Law 12

[Dan56]

Law doesn't specify "against an opponent" for PIADM - it could be an act which endangers a team-mate, e. g. a "scissors kick" close to a team-mate's head.

I disagree. Broadly, I think it is implicit in the Laws that PIADM requires disadvantaging an opponent. But beyond that, as to your specific example, Law 12 does explicitly say that a scores kick is permissible unless It is dangerous to an opponent.

(I do agree that the language of PIADM (unfortunately like too many parts of the Laws) is less than perfectly clear.)

I agree the phrasing of the Law is unclear. I therefore emailed IFAB for a clarification. The answer I got back was that PIADM is about an action that "threatens injury to someone (including the player themself)" and IFAB stated that the next bit, about including preventing an opponent from playing the ball:

"...is one of the ways (but not the only way) that the player's action threaten injury" David Elleray.

So yes, PIADM includes threatening injury to oneself or to a team mate.

 

[Peter Grove]

I agree the phrasing of the Law is unclear. I therefore emailed IFAB for a clarification. The answer I got back was that PIADM is about an action that "threatens injury to someone (including the player themself)" and IFAB stated that the next bit, about including preventing an opponent from playing the ball:

"...is one of the ways (but not the only way) that the player's action threaten injury" David Elleray.

So yes, PIADM includes threatening injury to oneself or to a team mate.

I don't see where that response clarifies that PIADM includes threatening injury to a team mate, specifically.

As far as I can tell, it's fairly agnostic on that particular issue.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

I don't see where that response clarifies that PIADM includes threatening injury to a team mate, specifically.

As far as I can tell, it's fairly agnostic on that particular issue.

Peter - The wording "threatens injury to someone (including the player themself)" reinforces the point I made earlier in this thread, that PIADM does not necessarily involve an opponent.

 

[Peter Grove]

Peter - The wording "threatens injury to someone (including the player themself)" reinforces the point I made earlier in this thread, that PIADM does not necessarily involve an opponent.

That's true - all I was saying is that the response from David Elleray does not specifically or overtly clarify the applicability to a team mate.

He doesn't say anything that isn't in the law already, and doesn't specifically mention a team mate (just as the law doesn't).

So whatever "clarification" is in that reply (and I'd say there's little to none) it does not specifically address the matter of PIADM and a team mate.

 

[socal lurker]

As I noted before, Law 12 is crystal clear in limiting scissors/bicycle kick danger to opponents, not teammates:

Playing in a dangerous manner​

Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.​

​

A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that it is not dangerous to an opponent.​

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

As I noted before, Law 12 is crystal clear in limiting scissors/bicycle kick danger to opponents, not teammates:

Playing in a dangerous manner​

Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone (including the player themself) and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury.​

​

A scissors or bicycle kick is permissible provided that it is not dangerous to an opponent.​

David Elleray's reply (quoted above) shows that the scissors kick is just one example of PIADM; he also confirms that PIADM can include risk to the player themself or a team-mate of the player, so if we forget the scissors kick and consider any other dangerous action we can answer the OP.

 

[Anubis]

Someone is planning disallow a scoring scissors kick that endangers the scorers team mate, with prospect of a sanction?

please someone do, and report back the findings

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Someone is planning disallow a scoring scissors kick that endangers the scorers team mate, with prospect of a sanction?

please someone do, and report back the findings

No, we have excluded the scissors kick frim this strand - but PIADM is not just about scissors kicks.

 

[Anubis]

No, we have excluded the scissors kick frim this strand - but PIADM is not just about scissors kicks.

Supppse there is tne age old quandary of, cross ball, attacker shoves his own playerr out of the way and heads the ball into the net

 

[Viridis1886]

Supppse there is tne age old quandary of, cross ball, attacker shoves his own playerr out of the way and heads the ball into the net

Please tell me that someone on here has done this!

 

[Anubis]

Please tell me that someone on here has done this!

Would you allow it?.

its hopefully not off topic

 

[one]

The debate here assumes those who write the law, write what they mean and mean what they write. We have seen time and time again this is not true. They don't think through the wording they use and the consequences it has for scenarios other than the ones in their head.

Take the quote from @socal lurker for example. It has contradictory statements. Scissors kick against team mate can be PIADM if you use the first paragraph but not if you use the second paragraph. And that all depends on how you interpret it.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

We are discussing a rarity - endangering a team-mate by a physical action.
One I recall from my time as a referee in local football (after some time in more senior football, then I hit the age limit which applied back then) is one example.
An attacker and defender challenged fairly in the penalty area, and both fell.
The ball lodged against the body of the prone defender. Another defender ran in from 5/6 yards away and hacked at the ball, still lodged against his team-mate.
Two attackers moved in as I whistled loudly to stop play, and thankfully they stopped just in time.
After confirming that the two fallen players were OK, I restarted with an indirect free kick to the attacking team, which led to the expected outcry from players and coach, with the latter then removed for his abusive language and gestures.
His appeal to the County FA failed.

 

[Anubis]

We are discussing a rarity - endangering a team-mate by a physical action.
One I recall from my time as a referee in local football (after some time in more senior football, then I hit the age limit which applied back then) is one example.
An attacker and defender challenged fairly in the penalty area, and both fell.
The ball lodged against the body of the prone defender. Another defender ran in from 5/6 yards away and hacked at the ball, still lodged against his team-mate.
Two attackers moved in as I whistled loudly to stop play, and thankfully they stopped just in time.
After confirming that the two fallen players were OK, I restarted with an indirect free kick to the attacking team, which led to the expected outcry from players and coach, with the latter then removed for his abusive language and gestures.
His appeal to the County FA failed.

Thats not a bad example but I would be stopping that for piadm regardless of defender or attacker about to hack at the ball.

 

[RyantheRef]

I disagree. Broadly, I think it is implicit in the Laws that PIADM requires disadvantaging an opponent. But beyond that, as to your specific example, Law 12 does explicitly say that a scores kick is permissible unless It is dangerous to an opponent.

(I do agree that the language of PIADM (unfortunately like too many parts of the Laws) is less than perfectly clear.)

PIADM doesn't require disadvantaging anyone. Punishing PIADM is not about restoring balance, it is strictly about disallowing certain behaviour.

 

[socal lurker]

As much as I sometimes fear IFAB trying to clear things up (see last few years of handball), I really do think they need to clear up PIADM. I believe that the whole point of PIADM ever being introduced as a foul is that it is an offense against the other team by interfering with an opponent in some way. And that has always been recognized as not only danger to the opponent that interferes with his ability to play the ball ("high kick ref!") as well as danger to the player committing the PIADM that interferes with the ability of the opponent to fairly and safely play the ball (most commonly trying to head a ball at normal kicking height near an opponent). The recently added language on PIADM (" includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury") muddied the water instead of clarifying it. I really don't think that IFAB expects referees to penalize a high kick near a teammate in the same way as a high kick near an opponent. And as much as I respect Elleray's willingness to answer email, his answers (perhaps necessarily) can be somewhat Delphic in nature. Especially considering that PIADM is almost never called at the professional level (I can only think of once that I've seen--I almost fell out of my chair), but is a real issue at grass roots (especially youth) levels, I think it would be good for them to really say what they mean in a clear way. (Though I will also acknowledge that at youth levels I think it appropriate and I am willing to call PIADM more broadly than I think IFAB really means when they are thinking of the professional game.)