Headbutt or not?
- Thread starter alexv
- Start date
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
Prey tell us the Laws @Padfoot....... Do I need popcorn????
It’s more that certain referees are using an erroneous interpretation of the LOTG to justify allowing head to head contact, presumably for club marks, or because they can’t be bothered doing the job properly......can’t think of any other reason why you would condone such behaviour?
Certainly isn’t because it’s in the spirit of the game, or that its something that we should just treat as ‘part of the game’......
Perhaps those who believe that head to head contact is an acceptable part of the game can explain why?
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Negligible
Had the exact scenario in my game today. Player motions forehead towards opponent's forehead. Not sure if there was contact, but if there was it was very minimal. In the moment, i was acutely aware that 'football expected' expected a caution and that's what it got. I devote preparation, concentration, effort and dedication to every game, so it has absolutely nothing to do with 'can't be bothered'. I'm entirely satisfied with this decision based on my interpretation of the Law at this time
I somewhat understand your point, but expectations are entirely different on the street than on the FOP
For what it's worth, this offence 'should' warrant a dismissal, but then again football is broken in many respects and it's not the job of an individual referee to fix it
Besides, even on the street, I can't see anyone being convicted of any criminal offence for such behavior. Doubt very much it would even get a response from the police these days. That's the way the world is these days, although i admire the fact that you're irritated by this
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
But that’s the point.....you would be 100% correct under the LOTG to dismiss for this.....so why not do it?
Why use a tenuous play on words to excuse the behaviour?
The offence does warrant dismissal, the LOTG allow you to dismiss for it......so why are referees finding excuses not to?
It’s not to improve the game, it’s not because it’s ‘part of the game’.....so it must be because those refs either believe that sort of behaviour is acceptable, they are more bothered about their marks/popularity or they simply can’t be arsed to make the difficult decisions.
On this occasion football is broken because referees have allowed it be that way.
Let's turn this question around - the LOTG specifically dictates that negligible head-to-head contact should not be sanctioned with a red card. So why are you so keen to ignore that word and send this player off when the law does not expect you to do so? It is not within the mandate of an individual referee to go against the LOTG in an effort to "fix" football.
Notwithstanding the professional game, I'm in very good (intelligent and experienced) company (on this site) in deeming this a cautionable offence
We are all humbled by your crusade, but your 100% is not mine. Money spoiled the game btw
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
No, it doesn’t.
It is true that the 'negligible' clause applies specifically to strikes by the hand or arm
It therefore boils down to a debate as to what constitutes 'excessive force' or 'brutality'. Maybe the former, but not the latter for me. What is 100%, is that it's not reasonable to make a 100% claim either way. I can see both arguments, but my gut feeling is that today's decision was the right one. The sea will freeze over before you can see both sides
What a completely irrelevant point. Tripping a player isn’t a red but do it to any of the above and you’re in trouble.
Exactly. There are lots of things that would get you a caution in a game but get you a night in the cells if you did the same against a copper.