i got the ball ref!

[Kent Ref]

This season i am giving an increasing amount of free kicks as follows:

Defending player gets the ball on a tackle but then makes significant contact with the opponent after the ball has gone.

Today i have given 6 for this in an adult game.

How much contact is the threshold for "ok" by your standards?

It's like they've never known this to be the case!

 

[Kref]

This season i am giving an increasing amount of free kicks as follows:

Defending player gets the ball on a tackle but then makes significant contact with the opponent after the ball has gone.

Today i have given 6 for this in an adult game.

How much contact is the threshold for "ok" by your standards?

It's like they've never known this to be the case!

Personally I would say it depends on the types of players that there. Like if Defender a is a massive bulky guy and attacker B is a lanky chap than that threshold will be lower. However if they are similar they are I will deem that the foul with have the same amount of force. ALso depending on the emotions of the game, if its heated I blow alot more often so that situation don't escalte. But in a lower temp game blow less as players are using their body and its a physical game.

In regards to your title, I give way too many DFK and get told ref, "but I got the ball". To which I have to tell them yes but in the process commited a foul.

 

[Max2]

Players are responsible for where their limbs end up

 

[one]

how much contact is not the main point here. Once you decide it's 'too much contact' then the point in this case is to decide who is responsible for that contact. The reason getting the ball is important and a consideration is that often the player who doesn't get the ball can anticipate he can't get to the ball first and avoids contact. On the other hand the player who gets the ball can also do it in a way that any contact is not careless or worse.

This is definitely one of those you have to see to judge.

 

[CA1992]

Usually there may be 1 or 2 of these shouts a game but 6 instances sounds like a lot. Obviously difficult for us to provide much advice as we didn't see them.

Only consideration I could really give you is - did the game expect free kicks in all of those instances? Or did there seem to be a few surprises beyond the offender? That usually can give you a half decent picture as to whether you were correct or not.

Remember not all contact is a foul, and football is a contact sport, if a player gets the ball first in a challenge and there is minor contact as a result that is not careless / bordering reckless or indeed reckless, then I'd be inclined to allow it (subject to whether or not it would affect match control)

I played at a half decent level before refereeing - so one of my considerations I use in those situations beyond what the game expects/needs is would I be upset if the free kick would be given against me/one of my team mates, or would I be upset if I or one of my team mates didn't get a free kick for being on the receiving end.

 

[Kent Ref]

Usually there may be 1 or 2 of these shouts a game but 6 instances sounds like a lot. Obviously difficult for us to provide much advice as we didn't see them.

Only consideration I could really give you is - did the game expect free kicks in all of those instances? Or did there seem to be a few surprises beyond the offender? That usually can give you a half decent picture as to whether you were correct or not.

Remember not all contact is a foul, and football is a contact sport, if a player gets the ball first in a challenge and there is minor contact as a result that is not careless / bordering reckless or indeed reckless, then I'd be inclined to allow it (subject to whether or not it would affect match control)

I played at a half decent level before refereeing - so one of my considerations I use in those situations beyond what the game expects/needs is would I be upset if the free kick would be given against me/one of my team mates, or would I be upset if I or one of my team mates didn't get a free kick for being on the receiving end.

How does a referee "know what the games expects"? Where is this term garnered from and what does it mean? I really don't know.

Every game is reffed as a one-off and from the heavy contacts today, after the tackle was made, it was obvious the teams are not used to the foul being given.

More of "last week's ref" i heard.

Do players understand the laws of the game now? Player's reactions are not always the guide to a good decision being given.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

How does a referee "know what the games expects"? Where is this term garnered from and what does it mean? I really don't know.

Every game is reffed as a one-off and from the heavy contacts today, after the tackle was made, it was obvious the teams are not used to the foul being given.

More of "last week's ref" i heard.

Do players understand the laws of the game now? Player's reactions are not always the guide to a good decision being given.

