Sliding Tackles
- Thread starter Ref253
- Start date
Treat it like any other challenge for the ball, you wouldn't hesitate to give the foul in other circumstances. Remember the "careless, reckless, excessive force" element and that a player in a sliding challenge has less control and therefore the offence is more likely to be in the latter two categories.......
Unless it’s studs up assault then it’s part of the game, same as any other decision, give what you see.. it’s not always a foul or a card
I always know where you're coming from, but allowing all tackles that win the ball would be folly. I had a game last week in which the ref let a couple of crunchies go and we nearly lost control for 10 minutes leading up to half time. It's not uncommon for me to blow for sliders which win the ball if I consider the tackle to yield significant risk to the opponent. Such a stoppage would attract a melon or cherry, otherwise I've made a mistake
As @Mintyref indicated, it's all about how much the opponent's safety is endangered on a sliding scale. Of course winning the ball will influence the outcome, but strictly speaking it shouldn't. When the culprit announces, 'I won the ball ref', my audible response whilst producing a card is, 'I don't care about the ball, player safety is my number one concern'. Seems to work
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
Winning the ball doesn't stop something from being a foul.
As others have said you need to think about whether the challenge meets the criteria for careless, reckless, or serious foul play.
For examples if the player with the ball needs to taking action to avoid being injured or caught by the challenge, i.e. has to jump out of the way, then I would say that is a foul regardless of whether the player making the challenge gets the ball or not.
As others have said you need to think about whether the challenge meets the criteria for careless, reckless, or serious foul play.
For examples if the player with the ball needs to taking action to avoid being injured or caught by the challenge, i.e. has to jump out of the way, then I would say that is a foul regardless of whether the player making the challenge gets the ball or not.
They are far less tolerant in the Prem than the EFL that’s a fact
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
One thing to look at is the nature of the contact: did the slide tackler go through the dribbler (with body or legs) or did the slide tackler get in front front of the dribbler so that the dribbler subsequently tripped over the tackler? Also, look at point of contact--if it is a slide tackle where the tackler stops the ball and the dribbler falls over the ball, that is a clean play.
Last, you don't say what level of adult. The less competitive the level of play, the lower you want that foul bar to be as the players have less skill to execute the slide tackle and to be the recipient of the slide tackle.
Last, you don't say what level of adult. The less competitive the level of play, the lower you want that foul bar to be as the players have less skill to execute the slide tackle and to be the recipient of the slide tackle.
Not sure I agree with this bit Mr Lurker
I can handle temperature of the game being a factor, otherwise a reckless or dangerous tackle is just that
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Not sure I agree with this bit Mr Lurker
I can handle temperature of the game being a factor, otherwise a reckless or dangerous tackle is just that
In my experience the higher the skill level the greater the tolerance of the players for contact, including on slide tackles. And the more likely that contact is initiated in a controlled way rather than a careless way.
RefJef
RefChat Addict
One thing to think about that helps me make a decision is does the tackle impede/stop the player being tackled from continuing with the game (at/immeadiatly after the tackle)?
If, in winning the ball, the tackler has “taken out” the player, so he can’t then compete to win the ball back, then this is probably a foul.
Unfortunately, though, nothing is ever clear cut! I would suggest that if the player being tackled “runs into” the tackler and trips over him (ie, the ball has been won “significantly” before contact) then no foul.
It’s not easy!
If in doubt, go with a free kick. Whatever you do, half will complain, half will think you’ve got the decision spot on. I often find that straight after you don’t give a 50/50 decision, another one occurs, then another, tempers flare, the temperature rises and your world quickly goes to rat $h1t.
If, in winning the ball, the tackler has “taken out” the player, so he can’t then compete to win the ball back, then this is probably a foul.
Unfortunately, though, nothing is ever clear cut! I would suggest that if the player being tackled “runs into” the tackler and trips over him (ie, the ball has been won “significantly” before contact) then no foul.
It’s not easy!
If in doubt, go with a free kick. Whatever you do, half will complain, half will think you’ve got the decision spot on. I often find that straight after you don’t give a 50/50 decision, another one occurs, then another, tempers flare, the temperature rises and your world quickly goes to rat $h1t.
Context can help decide if there’s a foul. For example, when a player tries to trap the ball and it bounces away he will often jump into a challenge with little care for the opponent simply because he wants to get the ball back. Whether he wins the ball or not that’s probably at least a foul, and may be a yellow or red, depending on contact made.
This is why referees should avoid pointing at the ball to indicate there was no foul, as that is implying that if the ball is won there can't be a foul.
Unfortunately this is one of the biggest misunderstandings, in that players still remain convinced it is OK to knock the opponent into next week as long as they win the ball. General things to look for, although it isn't an exact science, include ...
- Was it careless, reckless or used excessive force, in which case the winning of the ball becomes irrelevant.
- If the slide tackle wins the ball and then there is contact with the opponent's legs look at the distance it goes. If it has ended up 50 yards away then it is going to stretch credibility to penalise (assuming it doesn't tick one of the three challenge types above). Whereas if it trickles 5 yards away and stays in play there's an argument to say the opponent could have still got the ball after the challenge had there not been contact.
- Look out for secondary movement, not that uncommon for players to win the ball then raise their leg in a secondary motion to make absolutely certain the opponent is going over.
Unfortunately this is one of the biggest misunderstandings, in that players still remain convinced it is OK to knock the opponent into next week as long as they win the ball. General things to look for, although it isn't an exact science, include ...
- Was it careless, reckless or used excessive force, in which case the winning of the ball becomes irrelevant.
- If the slide tackle wins the ball and then there is contact with the opponent's legs look at the distance it goes. If it has ended up 50 yards away then it is going to stretch credibility to penalise (assuming it doesn't tick one of the three challenge types above). Whereas if it trickles 5 yards away and stays in play there's an argument to say the opponent could have still got the ball after the challenge had there not been contact.
- Look out for secondary movement, not that uncommon for players to win the ball then raise their leg in a secondary motion to make absolutely certain the opponent is going over.
The Brighton red card was text book nasty, one player slides in, one player dives in to hurt someone, if bans could be 6 games that tackle deserves it!!
one
RefChat Addict
Most fouls in sliding tackles which win or make contact with the ball are committed with the trailing leg, so keep an eye on them.
Also although I prefer if the referees don't point at the ball, if they do, the bigger issue is the incorrect context given using voice by saying "he got/won the ball" or just "ball". Yelling out "fair tackle" gives a much better context as to why you didn't give a foul.
Also although I prefer if the referees don't point at the ball, if they do, the bigger issue is the incorrect context given using voice by saying "he got/won the ball" or just "ball". Yelling out "fair tackle" gives a much better context as to why you didn't give a foul.
In general I agree, but I think that there are some circumstances when it's a good idea to point at the ball, ie when a defender slides in to win the ball in his penalty box and just makes contact with the ball (you know the type,on the stretch and he just gets his toe on the ball and it trickles out for a corner), or the keeper dives at the attacker and just gets his finger tip and changes the direction of the ball). Pointing to the ball indicates that you've seen that the ball was won in these penalty call incidents and players will recognise straight away why you've made you're decision. But in most tackle situations I agree with not pointing at the ball
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
Nit pick/pet peeve: getting the ball is not completely irrelevant. The failure to get the ball along with non-trivial contact is almost certainly a foul. But getting the ball doesn't create a license for contact (which I think is what you're really saying). I absolutely agree that too much verbal focus by referees on the ball fees the myth that touching the ball means anything goes.
Observers will pick up on it these days. Better to shout something like "fair challenge".