Soccer Ref Education - Impeding Or Charing? (Fair Or Foul #40)

[@icethethrees]

First clip is a clear foul by blue #21 who runs straight for white #22 and does not play the ball at all (he is clearly late with the hip check + forearm to midsection and makes no attempt at or touch on the ball). And that's true regardless of whether or not you think that initial foul affected the following push in the back by white #22 on blue #16. Call should've gone the other way - DFK for white

[@jaymyers7900]

Hey Stephen, For Clip #1, white chicken wings blue from behind. I have blue DFK coming out. For Clip #2, I see White with yellow shoes sorta "steered" Blue into White with Gloves who played nothing but body. Blue played through it so Im thinking I would have let it develop for a few more seconds and then brought it back for a DFK for Blue if nothing came of it. For Clip #3, from what I see, when White finally got turned enough and got in front of blue, he is being pushed down from behind. I dont feel he even was set up or began his impeding. That's a foul on Blue for pushing. Im also bringing out the yellow on #5 - as there is a case to be made for a reckless push from behind, as well as the dissent. The dissent is much more obvious, so that would be my official recording.

[@BrianPowersHomes]

I agree with the calls on 1 and 3. For 2, I've got impeding although looks like a potential advantage developing so probably best to delay the call and see what happens.

[@GregMcNeish]

Last one looks like the clearest charge of all, honestly. White was well within playing distance when he entered the space, even though by the time contact was made the ball was a little further away. I'd be inclined to call impeding in the second example, but since the player who was fouled regained possession I'd wait to see if advantage was established (unclear from that vantage point). First clip is definitely a charge. At real-time speed you can see that the player regains control after the initial contact and then propels HIMSELF into the other player. Looked to me like he might have been trying to sell that he had been launched into him, but no.

[@samsummerville8027]

In the first clip the player has his path to the ball changed. Is he supposed to allow other players to just move him off the ball and then give up?

[@GregMcNeish]

@@samsummerville8027 No, but the first contact was fair, while the second was not. Both the point of contact (shoulder vs. back) and force of the tackle were different.

[@forzajuve4845]

I will say that I am a ref also ...1, I see this charge being stretched to try to make it legal..the rule is a SHOULDER to SHOULDER charge..the first contact by blue is NOT using his shoulder..That is a hip check..yes he's using the side of his body, so it's not from behind but it's also not his shoulder either and as far as white, is concerned, I see it as a pushing foul, not charging..his arm is extended, using it to push his opponent to the ground .2..why pushes blue Ito white's teammate causing white to to to the ground but it''s a plain since blue ended with possession # I see as white trying to lure the foul, he was in playing distance, 2 steps, but he was looking for the foul, went down too easily ..I would have allowed play to continue and told white to get up..it's not futsal , so not all contact is a foul..I've been reffing since 1981..from college level down ..as far as the players crowding the ref, it's a problem that it not addressed especially in select games, important games, select tournaments by young refs because they are afraid they will not be assigned to these games again..I've seen it too many times and was even told that by one of the refs..I was AR Philadelphia Union academy game , their goalie screaming the F word at players and the middle ref..I gave the keeper a SHHH gesture but the middle ignored him..I told the middle that you need to address this with the keeper and he said "if I start cracking down on stuff like that, I'll never be invited back again ..This is a huge problem with US Soccer..PIAA would want that stopped immediately ..The tournaments are similar because the organizers don't back the refs when the , you know what hits the fan, because the money comes from the clubs

[@aj_ford_527]

Agree with 1 & 3. Hard to tell from the angle on #2 but it does look like the player with yellow shoes is cbehind the attacker. He lowers his shoulder and arm into the back of the attacker so, in the interest of player safety, I would call charging against the player with the yellow boots as the first foul. DFK.

[@MrFutbol007]

1st clip. Are the laws changing now?! Blue clearly is NOT going for the ball but tries to impede the attacker. Foul.

[@prs314]

Laws say that “If the ball is within playing distance, a player can be fairly charged (shoulder to shoulder) by an opponent.” So it looks like “going for the ball” is not even a requirement to be able to charge an opponent, all that is required is for the ball to be reachable.

[@cheyenedeweese]

Clip 1, I agree. Foul on white. Clip 2, I believe no foul should be called. Play on. Clip 3, white was not playing the ball. White would have fallen regardless. Advantage to blue. Play on.

[@deltaboy2011]

Last clip is more like grabbing the white shirt.