A&H

Getting your foot in between ball and opponent's foot

deusex

deusex

RefChat Addict
Imagine a striker pulling his foot back to unleash a shot.
Is it acceptable for a defender to put his foot in the space where the striker is about to kick into so that the striker kicks into the NOW STATIONARY defender's foot and not the ball.
Are you penalising this?
If it is a FK under what offence? It will look like a trip but is it really a trip? Is it just shielding the ball?
 
The Referee Store
For me the distinction is whether he has won possession of the ball, just hanging your foot in between the attackers foot and the ball isn't possession but on the other hand the defender doesn't need to touch the ball to have gained possession. One of those you know it when you seen it scenarios.
I can see where you are coming from some referees seem to think unless the defender plays the ball then it's a foul whenever the attacker kicks the defender.
 
Becomes more serious when the defender leaves studs showing in the path of the attackers foot - then the question becomes yellow or red rather than foul or not.
 
If the LOTG state that its acceptable to place yourself between the ball and your opponent (so long as the ball is within playing distance) I'd say it's fine. Some might even argue it should be a FK to the defender who's just had his foot kicked (as alluded to above). I wouldn't give a FK to the attacker that's for sure. If I did, I think I'd be struggling to explain to the defending team captain exactly what the FK was for. Impeding? I don't think so..... ? :hmmm: :)
 
I have penalised a player for this, and sent the defender off as well. A forward ran into the PA past several challenges then as he went to shoot from 6 yards out a defender behind him slid in and put his foot between ball and forward. The attacker kicked his foot and went over. The defending team claimed he'd fouled their player. I disagreed, because I felt the defender had fouled the attacker by tackling him carelessly, awarding the penalty and sending him off for DOGSO. His team weren't happy, but they aren't normally anyway!
When it happened I considered it careless (actually reckless) because the player was in the process of shooting and was therefore always going to contact the defender's foot rather than the ball, but would not know this because of the angle the player challenged from. I would have cautioned if it hadn't been a DOGSO.
 
Don't forget, 'carelessly tackles an opponent' is a foul now.
Putting your foot in the path of the swing of an opponent is a foul...but it's a bit of a case by case basis as well, because it can be a foul the other way.
 
Had something similar to @Markt recently. Attacker just inside the area. As the defender slid in at such an angle the forward cut around the tackling leg. But how he turned the trailing leg of the defender who was now on the floor, not moving, meant the attacker stepped into where the trailing leg was and went over. The defending team was moaning with their argument being he couldnt move his leg out of the way once he was there. For me it was a trip, probably not the most intentional of trips, but had the defender not had his other leg there the striker was getting his shot away. It was a soft one in hindsight, but I'd certainly give it again.
 
Kes said:
If the LOTG state that its acceptable to place yourself between the ball and your opponent (so long as the ball is within playing distance) I'd say it's fine. Some might even argue it should be a FK to the defender who's just had his foot kicked (as alluded to above). I wouldn't give a FK to the attacker that's for sure. If I did, I think I'd be struggling to explain to the defending team captain exactly what the FK was for. Impeding? I don't think so..... ? :hmmm: :)
Click to expand...
I think you're taking that a little out of context. The entire passage makes it clear that placing yourself between an opponent and the ball is only permissible in the context of shielding. Sticking your foot in between an opponent's foot and the ball does not qualify as shielding.

Assuming you decide it's a foul and actually feel it incumbent upon you to explain yourself to the defending team captain, I would just say it's a free kick for a careless tackle, remembering that "careless" is defined in the LotG as meaning "that the player has shown a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge." Depending on the exact nature of the challenge, you might decide that it was actually reckless (and so a cautionable offence) or even involved the use of excessive force (though that's much less likely). Or you could decide that no offence has actually taken place.
 
Peter Grove said:
I think you're taking that a little out of context. The entire passage makes it clear that placing yourself between an opponent and the ball is only permissible in the context of shielding. Sticking your foot in between an opponent's foot and the ball does not qualify as shielding.

Assuming you decide it's a foul and actually feel it incumbent upon you to explain yourself to the defending team captain, I would just say it's a free kick for a careless tackle, remembering that "careless" is defined in the LotG as meaning "that the player has shown a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge." Depending on the exact nature of the challenge, you might decide that it was actually reckless (and so a cautionable offence) or even involved the use of excessive force (though that's much less likely). Or you could decide that no offence has actually taken place.
Click to expand...
Won't disagree with any of that Peter. :)
In all honesty, I had trouble even trying to envisage the scenario given by the OP actually taking place - so probably best if I just leave it there..... ;) :D
 
Kes said:
Won't disagree with any of that Peter. :)
In all honesty, I had trouble even trying to envisage the scenario given by the OP actually taking place - so probably best if I just leave it there..... ;) :D
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, seems to me like we're over thinking a situation.
 
I'm siding with Deusex at least in asking why it's a foul.

Why should a player whose foot is within playing distance of the ball be penalised when he's kicked by a player whose foot was further from the ball?
 
I've seen a similar (albeit slightly different) scenario before. A player for Blues cuts into the area and knocks the ball around 2 yards to the side. The White defender makes up the ground and attempts to kick the ball clear, and at the same time, Blues striker goes to shoot - They both result in kicking each other, and the ball is cleared away.

My instinct said penalty, but after a moments thought, I did not give a foul and continued to play on, as both players were equal distance from the ball, and both committed a careless foul on each other. Neither player had superior control of the ball, and so I stated it was a "coming together" and rejected appeals from both sides.

Would be interested to hear thoughts of others on this particular incident (without hijacking the current thread!).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top