Player swings his arm trying to get leverage while jumping for the ball. The arm is loose, the hand open but makes contact with the opponent's eyes. Totally accidental, but careless striking nonetheless, free kick only required.
Off the ball incidents
- Thread starter Oli
- Start date
But he hasn't tried to strike an opponent, that's not an example of so called careless violent conduct as is being suggested here, he was just challenging for the ball. VC is a deliberate attempt to hurt or injury another player through physically hitting or attempting to hit them, be it a shove, punch, head butt or kick etc.
Last edited:
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
matty, the statement that 'there is no measurement bar for striking an opponent off the ball' is patently untrue. Careless, reckless excessive force DOES apply. I've already provided several references in the LOTG to support that. To sit there and continuously claim that 'off-the-ball striking isn't subject to CRUEF' is just being stubborn. You might be hard pressed to think of a careless incident of off-the-ball striking, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
I really hate it when referees perpetuate the myth that 'striking is a red card'. It's not. That, as a categorical statement, is not supported ANYWHERE in the LOTG, so I'd like you to stop making false claims around this. If, hypothetically, a player carelessly strikes an opponent off-the-ball, then this is a direct free kick and nothing else. I've already demonstrated why your claims that anything off-the-ball isn't a foul are patently incorrect.
One potential example could be a player, some distance away from play, turns in excitement at his mates turning up to play and raises his arm for a vigorous wave, knocking a nearby opponent.
VC is 'using excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball'. So a strike, for instance, that is quite light in force wouldn't fit into either of those. The scale ALWAYS applies.
I really hate it when referees perpetuate the myth that 'striking is a red card'. It's not. That, as a categorical statement, is not supported ANYWHERE in the LOTG, so I'd like you to stop making false claims around this. If, hypothetically, a player carelessly strikes an opponent off-the-ball, then this is a direct free kick and nothing else. I've already demonstrated why your claims that anything off-the-ball isn't a foul are patently incorrect.
One potential example could be a player, some distance away from play, turns in excitement at his mates turning up to play and raises his arm for a vigorous wave, knocking a nearby opponent.
VC is 'using excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball'. So a strike, for instance, that is quite light in force wouldn't fit into either of those. The scale ALWAYS applies.
In the original post it is stated that during a scuffle the player" kicked out but it was more of a poke " we have all seen them happen in this instance its seems to be e player losing his temper and having a kick ? regardless off the amount of force that should have been a red card !
Again though you have really got to be there to make such calls
Again though you have really got to be there to make such calls
I never said anything off the ball isn't a foul at all, I said violent conduct is off the ball. There is simply no instance of careless or reckless violent conduct, none. The examples you used is not violent conduct, but you continue to try and use it as a means to justify what you are saying. You cannot consider a player to have struck another when he has simply raised his are in celebration and accidentally caught him, that would be dangerous play at best.
Clearly it is the word struck, or strike that we are differing on. To me it means they have punched, kicked, slapped, head butted etc another person, something that could end up in police action as is the case of an incident of VC in a county game a friend of mine ref'd. You cannot do any of the actions I have mentioned and not issue a red card. I have sent if players for rubbish petulant kicks that barely caught the opponent and and for full on lunging head butts, as well as a player swinging a punch into thin air.
Clearly it is the word struck, or strike that we are differing on. To me it means they have punched, kicked, slapped, head butted etc another person, something that could end up in police action as is the case of an incident of VC in a county game a friend of mine ref'd. You cannot do any of the actions I have mentioned and not issue a red card. I have sent if players for rubbish petulant kicks that barely caught the opponent and and for full on lunging head butts, as well as a player swinging a punch into thin air.
again Matty , we read the post and everyone gets their own mental pic of the situation !!
its easy to sit at the computer and say should have done this or that .....but when your at the game in real time we all do what we think is correct at the time ,then run it over in our mind afterwards !!
i wasnt being critical ,just reacting to the thread
its easy to sit at the computer and say should have done this or that .....but when your at the game in real time we all do what we think is correct at the time ,then run it over in our mind afterwards !!
i wasnt being critical ,just reacting to the thread
Did you really just write that, Cap'n?
that apart, I agree with the cap'n on this one. I was being assessed for a game, player won the ball in a 'tough but fair' tackle and played it to a team-mate. player he'd won it off petulantly kicked out at him, off the ball, as he headed upfield, making contact, albeit only slightly, with his foot.
With play still proceeding, I ran by offender and told him that we didn't need any of that nonsense, or words to that effect, loudly enough for other players to hear. Assessor liked it....I rest my case
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
Which, again, is completely untrue. I've already stated where that's supported in the LOTG.Striking is a foul. Fouls are CRUEF. If you think that striking isn't a foul, or that fouls are only on-the-ball then please, show me which page of the LOTG states that.
Ugh I give up, I guess you never have referee's seminars where you discuss or are advised on things. You just have your book and if it isn't word for word what the book says then it has to be wrong.
You go and book someone for violent conduct and see what your assessor says.
You go and book someone for violent conduct and see what your assessor says.
So @haywain in the described scenario the player who got kicked all be it petulantly , decides to let out a scream and roll around the floor for a bit ?
leaves with a call to make ?
or he turns round and punches the player who kicked him ?
All these situations are dependant on many factors so itd very hard to have a black or white view on them ,
It worked on that particular occasion but may cause further problems next time
Never a dull moment
leaves with a call to make ?
or he turns round and punches the player who kicked him ?
All these situations are dependant on many factors so itd very hard to have a black or white view on them ,
It worked on that particular occasion but may cause further problems next time
Never a dull moment
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
I just want you to tell me how you figure that VC on the field, while the ball is in play, by a player against an opponent isn't a foul.
Or how a foul MUST occur in proximity to the ball.
Next you'll be telling me the restart is where the ball is or some such!
Please, educate me. Show me anything that supports your claims.
So @haywain in the described scenario the player who got kicked all be it petulantly , decides to let out a scream and roll around the floor for a bit ?
leaves with a call to make ?
or he turns round and punches the player who kicked him ?
All these situations are dependant on many factors so itd very hard to have a black or white view on them ,
It worked on that particular occasion but may cause further problems next time
Never a dull moment
We don't do things like that in West Sussex, Beezer
Cap'n, you're taking this far too seriously, imho.....I'd offer you a beer but you probably only drink that 4 star bollux, I'll be bound
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
NFI what 4 star is, but you lot can buggar off with your warm swill ;-)
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
Hahaha. XXXX is only drunk in north Queensland. It's not unreasonable to presume that the only reason is because they can't spell 'beer' up that way. The only word longer than 'ute' (google it) they know is pig-shootin - those banana benders have had a bit too much sun!!
Surprised you didn't mention Fosters - that's our export drink, because nobody here drinks that swill!!
Not so sure if Penfolds Grange quite qualifies as our national drink. Real wine comes in cardboard boxes after all ;-)
Surprised you didn't mention Fosters - that's our export drink, because nobody here drinks that swill!!
Not so sure if Penfolds Grange quite qualifies as our national drink. Real wine comes in cardboard boxes after all ;-)
SM
The avuncular one
Calm it down please. We are referees. We discuss situations and theoretical scenarios, we don't bicker like players
I have just quoted the cap'n, but it is not meant solely for him.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
From what I can see, the essence of the debate isn't whether CRUEF applies to 'off the ball' fouls .. Cap'n is right that by the LOTG it does. The debate is whether Any / All deliberate off the ball kicks, strikes etc can be classified in a way other than Violent Conduct ... because almost by definition any action like this is Excessive Force as the amount of force that should be being exerted in that situation is zero!