Sliding without contact

[cZulu]

Slight difficulty with a few of these at the weekend. Scenario:

1. RED player attempts to tackle BLUE player via slide tackle.
2. BLUE player avoids the challenge via a quick shuffle and slight 'jump' - RED player innocuously slides past.
3. BLUE player looses possession in the next phase of play - completely unrelated to the slide challenge by RED.
4. BLUE players moan that the 'intent' of the slide tackle should have been called a foul.

My view was that the sliding player made no contact (with man or ball). Had the ball been won in all likelihood it would have been a fair challenge, but had he caught the player could have been called careless, reckless or worse. How do you call this? By nature of sliding and not winning the ball was he out of control?

 

[JamesL]

Slight difficulty with a few of these at the weekend. Scenario:

1. RED player attempts to tackle BLUE player via slide tackle.
2. BLUE player avoids the challenge via a quick shuffle and slight 'jump' - RED player innocuously slides past.
3. BLUE player looses possession in the next phase of play - completely unrelated to the slide challenge by RED.
4. BLUE players moan that the 'intent' of the slide tackle should have been called a foul.

My view was that the sliding player made no contact (with man or ball). Had the ball been won in all likelihood it would have been a fair challenge, but had he caught the player could have been called careless, reckless or worse. How do you call this? By nature of sliding and not winning the ball was he out of control?

The only questions you need ask here is
1) did the player play in a dangerous manner as defined in law 12.
2) did the player impede the progress of an opponent
3) forget the absence of any contact, did the player challenge in a way that was careless, reckless or with excessive force.

All no's play on, yes to anyone of those then it's an offence, play should be stopped if no advantage can be applied and appropriately restart the game.

 

[Kes]

The only questions you need ask here is
1) did the player play in a dangerous manner as defined in law 12.
2) did the player impede the progress of an opponent
3) forget the absence of any contact, did the player challenge in a way that was careless, reckless or with excessive force.

All no's play on, yes to anyone of those then it's an offence, play should be stopped if no advantage can be applied and appropriately restart the game.

This ^ ^ ^

Also, remember that there doesn't need to be actual contact for it to still be a DFK.

 

[one]

While @JamesL gave you the answer, refereeing is not exact science. While your answer to those questions be whatever, another referee watching that incident may give different answer. Heck you may give a different answer to those questions in a similar incident but a different game.

Go with your gut feel and back yourself.

 

[Redster]

My rule of thumb with no contact challenges are that if it looks awkward or dangerous, and I decide that had the challenge made contact there would have been a sanction, then I am heading towards calling a foul. This still leaves the decision as to whether there no being contact was down to the attacker acting with care. If so, probably no foul.

 

[Keeday]

In my view where there is no contact because the player with possession of the ball had to take evasive action then I tend to award a foul. Why should the player have to be clattered and risk injury in order to get a free kick?

 

[JamesL]

In my view where there is no contact because the player with possession of the ball had to take evasive action then I tend to award a foul. Why should the player have to be clattered and risk injury in order to get a free kick?

Uhhh, yes, tetx book definition of playing in a dangerous manner springs to mind.

 

[socal lurker]

Uhhh, yes, tetx book definition of playing in a dangerous manner springs to mind.

PIADM is a possibility, but I think it is more likely to be a careless (or less commonly reckless) tackle--nothing in the definition of a careless/reckless tackle requires contact. And if it's both, the tackle prevails as the more serious offense. In practical terms, if a tackle without contact is bad enough that I am going to call it, I'm almost certainly going with the careless tackle rather than PIADM.

(I think a lot of these plays also often involve essentially a silent advantage, as the attacker who evades contact is still charging ahead with the ball, and often that means the potential offense simply gets ignored rather than an advantage signal.)

 

[ref craig]

And when you do blow the whistle you always get the player's moaning there's no contact ref or I didn't touch him