Kicking the ball to a player's head while in play
- Thread starter Jorik0907
- Start date
- Status
boulderdomb
Active Member
Red card violent conduct
Mooseybaby
Retired big bad baldy in all black!
Am I right in thinking the AR flags for a throw to the the team in White?
Player in White could have kicked that ball anywhere, instead decided to kick it with force at a grounded opponent a only few feet away.
Red card all day long!
Player in White could have kicked that ball anywhere, instead decided to kick it with force at a grounded opponent a only few feet away.
Red card all day long!
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Oh I like this one
Can you really be punished for kicking the ball at someone whilst the game is live?
If the game is stopped, no doubt am going red
But kicking the ball whilst the game is live is a different kettle of fish. Am not sure white player whils game is live has an obligation to kick the ball anywhere but there, afterall, is it his doing that blue is lying on ground. White rattles that whilst its in play and blue is standing as expected, and I dont think red would even be discussed. VC covers offences whilst not challenging for the ball.
Whites body language to me tells me he meant it, but also, that, certainly to him, there is no offence in kicking a live ball.
However unnecessary that action is, and however much I might want it to be sanctioned and yes it certainly would be risking revenge, but, I dont think the LOTG can support VC here.
Can you really be punished for kicking the ball at someone whilst the game is live?
If the game is stopped, no doubt am going red
But kicking the ball whilst the game is live is a different kettle of fish. Am not sure white player whils game is live has an obligation to kick the ball anywhere but there, afterall, is it his doing that blue is lying on ground. White rattles that whilst its in play and blue is standing as expected, and I dont think red would even be discussed. VC covers offences whilst not challenging for the ball.
Whites body language to me tells me he meant it, but also, that, certainly to him, there is no offence in kicking a live ball.
However unnecessary that action is, and however much I might want it to be sanctioned and yes it certainly would be risking revenge, but, I dont think the LOTG can support VC here.
VC and the LotG will support any decision taken by the referee in this respect. If, in the opinion of the referee, ...
PP62
Well-Known Member
Yes it is. The white player who pushed the blue player to the ground is the same one who kicked the ball.
I've watched it several times and am in no doubt he knew what he was doing. I'm going red with this.
one
RefChat Addict
If we can use the lotg to support sending a player off for VC on a soft trip from behind (https://www.refchat.co.uk/threads/wolves-v-swansea.10956/) yet not being able to support a send off for this malice violent act then I think either there is something very seriously wrong with the lotg or the application of it. No prizes for guessing i think which is the case.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
You cannot compare this incident to (what I certainly classed as a deliberate kick, not a trip) , to a moving ball being kicked whilst the game was in progress
For the 0.5% its worth, I would like to dismiss for VC here. I just dont think the LOTG class this as such though.
Deliberatley kicking a ball whilst game is in progress, I cant justify as a sanction.
Given VC covers offences whether or not contact was made, by that rule of thumb we are sending him off even if he misses his intended target
We are (rightly) , upset here because the ball has been kicked at his head.
For the 0.5% its worth, I would like to dismiss for VC here. I just dont think the LOTG class this as such though.
Deliberatley kicking a ball whilst game is in progress, I cant justify as a sanction.
Given VC covers offences whether or not contact was made, by that rule of thumb we are sending him off even if he misses his intended target
We are (rightly) , upset here because the ball has been kicked at his head.
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
Really?
Violent conduct is when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball, or against a team-mate, team official, match official, spectator or any other person, regardless of whether contact is made.
The white player is not "challenging for the ball".....he has the ball at his feet and decides to kick it, with force, into the face of his opponent who is on the floor.
How much force is acceptable when determining whether it was "excessive"? Well....how hard would you like a ball to be kicked into your face from a few feet while you are lying on the floor before you felt it was "excessive"?
I would suggest that the force is very much "excessive".
So lets think about "brutality"......which is defined as
behaviour that is very cruel or violent and showing no feelings forothers
Lets see....cruel? Yep. Violent? Yep. No feeling for his opponent? Yep.
So ticks all the boxes for "brutality" as well as "excessive force".
Do you still want to try and justify no red card? Maybe you need some time to sit in the corner and think about the stupidity of your earlier post?
If any referee fails to see that as VC, it really is time to hang up the whistle and get your kit listed on Ebay.
Kes
I'll Decide ...
This. ^ ^ ^ ^
As the referee, you'll already have a feel for the match in particular and of the players demeanour. Being stood right there you'll
know in your guts whether or not the guy meant it.
