Question Number: 35812

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 11/24/2024

Petr of Prague, Czech Republic Czech Republic asks...

This question is a follow up to question 35810

Did all three offenses really occur at the same time?

I think it's similar to this part of the offside rule:

'In situations where: an offence is committed against a player in an offside position who is already playing or attempting to play the ball, or challenging an opponent for the ball, the offside offence is penalised as it has OCCURRED BEFORE THE FOUL CHALLENGE'

In my cases, what happened first doesn't matter? Sometimes it matters which came first and other times it doesn't?

Thanks!

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Petr
Some PIADM is not like a regular offence. In your example the time window can be long for the PIADM so both offences can occur at the same tine.

As the offences were committed by the same player so a referee can ignore the playing in a dangerous manner offence and penalise the more serious handling.

It’s akin to a foul outside the penalty area and immediately a second foul inside the penalty. All referees will go with the penalty kick if they have the choice.

In the same way wouldn’t a team want a direct free kick or penalty rather than an IDFK. The handling will attract more attention and appeals rather than a possible PIADM.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Petr,
if you look hard enough you can find some bizarre scenarios like two teams both with PIOPs not able to participate!
In any creative situation the referee can apply advantage if the same person is the one involved as to punishing any offence that best serves the interest of the offended team. We can delay cautioning we can delay whistles and we can go back to the original foul, as long as play has not restarted. If Player BLUE A was offside and Player RED B was then ducking due to a high kick and then player A jumps on top of him. Do you think the INDFK out versus a DFK is merely a matter of restart given the PIADM and the jumping at the opponent as SFP or VC makes a great deal of difference? If there is involvement by the offside PIOP prior to any action, we go offside but if that action be it a DFK action of a SFP or VC or a cautionable USB or a reckless or a careless act. What is most beneficial?
Here is an unlikely offside scenario- BUT_ would you give it?
RED keeper wants to punt the ball down field as all of the of the opposition Bs are inside RED's half but instead winds up hitting a low bullet into the back of his own defender's back side. RED attacker A was timing his run perfectly just onside at the punt kick and running across the midfield but just inside the B half at the time the ball rebounds of the backside. He saw the enemy was taking advantage of the mistake and angled his midfield across run/ back into his own half in full pursuit because he already running hard. Just as the B opposition were about to gain control he slides in and upends the B attacker right at the corner the PA. Let say it was a SPA foul, no DOGSO or SPS or VC. Far fetched, I agree, no one else got there but imagine? Are you going to award an INDFK for offside participation, a DFK for the tackle out side, or a PK if the tackle was the tiniest bit inside?
Cheers lol

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

See Question: 35816