Question Re Shoulder Charges

[JohnR]

Are shoulder charges 100% "neutral" in that the attacker and the defender have equal rights to initiate contact? Do they each have the right to use the same level of force?

In other words, just as a defender is permitted (with proper technique) to charge a forward off the ball, can the forward charge the defender away from his body?

[Ref Flunkie]

Are shoulder charges 100% "neutral" in that the attacker and the defender have equal rights to initiate contact? Do they each have the right to use the same level of force?

In other words, just as a defender is permitted (with proper technique) to charge a forward off the ball, can the forward charge the defender away from his body?


It was MY impression that as long as the player is playing the ball, the shoulder charge is legal as long as it is done without reckless or excessive force. If an attacker charges a defender, riding him outside ball playing distance, I would think that this would be a foul as the attacker is no longer playing the ball. Again, these are just my impressions.

[JohnR]

It was MY impression that as long as the player is playing the ball, the shoulder charge is legal as long as it is done without reckless or excessive force. If an attacker charges a defender, riding him outside ball playing distance, I would think that this would be a foul as the attacker is no longer playing the ball. Again, these are just my impressions.

I cannot argue with the logic that when the defender rides the attacker the defender is moving toward the ball, and when the attacker charges the defender the attacker is moving away from the ball.

However, I am having trouble understanding just what sort of charge the attacker is permitted, and to what extent the attacker is less limited in his charging options. It appears that he cannot charge as far. May he charge as hard? Is he free to initiate contact? Because after all, the latter move is taking him away from ball, too.

[whitehound]

I cannot argue with the logic that when the defender rides the attacker the defender is moving toward the ball, and when the attacker charges the defender the attacker is moving away from the ball.

However, I am having trouble understanding just what sort of charge the attacker is permitted, and to what extent the attacker is less limited in his charging options. It appears that he cannot charge as far. May he charge as hard? Is he free to initiate contact? Because after all, the latter move is taking him away from ball, too.
Guys!!! Really!! Of course an attacker can put his body into a defender to prevent being charged off of the ball. This is stuff you simply cant quantify without being there and seeing the play in question. The best referee is one that has played the game ALOT and knows this stuff by second nature.

[JohnR]

I ain't no referee. I'm just an ignorant guy trying to understand the game better.

Also, what you say doesn't seem to hold true in the youth game. When the defender charges hard enough to knock a (usually smaller) attacker down, he sometimes is whistled, sometimes not. But I don't think I've ever seen an attacker getting away with knocking down a defender.

But then again, learning about soccer rules from watching youth games is a perilous endeavor ...

[Ref Flunkie]

I ain't no referee. I'm just an ignorant guy trying to understand the game better.

Also, what you say doesn't seem to hold true in the youth game. When the defender charges hard enough to knock a (usually smaller) attacker down, he sometimes is whistled, sometimes not. But I don't think I've ever seen an attacker getting away with knocking down a defender.

But then again, learning about soccer rules from watching youth games is a perilous endeavor ...

Yeah all levels of soccer are called differently. Again, if the shoulder charge is done carelessly or with excessive force it is called...and this is judged by the referee (which is why you see variability in the calls). The reason you don't see attackers do it often is because he already has possession of the ball, so there is no need to shoulder charge the defender UNLESS the defender shoulder charges him. Then he has to use his body to keep his position and possession of the ball. My only thing is as soon as the attacker stops playing the ball (i.e.-outside of playing distance) and is still charging the defender, it becomes a foul. Other then that, they both have equal rights to use physical play within the rules of the game.

[JohnR]

Ref Flunkie -

Thanks!

At any rate, you know the story, this is mostly theoretical because in youth soccer the primary rule is to blow the whistle when a kid falls down. :) But occasionally, I see flashes of good solid refereeing. Would like to see the boys play to the level of those referees, even if they get nailed at times by the weaker ones.

[IASocFan]

...Also, what you say doesn't seem to hold true in the youth game. When the defender charges hard enough to knock a (usually smaller) attacker down, he sometimes is whistled, sometimes not. But I don't think I've ever seen an attacker getting away with knocking down a defender.

But then again, learning about soccer rules from watching youth games is a perilous endeavor ...

Attackers and defenders are governed by the same laws. They are both players trying to play the ball (legal) or the opponent (not legal). Charging the opponent hard enough to knock them down is generally a foul. Circumstances may dictate that the player was off balance and received a fair charge which caused him to lose his balance.