Red card all day long for me though. ..
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
We already know law court and dictionary definitions do not apply to the LOTG
If they did, the Beckham act of VIOLENCE which I like to use as an example would not even register a call to Childline in the outside world.
I just dont feel anyone can dictate what or what not a player does with the ball in open play.
I want to red card him. I would hope the LOTG support a red card.
My point was, do they?
If they did, the Beckham act of VIOLENCE which I like to use as an example would not even register a call to Childline in the outside world.
I just dont feel anyone can dictate what or what not a player does with the ball in open play.
I want to red card him. I would hope the LOTG support a red card.
My point was, do they?
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
The only act of stupidity I read here is someone not grasping my post. Nowhere am I justifying no red card. I was asking how to justify the red card, Unless someone is obtuse, then the difference betwen the two is clear.
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
Pretty much looks like you are trying to justify not dismissing the player?
And then rapidly backing away from that ludicrous position when it becomes apparently clear that you are totally and utterly wrong........but hey...keep digging.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
My question was can you justify a dismissal for someone kicking a ball whilst in open play.
No digging here matey but am honoured you find time to assume I care for your input. This is not meant to be a site for personal grievances.
You also seem to be, or should be, knowlegable enough to know this decision falls into the "opinion of the referee" catergory, I.e, there is no right or wrong...
No digging here matey but am honoured you find time to assume I care for your input. This is not meant to be a site for personal grievances.
You also seem to be, or should be, knowlegable enough to know this decision falls into the "opinion of the referee" catergory, I.e, there is no right or wrong...
RefJef
RefChat Addict
To be fair, my interpretation is is that @Ciley Myrus would like to red card this (& would probably do so?) but is, quite rightly, asking do the LOTG support red card in this instance?
This is, I think, good reflective practice as it helps us all develop our understanding of the laws, and to also prepare ourselves should we find ourselves in a similar scenario: much better to have the discussion in the cool, calm rational refchat forum than on a pitch with tempers flairing.
I fully agree with the line re: violent conduct cited by @Padfoot above.
However, the LOTG are not as helpful as they might be on this - they specifically talk of "an object (or the ball) is thrown at an opponent ..." It could be argued, therefore, that by omission, kicking the ball at an opponent is not an offence. I am not saying that this would be my decision, but it is an argument that could be cited.
Another possibility: "Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone" This incident certainly falls under that category and is done with excessive force, so perhaps grounds for a Red, but... but .. the Careless/Reckless/Excessive Force all refer to direct free kicks, PIDAM results in an IDFK, so an anomaly there.
On my pitch, this is going to be a Red, using @Padfoot's rational from above, but I think it is an interesting question and I am interested to hear more experienced minds than mine give their thoughts (but in a calm, considered manner - tackle the argument, not the man!)
This is, I think, good reflective practice as it helps us all develop our understanding of the laws, and to also prepare ourselves should we find ourselves in a similar scenario: much better to have the discussion in the cool, calm rational refchat forum than on a pitch with tempers flairing.
I fully agree with the line re: violent conduct cited by @Padfoot above.
However, the LOTG are not as helpful as they might be on this - they specifically talk of "an object (or the ball) is thrown at an opponent ..." It could be argued, therefore, that by omission, kicking the ball at an opponent is not an offence. I am not saying that this would be my decision, but it is an argument that could be cited.
Another possibility: "Playing in a dangerous manner is any action that, while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone" This incident certainly falls under that category and is done with excessive force, so perhaps grounds for a Red, but... but .. the Careless/Reckless/Excessive Force all refer to direct free kicks, PIDAM results in an IDFK, so an anomaly there.
On my pitch, this is going to be a Red, using @Padfoot's rational from above, but I think it is an interesting question and I am interested to hear more experienced minds than mine give their thoughts (but in a calm, considered manner - tackle the argument, not the man!)
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
It’s a red card. It’s violent conduct. End of discussion.
Trying to find reasons why a referee might be justified in not dismissing by trying to find loopholes in the LOTG is just pandering to weak refereeing.
Utterly pointless and a waste of time to try and invent reasons for not dismissing.
The only reason for not dismissing is ‘I didn’t see it’.
Trying to find reasons why a referee might be justified in not dismissing by trying to find loopholes in the LOTG is just pandering to weak refereeing.
Utterly pointless and a waste of time to try and invent reasons for not dismissing.
The only reason for not dismissing is ‘I didn’t see it’.
- Status