Hip Check

[JohnR]

Question -

Can you think of any situations in which a hip check -- which I will define as leaning the hip into the opponent's hip, then shifting the weight to throw him off balance -- is an acceptable play? By acceptable I don't mean that you might not blow the whistle because of course you don't blow the whistle at everything, but say in the circumstance where the hip check knocks the attacking player to ground, thereby denying him the ball (and at least in the case I am thinking of, a scoring opportunity).

Thanks.

[Ref Flunkie]

Not really. Is this a trick question? :)

[macheath]

Question -

Can you think of any situations in which a hip check -- which I will define as leaning the hip into the opponent's hip, then shifting the weight to throw him off balance -- is an acceptable play? By acceptable I don't mean that you might not blow the whistle because of course you don't blow the whistle at everything, but say in the circumstance where the hip check knocks the attacking player to ground, thereby denying him the ball (and at least in the case I am thinking of, a scoring opportunity).

Thanks.

No. Especially if the other player is truly knocked to the ground. (Unless its two teams of adult English expatriates playing each other, and then anything goes--just kidding!)

[IASocFan]

Question -

Can you think of any situations in which a hip check -- which I will define as leaning the hip into the opponent's hip, then shifting the weight to throw him off balance -- is an acceptable play? By acceptable I don't mean that you might not blow the whistle because of course you don't blow the whistle at everything, but say in the circumstance where the hip check knocks the attacking player to ground, thereby denying him the ball (and at least in the case I am thinking of, a scoring opportunity).

Thanks.

A hip check is somewhat like a shoulder charge. If with used limited force while protecting the ball, it should be OK. If used with sufficient force to knock the opponent over, it would be pushing or reckless charging. Like the shoulder, the referee needs to determine if it's fair. I have called and seen numerous hipchecks called, and let some minor or trifling ones go.

[JohnR]

Not really. Is this a trick question? :)

Nah. It's just that I think I know something, and then I see a youth game called totally differently which leads me to ask the question.

IaSocFan compares a hip check to a shoulder charge ... yet under some circumstances the defender may legitimately shoulder charge an attacker off the ball, causing him to fall to ground. Should I interpret this comparison to mean that the same rules apply to a hip check?

[billf]

Nah. It's just that I think I know something, and then I see a youth game called totally differently which leads me to ask the question.


You're talking about a youth game. You're lucky in many cases to get a referee. If you get one who can consistently implement the laws properly, you hit the mega-millions lotto. To answer the original question, of course its not legal. Does that mean you'll get referees who both recognize that and who make the call? Of course not. Being a referee requires a lot of self motivation to get better. There aren't coaches and practices to get you on the right page. If you lack self motivation and/or experience, you're going to let obvious stuff go. Its a lot harder to become a competent referee than it might seem. This is an avocation where the average career probably lasts less than three seasons. I think it takes at least three years to figure out what you're doing. This suggests that you're far more likely to get a bad referee than you are a good one.

[JohnR]

To answer the original question, of course its not legal.

"Of course" to you but not to me. :o

Thanks.

[BC_Ref]

"Of course" to you but not to me. :o

Thanks.

I'll try to explain the "of course" a bit for shoulder charges. If you read Law 12, nothing is mentioned about shoulder tackles, etc... at all - so technically every single overlystrong shoulder tackle should be called a foul under Law 12.

Traditionally, a shoulder charge/tackle (full arm to arm) is part of the game, therefore allowed as long as you are playing the ball and not the man. Even if you knock the guy over end over end (having said this, the type of soccer matters - your English style shoulder charge might get called in other leagues where less physicality is accepted). Hip checks aren't traditional, so are evaluated under the "careless, reckless, excessive force" criteria without the restraint shown for shoulder to shoulder contact.

For women's games, this is a problem area since they can hip check much more easily than guys on average and I'll see it much more often than in guys games. And some of these women players can make mighty fine hip checks that are difficult to spot - a subtle but forceful "bump" at the right time does wonders.

[JohnR]

Traditionally, a shoulder charge/tackle (full arm to arm) is part of the game, therefore allowed as long as you are playing the ball and not the man.

Thanks for the explanation. One more question, if you please. Can you succinctly define "playing the ball and not the man" for the shoulder charge? I must confess, while I think that I can tell the difference between a fair & foul challenge when I see it, I could not define it if asked.

[HeadHunter]

Thanks for the explanation. One more question, if you please. Can you succinctly define "playing the ball and not the man" for the shoulder charge? I must confess, while I think that I can tell the difference between a fair & foul challenge when I see it, I could not define it if asked.


Not sure I can define it so as to cover all situations and to be honest this sort of call is mostly a gut "huh that looked like a foul"- at least for me. However to try and verbalize it ball not man means where are the eyes and more importantly where are the hips pointing. That is if the hips are set so that the player's run is taking him on a clear line to the ball then he is going for the ball.

In caveat this only applies in a clear shoulder charge situation- that is where the two players are even distances (roughly from the ball) so the contact is side to side.

