This is another in my occasional series of blogs where I look at how incidents in open play can be broken down into elements as can be done with "set plays".
For every incident on the field, I run through a series of questions
Where is the ball?
Hopefully if a player is challenging for the ball, he is in close proximity to the ball. This means being within the length of a leg away from the ball. I also consider whether he has unobstructed access to the ball - so has his opponent got his body (or any part of it) between the ball and challenger, for example is the ball being shielded by the player in possession?
Apart from the distance from the ball at the time of his challenge, the other factor I consider is the angle of approach of the challenge. The angle and distance give me a good idea of whether the challenge is going to be
a) legal
b) successful
A challenge from behind on a player running away from a challenger has less chance of being successful and more chance of being illegal than a face to face challenge. As the angle of approach moves from being face to face, there is a greater chance of the ball being partially shielded and therefore there is an increased risk of contact being made with the player in possession.
Where are the players?
I've often heard it said by commentators on the television "if that had been anywhere else on the field, the referee would have given that" when referring to a challenge made by a defender for the ball in his own penalty area. They are probably partially correct as the awarding of a free kick on the half way line will never present the same goal scoring opportunity that comes from a kick from the penalty mark.
So in the case of the free kick on the halfway line, it can be given when the offence is less obvious to those on the touchline/in the stands/50m away on the field. In the case of challenge that results in the awarding of a kick from the penalty mark, referees want to be certain that the offence is more obvious.
The other consideration is whether the players are attacking or defending. Attackers are, in general, less proficient at challenging for the ball than defenders. Therefore giving rise to the expression, "a forward's tackle".
What infringements may occur or may have just occurred?
This is the big one ...
So I've considered the angle of approach and the distance travelled to make the challenge, i.e. from the point the challenge is initiated, I now need to consider the speed of the challenge and also the force used in the challenge
When I mention the force used (insert your own Star Wars joke here), I mean, is it proportionate to the required action needed to dispossess the player currently in control of the ball. It's an all too common occurrence that a challenger will want to take man and ball. The law was changed a couple of seasons ago to include reference to the fact that if a challenge is careless, reckless or using excessive force, then winning the ball is no defence.
The force of the challenge is dependent on the speed the challenger is moving at relative to the player in control of the ball and their relative directions. If two cars are moving at 20-30 miles per hour in the same direction and one slows slightly and the other one collides with it, the force exerted is less than if both cars hit head on or if one was stationary.
If an infringement has occurred, what action should I take ... if any?
I have a choice to make ... advantage or no advantage?
Even if an advantage exists, unless there is a goal scoring opportunity, if I am considering issuing a caution or dismissing a player, then I'm not going to play that advantage. I'm going to stop play, issue the sanction and have a controlled restart (on my whistle).
If the advantage exists, then I sweep up the arms, give the approved vocal command "Play on - Advantage" so everyone can see and hear it, then carry on with the game.
So how do I decide if I'm going to issue a caution or dismiss, well that's a story for another time (as they used to say on Hammy Hamster's Adventures on the Riverbank - look it up on Youtube!) but generally speaking, if a challenger is
So all that goes through my head every day when I'm in the run up to a game or a course. I also think about it when watching a game, so I can often tell whether a player is going to get a caution or a dismissal before the commentator makes reference to it.
Next time I'm going to look at playing advantage, when to do it and when not to.
Continue reading...
For every incident on the field, I run through a series of questions
- Where is the ball?
- Where are the players?
- What infringements may occur or may have just occurred?
- If an infringement has occurred, what action should I take ... if any?
Where is the ball?
Hopefully if a player is challenging for the ball, he is in close proximity to the ball. This means being within the length of a leg away from the ball. I also consider whether he has unobstructed access to the ball - so has his opponent got his body (or any part of it) between the ball and challenger, for example is the ball being shielded by the player in possession?
Apart from the distance from the ball at the time of his challenge, the other factor I consider is the angle of approach of the challenge. The angle and distance give me a good idea of whether the challenge is going to be
a) legal
b) successful
A challenge from behind on a player running away from a challenger has less chance of being successful and more chance of being illegal than a face to face challenge. As the angle of approach moves from being face to face, there is a greater chance of the ball being partially shielded and therefore there is an increased risk of contact being made with the player in possession.
Where are the players?
I've often heard it said by commentators on the television "if that had been anywhere else on the field, the referee would have given that" when referring to a challenge made by a defender for the ball in his own penalty area. They are probably partially correct as the awarding of a free kick on the half way line will never present the same goal scoring opportunity that comes from a kick from the penalty mark.
So in the case of the free kick on the halfway line, it can be given when the offence is less obvious to those on the touchline/in the stands/50m away on the field. In the case of challenge that results in the awarding of a kick from the penalty mark, referees want to be certain that the offence is more obvious.
The other consideration is whether the players are attacking or defending. Attackers are, in general, less proficient at challenging for the ball than defenders. Therefore giving rise to the expression, "a forward's tackle".
What infringements may occur or may have just occurred?
This is the big one ...
- shirt pull
- body check
- push in the back/front
- kick on the ankle/shin/knee/thigh
- trip from the front/side/back
- before the ball arrives
- when the ball is present
- when the ball departs (is passed)
So I've considered the angle of approach and the distance travelled to make the challenge, i.e. from the point the challenge is initiated, I now need to consider the speed of the challenge and also the force used in the challenge
When I mention the force used (insert your own Star Wars joke here), I mean, is it proportionate to the required action needed to dispossess the player currently in control of the ball. It's an all too common occurrence that a challenger will want to take man and ball. The law was changed a couple of seasons ago to include reference to the fact that if a challenge is careless, reckless or using excessive force, then winning the ball is no defence.
The force of the challenge is dependent on the speed the challenger is moving at relative to the player in control of the ball and their relative directions. If two cars are moving at 20-30 miles per hour in the same direction and one slows slightly and the other one collides with it, the force exerted is less than if both cars hit head on or if one was stationary.
If an infringement has occurred, what action should I take ... if any?
I have a choice to make ... advantage or no advantage?
Even if an advantage exists, unless there is a goal scoring opportunity, if I am considering issuing a caution or dismissing a player, then I'm not going to play that advantage. I'm going to stop play, issue the sanction and have a controlled restart (on my whistle).
If the advantage exists, then I sweep up the arms, give the approved vocal command "Play on - Advantage" so everyone can see and hear it, then carry on with the game.
So how do I decide if I'm going to issue a caution or dismiss, well that's a story for another time (as they used to say on Hammy Hamster's Adventures on the Riverbank - look it up on Youtube!) but generally speaking, if a challenger is
- coming in from any angle greater than 135 degrees relative to the direction the player in control of the ball is moving
- has both feet off the ground as he initiates the challenge
- uses both feet to challenge
- is moving much faster than the player in control of the ball
- is less likely to actually make contact with the ball, because the player in control of the ball is moving away from him
- making contact with any part of the player in control of the ball, other than his foot
So all that goes through my head every day when I'm in the run up to a game or a course. I also think about it when watching a game, so I can often tell whether a player is going to get a caution or a dismissal before the commentator makes reference to it.
Next time I'm going to look at playing advantage, when to do it and when not to.
Continue reading...
