Question Number: 23714

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 7/28/2010

RE: Rec./Select Other

Mike of Austin, TX USA asks...

I'm a relatively new ref. having been certified about a year. This off-season I've really been looking back to analyze my performances to try and figure out what I can do better next season.

In reading the ATR, Law 12 Section 1 says 'Except for a handling offense, it is not necessary for the players action to be considered "deliberate" in
the sense that the player intentionally set out to kick, push, trip, hold or otherwise foul the opponent.'. Then in section 2 it says 'Referees should not punish actions that are accidental or inadvertent.' and 'the action becomes an offense only if the referee decides that it was committed carelessly, recklessly, or
with excessive force.'

I'm having some trouble wrapping my brain around these seemingly contradictory statements that by themselves seem perfectly reasonable. Translating these concepts to action on the field I think has been the source of some of my on-field match control issues last season. (perceived inconsistency on my part)

Though I didn't quote the whole of the sections here, I don't think I'm reading and interpreting them out context am I? How common are truly accidental incidents?

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Referee Mike
My advice is to look at the action of the player and if it looks like an offence even if the player may not have meant it then I would still call the foul. As the ATR states "Under Law 12, the referee makes a decision based upon what he or she sees a player actually do—the result of the player’s action—not upon what might be in the player's mind."
To me even if it is accidental or inadvertent it is still careless and a breach of the Law. Of course there will be times when two player are running for the ball and the accidentally collide with each other. That is not deliberate or indeed a foul. However let's say that a player runs behind an opponent and makes contact with him causing him to trip. That will look like a foul and IMO it should be called. Yes one could argue that the player's actions may have been accidental but the referee can only give what he sees.

Answer provided by Referee Dennis Wickham

Mike:

There are two notions at play.

At one time referees were not calling fouls because they didn't think that the player intended to do X to the opponent. (At the highest levels, almost everything that happens is deliberate, but that is another discussion). The framers of the law removed (except for handling) the notion that fouls must be deliberate. Thus, a player commits a foul by being careless (tackling, charging, jumping, etc) in a way that unfairly affects an opponent even though the player didn't intend to injure or foul.

The second notion, however, is that not everything that happens needs to be a reason to stop play. Some contact between players occurs even though neither is careless and both are doing what the game expects them to do. (For example, two opponents jumping straight up to head a ball may result in both crashing into the other. There is no foul.)

Moreover, the game is more enjoyable when players are allowed to play through infringements that players are willing to accept as 'part of the game' rather than stop play for every infringement. What the players will accept varies greatly with the age and skill of the players, but trifling and doubtful infringements can be ignored. In this sense, - - that only breaches that are not trifling or doubtful should be called, does the ATR (based on an old, but vital, IFAB decision that predates the change to the law) consider them as 'deliberate.'