- This topic has 40 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Law 12 A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any
of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be
careless, reckless or using excessive force:
• kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
• trips or attempts to trip an opponent
• jumps at an opponent
• charges an opponent
• strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
• pushes an opponent
• tackles an opponentIf a player, in the eyes of the referee, is careless, reckless or uses excessive force in a tackle, then he commits a foul. It doesn’t matter whether he gets the ball or not. When the referee gives a foul for a tackle, players are acting under a misapprehension when they indicate that they got the ball.
This file gives some further explanation of the rule; http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf
Careless – lack of attention or consideration or without precaution – free kick only
Reckless – with disregard for the danger to, or consequences for, his opponent – free kick plus caution
Using excessive force – far exceeded the use of necessary force and is in danger of injuring his opponent – free kick plus sending offYou may or may not like the rule. You may or may not share the referee’s opinion. Fans are usually partisan; they generally think that decisions against their side are harsh, while decisions against their opponents are lenient. But it seems that an appeal will only succeed if the referee has made a glaring error, and that doesn’t appear to be the case here.
Law 12 A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a player commits any
of the following seven offences in a manner considered by the referee to be
careless, reckless or using excessive force:
• kicks or attempts to kick an opponent
• trips or attempts to trip an opponent
• jumps at an opponent
• charges an opponent
• strikes or attempts to strike an opponent
• pushes an opponent
• tackles an opponentIf a player, in the eyes of the referee, is careless, reckless or uses excessive force in a tackle, then he commits a foul. It doesn’t matter whether he gets the ball or not. When the referee gives a foul for a tackle, players are acting under a misapprehension when they indicate that they got the ball.
This file gives some further explanation of the rule; http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf
Careless – lack of attention or consideration or without precaution – free kick only
Reckless – with disregard for the danger to, or consequences for, his opponent – free kick plus caution
Using excessive force – far exceeded the use of necessary force and is in danger of injuring his opponent – free kick plus sending offYou may or may not like the rule. You may or may not share the referee’s opinion. Fans are usually partisan; they generally think that decisions against their side are harsh, while decisions against their opponents are lenient. But it seems that an appeal will only succeed if the referee has made a glaring error, and that doesn’t appear to be the case here.
I am sorry we all seem to be on different pages but you are confirming the point I am trying to make.
Nothing says it was a red card in the rules as it boils down to a matter of opinion on if the tackle used excessive force or not.
I will argue till the day I die that there was no excessive force in that tackle as if any less “force” and he wouldn’t have got to the ball in time but it will always boil down to a matter of opinion.
This for me is one of the major problems for referees nowadays in that they have not got a set of rules they can live by leaving them open to criticism.
If anyone watched Man U v Chelsea the other night you will see the same problem with the hand ball rule in that the latest party line is that “it is not a hand ball if it was not deliberate”…
So unless the referee is a mind reader they have no idea if it was deliberate or not!
I know that if any of the three I saw that night were by Caldwell it would of been a hand ball without fail.
Check Ashley Cole’s on the edge of the box and the commentator says “it was not an unnatural position so its not a hand ball” …. Putting aside the guy is doing a Bruce Forsythe type pose in mid air what the feck is an unnatural position? Do you have to detach your hand and throw it through the air?
The FA have a lot to answer for in terms of over complicating simple issues such as a hand ball or a good clean tackle to the point that nobody knows where they stand any more!
I will argue till the day I die that there was no excessive force in that tackle as if any less “force” and he wouldn’t have got to the ball in time but it will always boil down to a matter of opinion.There are circumstances when a player is not entitled to make a tackle. Sometimes he will just have to stand off and wait for a better opportunity.
If a player does make a forceful tackle, then he takes the risk of incurring the referee’s wrath. If McManaman needed to use a degree of force to win the ball, perhaps it would have been better if he had resisted making the tackle at all.
It’s not as though the tackle was necessary. It appears that it was provoked by a knock that McManaman got just before – he seems to have a very quick temper. After last season, he should have known better.
There are circumstances when a player is not entitled to make a tackle. Sometimes he will just have to stand off and wait for a better opportunity.Not even read the rest of your post. Where, in the laws of the game, does it state that?
Law 12
An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if, in the opinion of
the referee, a player:
• plays in a dangerous manner
• impedes the progress of an opponent
• prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands
• commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which
play is stopped to caution or send off a playerIt’s a foul if a player kicks or attempts to kick an opponent. If a player can’t make a tackle without kicking his opponent, he isn’t entitled to make a tackle.
The usual scapegoat is the referee. Coyle has already wrongly criticised the referee who dismissed McManaman, promising to appeal against the decision. Fortunately, wiser counsel prevailed.I’d no idea this would be so contentious. I’m sorry I said it.
There are circumstances when a player is not entitled to make a tackle. Sometimes he will just have to stand off and wait for a better opportunity.
Not even read the rest of your post. Where, in the laws of the game, does it state that?[/quote]
now then lad, why don’t you join a library.
The usual scapegoat is the referee. Coyle has already wrongly criticised the referee who dismissed McManaman, promising to appeal against the decision. Fortunately, wiser counsel prevailed.
I’d no idea this would be so contentious. I’m sorry I said it.[/quote]
its not lad, and you are right. these other pillocks cant see it, thats all
The usual scapegoat is the referee. Coyle has already wrongly criticised the referee who dismissed McManaman, promising to appeal against the decision. Fortunately, wiser counsel prevailed.
I’d no idea this would be so contentious. I’m sorry I said it.[/quote]
its not lad, and you are right. these other pillocks cant see it, thats all[/quote]
Looks like this meeting of the minds has come to an end :huh:
Law 12An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if, in the opinion of
the referee, a player:
• plays in a dangerous manner
• impedes the progress of an opponent
• prevents the goalkeeper from releasing the ball from his hands
• commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which
play is stopped to caution or send off a playerIt’s a foul if a player kicks or attempts to kick an opponent. If a player can’t make a tackle without kicking his opponent, he isn’t entitled to make a tackle.
The bit in bold, fair point… Struggling to see how that is relevant to McManaman’s case, though.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
