A&H

Restart after ball put out of play for an injury

The Referee Store
Cheshire Ref said:
Even so i think the definition on page 88 has to be the right one. It has to be OR not AND.
Click to expand...
No, these are two different things, there is no contradiction. The definition that you have pasted is for Serious Foul Play which as you rightly say states
Serious foul play
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.

P81 defines excessive force : Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off.

P88 therefore effectively just says the same things twice: SFP is a tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent or endangers the safety of an opponent.

Moreover, we are talking about Violent Conduct not SFP which is defined, also on P88, as: when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball and as has already been stated on P81 excessive force must exceed what is necessary and endanger the safety of an opponent.

As I have already said, it is perfectly possible that the challenge described by the OP did endanger the safety of the opponent but if it didn't then it was incorrect to dismiss.


 
Last edited:
McTavish said:
As Monotone said, the definition of excessive force in the LOTG is "when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off"
If the safety of the opponent was not endangered then it was not excessive force according to the LOTG. Not saying that he OP was wrong but the argument that I have sometimes heard that as no force at all was needed in this situation then any force is excessive is not supported in the LOTG.
Click to expand...
I think that the confusion arises in part because we consider Excessive Force both in the context of SFP and in the context of VC. But obviously the tolerance levels are far different in the two cases. Relating to the OP, a body check conducted as part of a genuine challenge for the ball would need to be far more 'Excessive' (and genuinely endanger the opposition player's safety) for us to sanction it as SFP. Whereas an off the ball incident, as in this case, does indeed become 'excessive' far more easily because there was no need for the action at all. For me, an off the ball body check that has enough force to knock the player to the ground is a nailed on Red Card for VC.
 
Similar to the Arsenal sending off, my view is that if the ball has long gone then any force is excessive force as there is no need or justification to use any force whatsoever.
 
McTavish said:
As Monotone said, the definition of excessive force in the LOTG is "when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off"
If the safety of the opponent was not endangered then it was not excessive force according to the LOTG. Not saying that he OP was wrong but the argument that I have sometimes heard that as no force at all was needed in this situation then any force is excessive is not supported in the LOTG.
Click to expand...

What does LOTG stand for please ? New ref and still learning these acronyms!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top