One reason for the imbalance is that defenders shouldn't take chances. They need to contain the attackers, and fouls create opportunities for the attackers. Attackers need to take chances to get the ball into the goal. If they lose the ball or foul, it's no worse than shooting wildly or kicking the ball out of bounds. Advantage is also called more often in the attacking half. If an attacker is fouled and a teammate gets the ball, advantage may be called or signaled.

And I would agree with your last statement. :) Advantage and triffling fouls sometimes make the rules less clear.

[kevbrunton]

Attackers and defenders are governed by the same laws. They are both players trying to play the ball (legal) or the opponent (not legal). Charging the opponent hard enough to knock them down is generally a foul. Circumstances may dictate that the player was off balance and received a fair charge which caused him to lose his balance.

One reason for the imbalance is that defenders shouldn't take chances. They need to contain the attackers, and fouls create opportunities for the attackers. Attackers need to take changes to get the ball into the goal. If they lose the ball or foul, it's no worse than shooting wildly or kicking the ball out of bounds. Advantage is also called more often in the attacking half. If an attacker is fouled and a teammate gets the ball, advantage may be called or signaled.

And I would agree with your last statement. :) Advantage and triffling fouls sometimes make the rules less clear.
Extremely well put.

[HoldenMan]

generally speaking, if the attacker or defender pauses, then takes a step in, especially with a dropped shoulder, or too much weight, then it's a foul. Sometimes you'll see attackers charging defenders away from them, but then they'll wind up a step or two away from the ball - generally this falls out of the bounds of protection and is a careless charge.

[Red Star]

I ain't no referee. I'm just an ignorant guy trying to understand the game better.
When the defender charges hard enough to knock a (usually smaller) attacker down, he sometimes is whistled.

But then again, learning about soccer rules from watching youth games is a perilous endeavor ...

As an, ahem, "solidly built" defender I have always called this the "mass rule". It goes like this: two players make equally hard but clean efforts for the ball. Small guy bounces off fat guy like a tennis ball, foul on fat guy. Why you may ask, the answer is the "mass rule". If you have more mass the foul is on you. It is almost universally applied. If you keep this rule in mind you will be able to predict the calls much more accurately.

I have long agreed with your observation that learning about soccer rules from watching yout games is a perilous endeavor. It particularly shows in adult matches played and officiated by persons who have not watched many top level adult matches. Imagine if NBA officials learned their craft by working with 12 year olds, chaos.

[Ref Flunkie]

As an, ahem, "solidly built" defender I have always called this the "mass rule". It goes like this: two players make equally hard but clean efforts for the ball. Small guy bounces off fat guy like a tennis ball, foul on fat guy. Why you may ask, the answer is the "mass rule". If you have more mass the foul is on you. It is almost universally applied. If you keep this rule in mind you will be able to predict the calls much more accurately.

I have long agreed with your observation that learning about soccer rules from watching yout games is a perilous endeavor. It particularly shows in adult matches played and officiated by persons who have not watched many top level adult matches. Imagine if NBA officials learned their craft by working with 12 year olds, chaos.

The same is true however, that NBA officials would have trouble refereeing U-12 basketball games...they are not the same. While in adult leagues, most players are of similar size, and youth levels the size difference can be much more drastic. While a charge done using the proper technique by the larger massed defender may appear acceptable, if the result of that "shoulder charge" is the smaller massed player flying 3 feet in the air away from the ball, then it is a foul because he used excessive force.

[refmike]

While a charge done using the proper technique by the larger massed defender may appear acceptable, if the result of that "shoulder charge" is the smaller massed player flying 3 feet in the air away from the ball, then it is a foul because he used excessive force.

RF, while I do not disagree that a call should be made, please be careful of the term "excessive force". That is the trigger for a send-off and it may not be appropriate to the point of this discussion. A larger player who bowls over a smaller player is really just not being careful enough. That would be worth a kick but not a card. Reckless or excessive force both imply knowledge that someone may be hurt and that not always the case.

[Red Star]

The same is true however, that NBA officials would have trouble refereeing U-12 basketball games...they are not the same. While in adult leagues, most players are of similar size, and youth levels the size difference can be much more drastic. While a charge done using the proper technique by the larger massed defender may appear acceptable, if the result of that "shoulder charge" is the smaller massed player flying 3 feet in the air away from the ball, then it is a foul because he used excessive force.

Of course by the same logic, since the attacker and defender used the same force the foul is on the attacker, he used excessive force too. He sent a guy flying. In the end it is the big guys fault, he shouldn't try so hard.