"What the game expects" is not a constant or something easily defined.
As an example, the level of readily accepted contact in the Isthmian or Southern Leagues is different to what happens in Division 5 of my local Sunday League.
As discussed elsewhere in this forum last week, players have at best a sketchy knowledge of the LOTG, including various versions of handball, offside, "got the ball", etc.
You get a feel for each game, and best advice is to not let anything go early on, then you can relax control if you believe it's safe to do so.

 

[Brian Hamilton]

Yes, you got the ball, but you also got the man ... problem solved. If you're giving a lot of these then consider reflecting on how much other contact you're allowing in the game.

 

[RustyRef]

How does a referee "know what the games expects"? Where is this term garnered from and what does it mean? I really don't know.

Every game is reffed as a one-off and from the heavy contacts today, after the tackle was made, it was obvious the teams are not used to the foul being given.

More of "last week's ref" i heard.

Do players understand the laws of the game now? Player's reactions are not always the guide to a good decision being given.

Completely different at different levels, but as a general rule of thumb if you surprise both teams there is a more than reasonably chance you have seen it wrong.

 

[Kent Ref]

Completely different at different levels, but as a general rule of thumb if you surprise both teams there is a more than reasonably chance you have seen it wrong.

The "surprise" was with the offending team each time but both teams did it!

 

[GraemeS]

Can I ask how you're selling/explaining the decision? To give very similar fouls 6 times and have them be a surprise every time suggests that no one really understood what you gave the first few for.

Refs are entitled to explain as much or as little as they like, but this sounds like a situation where a clear explanation to the captain or a worst offender would have benefitted you in selling (or ideally, avoiding) the later ones. And similarly, once you've given 3, you should have a really easy sell on the last few: "just like that one 10 minutes ago over there, he's gone through the ball and into the player" or something similar.

It's a little unusual, but I wonder if this is also a case where you should have been thinking about team PI? You're seeing a pattern of a certain type of forceful tackle and it would benefit the game to stamp it out before someone gets hurt by this kind of follow through. Getting a captain in and explaining the pattern you're seeing again helps them understand what is unacceptable and why it might soon become a caution, which can only increase the chances of it stopping.

 

[Kent Ref]

When the first one happened i explained to the offender that because you get the ball it does not mean you're free to make significant contact with the other players legs after.

None of the 6 were "leg-breakers" but the tackled player went down, due to the contact.

It was like they had never heard / or considered this to be a foul. The "i got the ball ref" was the constant call.

I would guess that both teams did 3 and probably different players each time.

What this comes down to is this, and this is where i'm struggling:

How much contact is acceptable and how much is not? Where is that line?

When i played in the forces it was a very low threshold of contact that was acceptable but forces football is VERY different to Sunday league.

 

[GraemeS]

What this comes down to is this, and this is where i'm struggling:

How much contact is acceptable and how much is not? Where is that line?

I mean, I think you need to look at the fact a forum of refs aren't answering that question and infer from there! The line is where you set it. End of.

There is a window in which you'll be happy with that line being set and each team (arguably, each player on each team, plus each team official, plus each spectator) will also have their own windows where they think you should be drawing that line. Interestingly, their windows might be different depending on if their player is the tackler or the tackle-ee. The window will also change depending on how they think you've been calling the game, the state of the pitch and a million other impossible to predict factors.

What you're imagining is a world where your window and their window overlap to an extent, and you then manage to draw the line inside that overlap and everyone is happy. It's not impossible, but a) even if the overlap does exist and you successfully identify it, you're human and still might struggle to hit the line consistently and b) the overlap simply might not exist at all. Which is why my preference is generally to set a line that I'm comfortable with and then just try to make my decisions around it as consistently as possible.

It might be because this is a bit of a pet hate, but I don't like players using a tackle as an excuse to try and clatter an opponent, so I'd have no issue carding for one of these if I thought the follow-through contact was remotely deliberate. And by the time you've given two of these to each team and explained what was unacceptable to the captains, anyone who then goes on to do this again after ignoring all the warning signs would have my hand twitching towards my pocket.

