRef said:
you said anything that wins the ball unless from behind is fine
Click to expand...

Rusty, please read what I said again. I didn't say that:

"tackles that the attacker can see coming can involve contact after the ball is played (provided it's not reckless or dangerous)."

RustyRef said:
There are loads of occasions where a player tackles from the front or side, wins the ball but then takes out the opponent, or contacts the opponent before winning the ball.
Click to expand...

If they contact the opponent before winning the ball then my rule of thumb says it's a foul. If they 'take out' the opponent then it's reckless, so my rule of thumb says it's a foul.

A tackle that the attacker knows is coming and which wins the ball before making contact can't be merely 'careless'. It can be reckless, in which case it's a foul. It can be a SFP, in which case it's a foul.
 
Last edited:
socal lurker said:
II do agree with Trip to the extent his real point is that there is not a lot of space between no foul and a foul that warrants a caution on a side/front tackle that gets to the ball first. But IMO there clearly is some space.
Click to expand...

I suspect you're technically correct. But this is a rule of thumb - by which I mean is almost always correct in practice,

I'd be very interested to see examples of actual tackles that fall into this space you describe.
 
Trip said:
All of those examples are - at the very least - reckless.
Click to expand...
I know what you're saying Trip. In non-Refereeing 'speak', winning the ball would mean the opposite of careless. I used to always caution for RP if I gave a FT for a challenge in which the ball was won. I've realized this pigeon-holes us however and makes me raise the bar for such incidents. There can be situations (early in the game for example) in which I want to send out a message without a card. So there are times when I give a FT (or similar) when the ball is won without cationing. Therefore, I've categorized that ball winning moment as 'careless' in 'ref chat'
 
Trip said:
All of those examples are - at the very least - reckless.
Click to expand...
Would have to just disagree on your concept/understanding. You are saying it's either fair or reckless+. It is accepted in football that actions go from fair to careless to reckless and the UEF in a sliding scale. There are plenty of teaching material with a colour coded 1-10 bar to assess a tackle. The bar starts from white or black (fair) fading to yellow (caution) then fading to red (send off). There is no jump from one to the other.

I am having difficulty understanding a challenge can go from fair, directly to reckless if the ball is played without the possibility of it being careless.

If ball is played, you consider it as a factor to favour it being a fair tackle. But it could still be careless, reckless or using excessive force.
 
one said:
If ball is played, you consider it as a factor to favour it being a fair tackle. But it could still be careless, reckless or using excessive force.
Click to expand...

While I think you are technically correct in practice a tackle that gets the ball first, makes contact which is not reckless, but which is careless is vanishingly rare.

For the same reason I find the idea of a "careful lunge" quite funny.

Show me an example.
 
Big Cat said:
I know what you're saying Trip. In non-Refereeing 'speak', winning the ball would mean the opposite of careless. I used to always caution for RP if I gave a FT for a challenge in which the ball was won.
Click to expand...

Winning the ball is not the criterion - it's winning the ball first - before any contact is made with the player. So that the contact cannot have aided the defender in getting the ball. I can't really see how such a tackle can be careless.
 
Trip said:
While I think you are technically correct in practice a tackle that gets the ball first, makes contact which is not reckless, but which is careless is vanishingly rare.

For the same reason I find the idea of a "careful lunge" quite funny.

Show me an example.
Click to expand...

I have one, from last week. If you can wait until I am at my laptop, and the clios still online, i will post it
 
Trip said:
Winning the ball is not the criterion - it's winning the ball first - before any contact is made with the player. So that the contact cannot have aided the defender in getting the ball. I can't really see how such a tackle can be careless.
Click to expand...

The term "winning" the ball is way too ambiguous. If you mean "making contact with the ball" then that's neither here nor there. It's not a reason to disallow a free kick in favour of a player that's been kicked/upended/clattered in the process...
 
Kes said:
It's not a reason to disallow a free kick in favour of a player that's been kicked/upended/clattered in the process...
Click to expand...

If he's been kicked, upended or clattered than that's not merely careless is it? It's reckless at least.
 
NOVARef said:
Hello, I'm starting to center more games now....mostly 11, 12, and 13 year olds. What are some rules of thumb or points to consider when defenders take out an attacker but get the ball first. I feel like a trip is a trip regardless if you get the ball first but referees tend to let it go as long as the defender gets the ball first. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Depends. If they win the ball in a fair challenge, play in. If they've gone in with force, free kick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top