At the youth level this non-call is very hard to sell as the resulting collisions can be quite violent. I had a two decisions close together in time. I called a PK for a clear foul that did not knock the player down. (jersey pulled as she tried to spin on a player) and within a minute of the restart a 50-50 collision that sent the one player flying. I've known the coach for a long time and usually had a good working relationship with him, but I'm pretty certain I just destroyed it. :)

[macheath]

Thanks for the explanation. One more question, if you please. Can you succinctly define "playing the ball and not the man" for the shoulder charge? I must confess, while I think that I can tell the difference between a fair & foul challenge when I see it, I could not define it if asked.

It gets tougher with each additional year of the players, but some elements are:

--arms down;
--ball within playing distance of both;
--not coming through the back, but from the side;
--taking a line towards the ball, and not abruptly swerving into the path of the other player;
--legs going towards the ball, not chopping across the opponent's ankles.

I agree with the earlier post that simply seeing one player fall isn't necessarily a bad charge. This is especially important to remember when a larger player and a smaller one are contesting. If the larger player stays within the rules, his/her strength may knock the other player down as a side effect of a legal charge, and that's ok--you can't penalize merely on a different of strength, just as you can't restrict a faster player from outrunning a slower one. The non-calls on larger players who are playing fairly are a big source of complaint.

[Ref Flunkie]

In caveat this only applies in a clear shoulder charge situation- that is where the two players are even distances (roughly from the ball) so the contact is side to side.



What, in your opinion, applies to one player dribbling the ball and the defender coming over to shoulder him off the ball. Are your criteria for fair/foul the same?

[HeadHunter]

What, in your opinion, applies to one player dribbling the ball and the defender coming over to shoulder him off the ball. Are your criteria for fair/foul the same?


Same general idea I think though as always this stuff is hard to verbalize. To me its dependent on how tight the ball is on the attackers foot. The closer it is, the harder it is to shoulder charge without committing a foul. If the defender just shoulders purely to push the defender away I'm far more likely to call it. However, if they are both trying to occupy the same space in order to get to the ball and the defender is just stronger then no problems.

Hope this clarifies my position.

[Ref Flunkie]

Same general idea I think though as always this stuff is hard to verbalize. To me its dependent on how tight the ball is on the attackers foot. The closer it is, the harder it is to shoulder charge without committing a foul. If the defender just shoulders purely to push the defender away I'm far more likely to call it. However, if they are both trying to occupy the same space in order to get to the ball and the defender is just stronger then no problems.

Hope this clarifies my position.

Yup....I must say for me, evaluating shoulder charges is the hardest thing to do. I guess it depends what the players are used to. Lately, as I do new divisions/teams, I tend to listen a lot to the players to see what they complain about and what they tolerate. Not sure if that is right or wrong, but it seems to be the approach I'm taking.

[PirateJohn]

The way I was taught to judge this in my first officiating class was this -- are they playing the ball or the player? If they hip check or shoulder charge someone because they are trying to get in a better position to play the ball -- no foul. If they hip check or shoulder charge to prevent the opponent from getting in a good position to play the ball -- foul.

Granted, it's easier said than actually applied, but I've found it overall a good guideline for assessing a situation.

[refontherun]

I think, if a player goes off his line and comes back in for the charge, it's illegal. I've seen that in upper levels where the defender will veer away from the attacker and change direction and slam into him/her. That's not a charge, that's a foul.

Let's save the hip checks for hockey. I will call it every time, unless there's advantage. I have called advantage back for a yellow in that situation.

[JohnR]

If they hip check or shoulder charge someone because they are trying to get in a better position to play the ball -- no foul. If they hip check or shoulder charge to prevent the opponent from getting in a good position to play the ball -- foul.

Hmmmm.

Let's take the following situation. Two players shoulder to shoulder. One has the ball on his right foot, is in the opponent's box, and lines up a shot. The other is on the left shoulder, is shielding from reaching the ball. As the other player shoots, the defender leans into the shooter's left shoulder and exerts moderate pressure. Normally, not enough pressure to amount to knock the player over. However, as the shooter is standing on only one foot during the act of shooting, he is off balance & cannot sustain the pressure. He tumbles to ground under the challenge, with the defender falling on top of him.

The call?

[Wreave]

I'll vote for no call, legal charge applied with reasonable force. Certainly not careless or reckless.

[IASocFan]

Hmmmm.

Let's take the following situation. Two players shoulder to shoulder. One has the ball on his right foot, is in the opponent's box, and lines up a shot. The other is on the left shoulder, is shielding from reaching the ball. As the other player shoots, the defender leans into the shooter's left shoulder and exerts moderate pressure. Normally, not enough pressure to amount to knock the player over. However, as the shooter is standing on only one foot during the act of shooting, he is off balance & cannot sustain the pressure. He tumbles to ground under the challenge, with the defender falling on top of him.

The call?


I had this non-call last Sunday! The attacker's coach did some yelling, but I thought she went down entirely too easily. :rolleyes:

[JohnR]

I'll vote for no call, legal charge applied with reasonable force. Certainly not careless or reckless.

OK, but that contrasts with PirateJohn's synopsis. He states that the difference between a proper shoulder charge and an improper charge can be summarized as to whether the defender is trying to get in a better position to play the ball (proper), or merely trying to prevent the attacker from getting in a good position to play the ball (improper). In this instance, with the shot in process of being launched, the defender cannot play the ball. The charge instead has the purpose of preventing the attacker from being in a good position to play the ball, by pressuring him during the act of shooting.

Is it fair to say, then, that you disagree with PirateJohn's synopsis?