The Ref Stop

Violent Conduct

Russell Jones said:
Totally understand the perspective. So, using Beckham as an example (where everyone now cites this as a nailed on YC), do you genuinely believe it’s credible to see this ‘kick’ as Reckless?
Click to expand...
Deliberate attempt to strike the player, for me, cannot be reckless.

Out of interest what would be an example of reckless in this exact situation? I cannot see one.
 
The Ref Stop
Russell Jones said:
To see this ‘kick’ as Reckless?
Click to expand...
The point I was making is that I did not see this kick and I can't make a definitive determination on what sanction i would have given. Therefore I rely on the referees opinion.

Using beckam as benchmark, had Iseen the OP, it is unlikely I would have said yellow. But there are plenty other benchmark examples that would also make it an easy yellow and nothing more. 😀 tolerance levels and all that.
 
Redref34 said:
See I am questioning now if the kick out was just petulant as it could be argued that it wasn’t excessive force. However, in my mind, if a goalkeeper holding the ball kicks at a strikers legs, he only really has one intention, to try and cause harm, therefore VC. I understand that if it’s a little flick out that will potentially not warrant a dismissal. I think on this occasion a RC was warranted on balance.
Click to expand...
I'd tend to agree with that.

I sent a player off a couple of seasons ago for casually (but not excessively forceful) swinging a very light kick-out at an opponent as the opponent jogged past him.

The reaction of the other players and the sidelines always tends to escalate these things when seen and so whenever it happens, a red card is the expected outcome. A "kick" is a kick, whether forceful or not and you'll be making a rod for your own back if you don't just get rid of the offender in my opinion.
 
Russell Jones said:
Totally understand the perspective. So, using Beckham as an example (where everyone now cites this as a nailed on YC), do you genuinely believe it’s credible to see this ‘kick’ as Reckless?
Click to expand...
Do they? I think the world, England fans in particular, universally accept red card as the right outcome.

You could easily align that kick to reckless though:

When Beckham kicks the back of Simeone's leg he falls backwards which could have caused danger or consequences to Simeone an example he could have banged the back of his head had he not broken his fall..easy 🙂

That said I still think Beckham deserved a red card and I reckon he would still get one today.

Anyway, digressing as usual!

It seemed to me that you were stating that factually for CRUEF it must be a challenge for the ball which is in fact not the case, in law. I appreciate this is your general interpretation of these situations (and I'm not a million miles away in that respect) but feel we do need to be clear that the law does allow for CRUEF judgement in situations where a player commits a physical offence against an opponent.
 
Kent Ref said:
Deliberate attempt to strike the player, for me, cannot be reckless.

Out of interest what would be an example of reckless in this exact situation? I cannot see one.
Click to expand...
My interpretation is that striking, in LOTG land, is with the hand/arms.

Anything with the foot/ankle should be considered a kick.

To answer your question simply, force!

As far as I can tell there is nothing in law that supports the view, often suggested on here by some, that any force in these situations is "excessive".

There are occasions where having access and the use @Archer's suggested BE code would be very useful indeed.
 
JamesL said:
My interpretation is that striking, in LOTG land, is with the hand/arms.

Anything with the foot/ankle should be considered a kick.

To answer your question simply, force!

As far as I can tell there is nothing in law that supports the view, often suggested on here by some, that any force in these situations is "excessive".

There are occasions where having access and the use @Archer's suggested BE code would be very useful indeed.
Click to expand...
For me a player has no business deliberately kicking another player.

The amount of force, for me, does not negate an act of VC being committed. This has no place in the game.

It's unfortunate a light kick and a full blooded whack lead to a red card and the same suspension but that's the FA's problem.

If you say "force" is the answer for reckless or UEF how does that look on a scale? Where are the parameters between red and yellow? ITOOTR?

More inconsistency if that's the case.

Keep it simple - red card for all examples of this exact scenario. What does the game expect @RustyRef ?
 
