Indirect FK for Dangerous Play

[boblardo]

OA game yesterday, 3 officials and I was appointed as AR.

Stripes v Greens, stripes play the ball into the box and green player raises his foot to head height in attempt to clear the ball. Stripes attacker goes to header, both miss the ball and no contact is made by green player, ref blows and awards a IDFK for dangerous play.

There were the usual arguments about why it wasn't a penalty "no contact made, so can't be a penalty", "why is he holding his head then?" funny how said player recovered well enough to take the penalty.

Ref came over to get my version, i agreed that no contact was made as striker had pulled out so IDFK was correct. I think many would have given a penalty

Just want clarification that the decision was correct?

 

[es1]

OA game yesterday, 3 officials and I was appointed as AR.

Stripes v Greens, stripes play the ball into the box and green player raises his foot to head height in attempt to clear the ball. Stripes attacker goes to header, both miss the ball and no contact is made by green player, ref blows and awards a IDFK for dangerous play.

There were the usual arguments about why it wasn't a penalty "no contact made, so can't be a penalty", "why is he holding his head then?" funny how said player recovered well enough to take the penalty.

Ref came over to get my version, i agreed that no contact was made as striker had pulled out so IDFK was correct. I think many would have given a penalty

Just want clarification that the decision was correct?

just to confirm...that's a typo?

 

[boblardo]

no not a typo but more a bad attempt at sarcasm.

There was absolutely no contact, the striker pulled his head away prior to any contact being made but still dived to the floor holding his head

 

[A Freethinker]

Do you mean he went to 'head' the ball?

Next what penalty if you gave an IDFK? How could the guy recover to take the penalty when you both agreed the decision was correct?

 

[boblardo]

I suppose it was a had to be there moment but...

ball was in flight around head height, striker went to head it defender went to boot it, striker saw defenders boot so "pulled out", both missed the ball, no contact made between players

there was no penalty, apologies I got myself confused as there was a penalty at my end later on in the game!!

god i hate monday's, maybe just close thread

 

[SurreySuperRef]

I think dangerous play is the right call here, and don't forget it has to be a caution as well.

The striker had enough time to pull his head out of the challenge, so it couldn't have been that late. The only thing wrong with it, from your description, is that he was playing the ball with his feet high up without proper attention and awareness.

 

[AlexF]

I think dangerous play is the right call here, and don't forget it has to be a caution as well.

While the old Laws of the Game (15-16) on pg 123 stated:

If a player plays in a dangerous manner in a “normal” challenge, the referee should not take any disciplinary action. If the action is made with obvious risk of injury, the referee should caution the player

The new (16-17) edition has done away with that wording.

Regardless, unless there's an obvious risk of injury, it does not HAVE to be a caution.

 

[SurreySuperRef]

I stand corrected, the more you know.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

yep, PIADM, IFK, caution optional. Contact would make it a penalty

 

[Nalbi]

yep, PIADM, IFK, caution optional. Contact would make it a penalty

Would you also caution the player then if contact has been made? I'm thinking of a high footed attempt that catches the other player on the chest or near the head? It is not with excessive force but then endangers the safety of the player; or from another view the offending player has made the challenge without due consideration to the safety of their opponent?

 

[AlexF]

It depends if you deem it reckless.

I've seen some of those that are merely careless, and some that are definitely excessive force in terms of contact force.

 

[Peter Grove]

Would you also caution the player then if contact has been made?

Well, in the olden days (i.e. up till last year) the laws had the following:

Playing in a dangerous manner involves no physical contact between the players. If there is physical contact, the action becomes an offence punishable with a direct free kick or penalty kick. In the case of physical contact, the referee should carefully consider the high probability that misconduct has also been committed.

Although that wording is no longer there, I would say the general idea of it still applies. So if you think that advice is still valid, it means you should be thinking seriously about a caution at least - but not necessarily.