As long as you're setting a line consistently and explaining where that line is (either by talking or simply via your decisions), it's on the players to modify their actions to your standards, not the other way round. Same if the pitch is slippy and wet - that doesn't mean you raise the bar to allow players to just clatter each other, it means they need to modify their tackles to account for that.

 

[Kent Ref]

I mean, I think you need to look at the fact a forum of refs aren't answering that question and infer from there! The line is where you set it. End of.

There is a window in which you'll be happy with that line being set and each team (arguably, each player on each team, plus each team official, plus each spectator) will also have their own windows where they think you should be drawing that line. Interestingly, their windows might be different depending on if their player is the tackler or the tackle-ee. The window will also change depending on how they think you've been calling the game, the state of the pitch and a million other impossible to predict factors.

What you're imagining is a world where your window and their window overlap to an extent, and you then manage to draw the line inside that overlap and everyone is happy. It's not impossible, but a) even if the overlap does exist and you successfully identify it, you're human and still might struggle to hit the line consistently and b) the overlap simply might not exist at all. Which is why my preference is generally to set a line that I'm comfortable with and then just try to make my decisions around it as consistently as possible.

It might be because this is a bit of a pet hate, but I don't like players using a tackle as an excuse to try and clatter an opponent, so I'd have no issue carding for one of these if I thought the follow-through contact was remotely deliberate. And by the time you've given two of these to each team and explained what was unacceptable to the captains, anyone who then goes on to do this again after ignoring all the warning signs would have my hand twitching towards my pocket.

As long as you're setting a line consistently and explaining where that line is (either by talking or simply via your decisions), it's on the players to modify their actions to your standards, not the other way round. Same if the pitch is slippy and wet - that doesn't mean you raise the bar to allow players to just clatter each other, it means they need to modify their tackles to account for that.

Good advice.

What also occurred to me is other refs don't blow for this.

I then become the problem as a result.

 

[CA1992]

Good advice.

What also occurred to me is other refs don't blow for this.

I then become the problem as a result.

Without seeing the incidents in question, it's difficult for anyone on here to provide concrete guidance or advice for you.

But rather than digging out other refs, maybe reflect on what you saw and the decisions you made and whether or not they are actually incidents worthy of penalising.

 

[Kent Ref]

Without seeing the incidents in question, it's difficult for anyone on here to provide concrete guidance or advice for you.

But rather than digging out other refs, maybe reflect on what you saw and the decisions you made and whether or not they are actually incidents worthy of penalising.

Helpful.

 

[Kes]

I think the obvious answer here is to stop over-thinking/analysing it @Kent Ref

It's up to you as the referee to decide whether or not a challenge you've seen is careless/reckless/excessive. Forget the daft players shouting "but I got the ball ref" - it's probably the most repeated player cliche in football.

Just develop a couple of stock verbal responses to it such as:

"Maybe, but you clattered the player as well"
"Yes, but carelessly"

Remember, 99% of the time, a player challenges an opponent for two reasons:

1. To win the ball from them ...
2. To remove the ball from their control ...

It's the player's responsibility to ensure that they do it in a manner which isn't careless/reckless/excessive - not yours.

Just give what you see.

 

[socal lurker]

Forget the daft players shouting "but I got the ball ref" - it's probably the most repeated player cliche in football.

USSF issued a position paper some years back (early 2000s?) titled "I Got the Ball" to address this pervasive myth that once you touch the ball anything goes. I knew of refs who carried the paper in their bags to hand out . . .

For me on these plays, one if the useful concepts is "did the tackler go through the opponent, or did the the opponent simply fall over the tackler after the tackler."

 

[Kent Ref]

USSF issued a position paper some years back (early 2000s?) titled "I Got the Ball" to address this pervasive myth that once you touch the ball anything goes. I knew of refs who carried the paper in their bags to hand out . . .

For me on these plays, one if the useful concepts is "did the tackler go through the opponent, or did the the opponent simply fall over the tackler after the tackler."

That's a good point.

At speed it's sometimes hard to tell.

 

[Dave2392]

There is nothing in the LOTG that states anything about "getting the ball". what it does state is the manner of the challenge and tackle that has happened