Question Number: 28627

Law 18 - Common Sense 7/30/2014

RE: Competitive Under 16

Paul of Milton, ON Canada asks...

My question has to do with the use of arms and hands by opposing players when challenging for a ball.

For me, blowing the whistle each and every time this occurs with a subsequent dropped ball (for two fouls occurring at the same time) would interrupt the momentum of the game.

However, how is this properly controlled and managed? Most of the time, I do not see either player gaining an advantageous position (or preventing one). If anything, in these situations, I wait for one of the players to commit a more serious foul than the other.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Paul
Players make contact with each other all of the time which includes incidental arm contact. Most times those are not fouls and play should continue.
As regards the dropped ball for two simultaneous fouls by two challenging players that rarely happens. One foul generally happens first and that is the one that should be called. If there are no obvious fouls then contact is at worst trifling or doubtful.
In these simultaneous foul situations I always believe that one player is the 'more' guilty party perhaps by timing, the manner /angle of the contact or perhaps the player's attitude in previous challenges.
I recall last season in a veterans' game one player was being over-zealous in challenges. I spoke with him about calming down. Later he was involved in a challenge with an opponent where both slid towards each other. A foul might have been called either way and I decided to go against the player I spoke to previously. My instinct told me that his opponent had sensed the type of challenge that was coming and decided to match it resulting in a right coming together. The award of the free kick resulted in a right moan from the player about it being 50 / 50 which allowed me the opportunity to have a further' word'. I believe a dropped ball would not have helped the game.
IMO the dropped ball restart for simultaneous fouls should rarely be called. It should be used to stop the game to check for injury and for any reason not mentioned elsewhere in the Laws of the Game.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Paul,
There are three or so 'normal' if that is even an appropriate description of simultaneous fouls,

(a) one is often quite violent for some reason, usually two players coming together at a high rate of speed from intersecting angles. Kind of a double charging foul as it were!

(b)Another has players who are tight to one another contesting for the ball, both will have arms stretched out across the other's body and usually a handful of jersey to boot so a holding/pushing /pulling type of foul!


(c)The third is the kicking the crap out of each other, where only the ball seems to get a free non contact pass.

I concur with your assessment that blowing the whistle each and every time then restarting with a drop ball would interrupt the momentum of the game. The dropped ball is rarely a good solution for offsetting fouls although it can be justified as correct! Unless you can determine who is at fault first and judge it accordingly, a viable alternative to the dropped ball would be to wait until the outcome of the(mutual holding, kicking or charging pact) becomes self evident!

You make mention of what proactive approach might help, to assist your man /match management properly?

Each referee has their own version of' Fingerspitzengefühl" the tingling in your extremities that directs you towards exercising good judgment or common sense. Your own character, personality and demeanour in how to do this effectively, be it silent & stern/ laughing & joking /deliberate & calculated! Communicate with the players, let them know you are watching, seeing and confirming they are ok with what you are allowing and they are taking. Listen objectively, legitimate dissent in the players voicing or showing displeasure tells you something! As my colleague Ref McHugh adroitly points out we can dismiss or allow some transgressions if the Foul Recognition ( the ability to tell fair from foul )and Foul Tolerance (the ability to ignore foul as fair) is within reasonable levels of players expectations and the referee's acceptance to recognize it as trifling and or doubtful .

Interestingly enough I had a drop ball situation in a u-16 for a double charging collision if ONLY to see if the two players were injured, from what I thought was a 50/50 that neither one was backing down from! So I do the drop ball, guess which two players want to contest it? Yup our two gung-ho guys! I drop the ball, they both MISS the ball and kick each other in the shins! LOL! As they hobbled about, I chewed them out for not waiting until the ball hit the ground and for the manner in which they both were disregarding the safety of the other and that unless they choose to head down a different path I might be choosing their path for them. I also suggested to the two coaches these guys were looking a little yellowish and a brief rest might do them some good! The players can not be told what to do nor are the coaches honour bound to substitute at the referee's insistence but some food for thought was tossed their way!

Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Paul,

I think you might be looking a little too hard for a 'simultaneous foul'. In all my years of refereeing I have never awarded a DB for a simultaneous foul, nor have I ever seen any other referee award it. It's quite rare.

I know the situation you're talking about - 2 players both put their hands on each other. Given that the laws allow you to ignore a trifling breach of the law, you have the discretion to determine at what point a foul is actually committed.

So you can try to let it go, as long as both players are doing it to a certain extent. If one player takes it a bit further, then you can penalise him - alternately, you could penalise the first player to engage in the manhandling. Otherwise, just let them go - after all, if both players are happy to engage in a certain level of activity and neither player has been clearly disadvantaged, then why does the referee even need to intervene?