Question Number: 16627

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/10/2007

RE: Rec Under 15

Kristin Love of pittsburgh, PA USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 16440

An attacker is dribbling with the ball into the penalty area. The defender challenges him, but the attacker neatly passes the ball off while attempting at the same time to step past the defender. After the ball leaves his foot, the attacker's arm (which was up to give him balance) goes over the shorter defender's shoulder, and comes down in a way that makes the defender fall down. It appeared to me to be part of the natural running motion, not an attempt to fell.

Meanwhile, the ball is sitting on the goalline, and one of the attacker's teammates kicks it into the goal.

The defender, had he remained standing, would have had no chance to get to the ball.

Should I have called anything against the attacker? At what point? Before the goal scored? After the goal scored?

After the goal scored, both boys yelped: The defender, because he didn't appreciate getting knocked over, and the attacker, because he didn't appreciate being unappreciated. I told them both to calm down, and surprisingly they both said "OK." and were quiet. [wow. they usually don't listen that well!]

At halftime, I quietly explained to the defender that I agreed that he had been knocked over, but I felt that it was neither on purpose nor did it make a difference in what happened next. I assured him that I was keeping an eye the attacker throughout the game. Comments?

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

If your verbal description translates correctly into my mental image of the play, it sounds like a job well done. Not every collision is a foul, nor is it a foul every time a player falls down. Those interactions that are fouls need to be non-trifling before we call them.

Your description sounds to me as doubtful whether a foul happened or not, although I can see where some would argue that it meets the criteria for being a foul. It would be seen as holding or pushing or striking of some sort. Still, it sounds trifling to me, as it had no effect on play. Unless the annoyance factor the defender feels is more than trifling.

If you decided that the attacker committed a foul, there is no need to wait before calling it. You probably wouldn't be looking at advantage at the far end of the field.

You are correct to keep a closer eye on the attacker, just in case you misread his actions and he really was running over the opponent. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

You decided that the play was not careless and part of natural play. End of story. Award the goal. That said, if you HAD decided there was a foul it occurred before the goal so you would have had to call off the goal.

Answer provided by Referee Ben Mueller

Ok - so if in your opinion it was nor careless, reckless, or with excessive force...then everything is all good. Not every collision needs to be a foul.