Kent Ref said:
For me a player has no business deliberately kicking another player.
Click to expand...
You lose the argument here already. If this was the case, many games would not complete...
Kent Ref said:
The amount of force, for me, does not negate an act of VC being committed. This has no place in the game.
Click to expand...
Violent conduct = brutality = An act which is savage, ruthless or deliberately violent
Kent Ref said:
It's unfortunate a light kick and a full blooded whack lead to a red card and the same suspension but that's the FA's problem.

If you say "force" is the answer for reckless or UEF how does that look on a scale? Where are the parameters between red and yellow? ITOOTR?
Click to expand...
The LOTG provides the definitions of this which I don't really need to expand on.
Kent Ref said:
More inconsistency if that's the case.

Keep it simple - red card for all examples of this exact scenario. What does the game expect @RustyRef ?
Click to expand...
Football expectancy is for situations not covered in law, where this exact example is.

Just to be clear I'm not arguing against this being a red card, but in my view if the law expected every kick when not challenging for ball or w/ ball put of play then the law would say so, similarly to how it does for striking an opponent in the face unless force used is negligible.

It just isn't as black and white as he shouldn't have kicked him there it's a red card as some would suggest.
 
JamesL said:
Do they? I think the world, England fans in particular, universally accept red card as the right outcome.

You could easily align that kick to reckless though:

When Beckham kicks the back of Simeone's leg he falls backwards which could have caused danger or consequences to Simeone an example he could have banged the back of his head had he not broken his fall..easy 🙂

That said I still think Beckham deserved a red card and I reckon he would still get one today.

Anyway, digressing as usual!

It seemed to me that you were stating that factually for CRUEF it must be a challenge for the ball which is in fact not the case, in law. I appreciate this is your general interpretation of these situations (and I'm not a million miles away in that respect) but feel we do need to be clear that the law does allow for CRUEF judgement in situations where a player commits a physical offence against an opponent.
Click to expand...
Happy to agree to disagree on the Beckham situation. At the time, no one was surprised by the red card .. but these days I believe football (especially at higher levels) would now expect a YC. You have totally persuaded me that using CRUEF for off the ball kicks is not incorrect 😊. However, I still think it’s an unhelpful approach for off the ball stuff, as the threshold for what is Careless, Reckless etc is likely to differ from that involved in a challenge —> unhelpful confusion / inconsistency.
 
I feel like scenarios such as this of deliberate off the balls kicks should fall down to negligible, petty or brutal, but they don't at the moment, and @JamesL is correct in law.
 
RefereeX said:
I feel like scenarios such as this of deliberate off the balls kicks should fall down to negligible, petty or brutal, but they don't at the moment, and @JamesL is correct in law.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

If a player angrily moved towards you and swung their arm back to punch you in the face but then thought better of it ie. no punch, no contact therefore not excessively forceful, you going red or yellow?

It's all about the perception/intent. Kicking out at someone isn't within the spirit of the game, much like spitting at someone (which again you could argue isn't excessively forceful) but the act itself still attracts a red card.
 
Kes said:
Agreed.

If a player angrily moved towards you and swung their arm back to punch you in the face but then thought better of it ie. no punch, no contact therefore not excessively forceful, you going red or yellow?

It's all about the perception/intent. Kicking out at someone isn't within the spirit of the game, much like spitting at someone (which again you could argue isn't excessively forceful) but the act itself still attracts a red card.
Click to expand...
I mean you could argue it all you like but spitting has nothing to do with CRUEF 😉
It is its own sending off offence (with biting) because, quite simply, it's just a disgusting act.

And if a player did as you describe, threatening violence I would consider as a "deliberately violent" act, so brutality as opposed to force and yes, I would still be going red in that situation.
 
Russell Jones said:
Happy to agree to disagree on the Beckham situation. At the time, no one was surprised by the red card .. but these days I believe football (especially at higher levels) would now expect a YC. You have totally persuaded me that using CRUEF for off the ball kicks is not incorrect 😊. However, I still think it’s an unhelpful approach for off the ball stuff, as the threshold for what is Careless, Reckless etc is likely to differ from that involved in a challenge —> unhelpful confusion / inconsistency.
Click to expand...
I agree, I don't think that would draw a red card today but back then it was nailed on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top