The fallacy in your argument is the common trap for youth officials cited above "If someone falls down there must be a foul". Some times players get knocked down and it isn't a foul. Sometimes they hit the ground in spectacular fashion and it still isn't a foul.

[Red Star]

RF, while I do not disagree that a call should be made, please be careful of the term "excessive force". That is the trigger for a send-off and it may not be appropriate to the point of this discussion. A larger player who bowls over a smaller player is really just not being careful enough. That would be worth a kick but not a card. Reckless or excessive force both imply knowledge that someone may be hurt and that not always the case.

Is not being careful the same as dangerous play? Should the restart be indirect?

I urge you to experiment with the "mass rule" the next time you watch a youth match, you will find it an excellent predictor of how the official will rule in these situations. To make it challenging only use it to predict the close ones.

[ref2coach]

Red Star then I would cause serious problems for your statistics. When I was middle school age I was taller and Fatter that almost everybody. The mass rule was often applied to my detriment. So now as still tall, but no longer fat, adullt official I am just a likley to "no call" or call the smaller player for not playing with proper care against the bigger player.

[Jeff L]

Shoulder charges went out with baggy shorts. They don't seem to be allowed any more, and many a goal used to be scored by bundling the goalkeeper over the line by the adminstration of such. Hence the definement of "goal area" and "penalty area". It was legal in the first, but not the second.
Now it doesn't seem legal anywhere, even in open play.

[tog]

Red Star then I would cause serious problems for your statistics. When I was middle school age I was taller and Fatter that almost everybody. The mass rule was often applied to my detriment. So now as still tall, but no longer fat, adullt official I am just a likley to "no call" or call the smaller player for not playing with proper care against the bigger player.


Likewise. I see a lot of smaller players recklessly going into challenges, expecting to get the call. I had a smaller player come in too hard on a bigger player recently on a 50-50 ball (it was really about 55-45 for the bigger player), bounce off, crack a rib (I later found out), and to add insult to injury, I yellow carded the injured player for playing recklessly.

It wasn't a particularly popular call, but I'm certain it was correct.

[tog]

Shoulder charges went out with baggy shorts. They don't seem to be allowed any more, and many a goal used to be scored by bundling the goalkeeper over the line by the adminstration of such. Hence the definement of "goal area" and "penalty area". It was legal in the first, but not the second.
Now it doesn't seem legal anywhere, even in open play.

"Shoulder charges" are entirely different from "shoulder challenges." If you drop your shoulder or come in with to much force (such that the challenge is with the full body, really, the shoulder just happens to be the point of contact, essentially playing "through" the opponent), that is a foul. Also, may times a challenge starts as a shoulder-to-shoulder challenge, but one player decides to extend their arm to create space and push the opponent off: foul.

Otherwise, I'll let them go shoulder-to-shoulder all day.

[david58]

Likewise. I see a lot of smaller players recklessly going into challenges, expecting to get the call. I had a smaller player come in too hard on a bigger player recently on a 50-50 ball (it was really about 55-45 for the bigger player), bounce off, crack a rib (I later found out), and to add insult to injury, I yellow carded the injured player for playing recklessly.

It wasn't a particularly popular call, but I'm certain it was correct.

I both coach and referee - hs coach in the fall, referee the rest of the year. I have seen waay too many fouls called due to fair charges when the little guy goes down, usually the attacker. Just such a call, won by a small, fast, good-acting forward, altered the outcome of a state playoff match last week.

In watching the play, and then being aghast that the forward, who embellished the fall a bit, was not fouled, I realized the source of the error by the referee. He had allowed himself to get flat to the play - he was in line with the two players, looking thru the left shoulder of the defender. The contact came on the defender's right shoulder. All the official saw was the attacker going down. My angle was directly behind the two players - I could see the contact, how it was initiated and how much acting was done (not a huge act, but just enough to win the call). Moral to the story - DEVIATE FROM THE STINKIN' DIAGONAL IF THAT'S WHAT IT TAKES TO SEE THE PLAY. I try to do this myself, but will concentrate on it even more in the coming winter league season.

From what I see as both coach and when I am an AR, the large majority of fouls that are called when there is upperbody, charging-type contact, should be no-calls.

Maybe some of the training we get in making the calls is from the parents. As the kids get more skilled, and challenge more vigorously, the parents begin to holler "PUSHING" even more than they do "HANDBALL." Sometimes inexperienced youth-league refs hear that feedback, and consciously or unconsciously adjust to reduce the protest. Though, admittedly, this is sometimes not a simple one to call.