Question Number: 31803

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/21/2017

RE: Rec Adult

Walter of SOUTHAMPTON, Pennsylvania USA asks...

Hi, my question is regarding impeding and running into an opposing player. Suppose player O is standing on the wing in their half of the field with their back toward midfield, and player D is behind them, loosely marking - player O doesn't know player D is there. Player O's teammate passes it over both players' heads down the field. Player O turns and runs once the ball passes overhead, and player D just stands there, resulting in the two colliding.

Should this be a call on player O for running into player D, player D for impeding due to not moving when the ball wasn't going to land anywhere playable for them relative to their current location on the field, or no call?

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Walter
Thanks for the question.
The offence of impeding involves no contact and as there is no contact in your scenario that offence which is punished by an IDFK restart can be ruled out immediately.
Now as described there is no offence due to the inadvertent nature of the contact and play should just continue. As described it is a coming together.
Now the reality during the game will be entirely different in that the referee will not have the benefit of the knowledge of why the collision unfolded and its inadvertent nature of players accidentally running into each other
It may look to the referee like Player D stopped the run of Player O which is the penal foul of holding. It might also look like if the referee has a good view of the incident that Player O charged into Player D which is a foul against Player O.
On field there may be all sorts of appeals depending on how it unfolds with maybe Player O appealing for being held back, Player D who might have been knocked to the ground appealing for an illegal charge. Or indeed there might be nothing with both players accepting that it is just a coming together.
I also think that many times the foul may unfairly go against Player D as he may be seen as the player most likely to gain and commit the offence by stopping the run of Player O who may have the most to gain. We see at times players protesting their innocence in such scenarios which can be justified.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Walter,
in theory a player is entitled to their piece of grass. If an opponent runs into through or over the opponent is at fault for a pushing/charging /striking /holding DFK foul not the INDFK for impeding or PIADM because of the contact. The newly created impeding with contact description is to alert referees that WHEN contact occurs the restart changes!

For the player standing still he has done no obvious wrong but as my colleague mentions appearances are deceiving and perception is not truth. It COULD look to the AR or CR or anyone as if the blocking action was done to deny the run.

If the player adjusts his positioning to intercept or tries to grab or hold the opponent the player is now more likely guilty of a foul .

While there are accidental coming together the player or the opponent will likely blame the other. No one said refereeing was easy or obvious your match your decision your reputation.

I will say this OFTEN off the ball contact is managed as a slowing the faster player down. I have my ARS on the look out for such contact in behind the play especially on breaking attacks. I would think defenders are more often guilty of initiating this off the ball contact but attackers love to push or knock the defender out of the way as well.
Cheers
Cheers

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 31807