Define: Professional Foul

[USSF REF]

I refer you to this thread: Whose line is it anyway, and did it cross? (http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=386361&page=2)

Does everyone else think the term "professional foul" is just another way to describe a "tactical foul"? Or do some of you have the thought that I had, that it is something different, be sure to look at the WIKI link I posted for additional info.

I'm just curious to see other's definitions on this, but I didn't feel like having that discussion was entierly appropriate on a thread about a ball in/out of play decision in a team chat.

[Ref Flunkie]

In short, yes. When I think of professional fouls, I think of fouls that are deliberately done to stop a play/attack. This can be a hand ball to stop a long pass forward, a trip of an attacker who beat a defender and has open field in front of him. I use professional foul and tactical foul interchangeably. Whether this is right or wrong, I have no idea.

[MassachusettsRef]

1. "Professional" v. "Tactical" are nearly synonymous. The only two possible distinctions you could make are that:

A) DOGSO fouls are oftentimes referred to as "professional fouls," as well and
B) Just from connotation, most people would argue that a "professional" foul is deliberate; that's not necessarily the case with a tactical foul. Many would argue that a tactical foul can be a careless foul that occurs at the wrong (or right) moment, whereas a professional foul is a deliberate attempt to stop an attack by fouling (not an attempt at the ball that turns into a foul).

But for the purposes of reading them in, say, MLSnet reports, they mean absolutely the same thing.

2. UEFA, in a document from a few years ago, did a very good job of laying out what 'tactical' means. Think about it--in the US, we have the "4 D's" for DOGSO, but we have never, to my knowledge, have had the definition of a 'tactical foul' spelled out in detail. So, here's the UEFA document. It's on page 5, point #11. The first part includes UEFA's 6 bullets for DOGSO (more detail than our 4 D's, but with some more latitude for the refs). The second part includes 6 bullets in determining if a yellow card is warranted for a foul to "stop a promising attack" (ie, tactical or professional):

http://www.uefa.com/newsfiles/171412.pdf

[usatowin]

It used to only refer to DOGSO offenses, but in recent years it's come to include tactical fouls as well.

[bluedevils]

I think different people have wildly varying ideas of what a professional foul is. Not only within the refereeing ranks, but among coaches, among players, among fans, among commentators as well.

Some folks seem to think it is about the OGSO aspects, some about the tactical aspects, some about the brutality.

My college coach always screamed at the refs (who were usually pretty horrible) "that's a professional foul" when he saw an aggressive over-the-ball tackle or other crap challenge.

[USSF REF]

It used to only refer to DOGSO offenses, but in recent years it's come to include tactical fouls as well.

That must be where my confusion comes from. I used to think it was only for certain types of fouls that resulted in red cards.

Clearly, that is no longer the case.

[Shackleton]

I generally think of it as synonomous with tactical foul. Although by looking at the Wikipedia link, it appears to have originally been synonomous with DOGSO fouls. But, I've also heard it used like your understanding--fouls intended to cause injury.

[DerbyRam54]

The section of the UEFA document dealing with advantage is interesting in light of the uproar surrounding the Lehmann incident in the Champions League final.

[refmike]

I have always been of the opinion that a tactical (or professional) foul is one in which the fouler is knowingly willing to take a card in order to stop his opponent. Now I hear that it is a category of things professional players are expected to do, as if that forgives the foul. That is a bunch of garbage, as far as I am concerned. A foul is a foul is a foul and we should not weight them by the reason they are made. If they want a card, I am willing to comply. Also I do not ref professional games so the term would not apply, right?

[MassachusettsRef]

Now I hear that it is a category of things professional players are expected to do, as if that forgives the foul. Who's saying it forgives the foul? The term is used to define a yellow card offence. Pretty much the exact opposite.

[MidwestRef]

When I think of a "professional" foul, I think of a foul that a professional would make when he knows EXACTLY what he's doing. In other words, I have a pretty broad definition of a professional foul. I generally use it as a term for a tactical foul, because a professional would know exactly how to make that foul happen. However, a professional would also know how to execute a brutal tackle to cause injury.

More often than not, I will use the term "tactical" foul in a game when explaining a foul to a player asking about it. Players seem to understand "tactical" more than professional.

[bluedevils]

Not having read the link(s) posted by others in this thread, I'll ask the question anyway:

What is the point of the term 'professional foul'? What good does it buy referees to use this term or spend time thinking about what it means and developing a definition? Especially in light of the differing opinions about what it means and also the broad scope of what many folks think it means, I just don't see the value in it.

[Wreave]

Having not followed the links, I think of them as different.

A tactical foul is one designed to stop an attack. This foul can be executed by generally any level of player. It's the kind of foul which is not deserving of a card on its own merits (e.g. too rough), but when taking the situation as a whole. As noted by another poster above, a tactical foul is one for which the fouler is willing to accept the likelihood of getting a yellow in exchange for stopping an attack. A U12 rec player could commit a tactical foul, pulling down an opponent who had gotten by him in a non-DOGSO situation, or a professional player could commit a tactical foul, putting a hip and leg into the path of a player who was opening up a potential breakaway. Both earn yellow cards.

A professional foul is one committed by a higher-level player, either with the intent to injure, with the intent to get away with something deliberate by making it look accidental, or both. Putting the studs into someone's ankle while making an otherwise clean tackle with the other foot, for example.

Some fouls are both tactical and professional, some are not. Not to start up a whole new discussion on this, but Rooney's foot stomp would have been a example of a professional foul, but not a tactical foul.

Those who think "professional foul" is used to refer to the level of play at the pro level that gets by without a whistle, which would be called at lesser/younger levels of play (the constant holding that is nearly ubiquitous would be a good example) are certainly in the minority, as what they are saying is the action is NOT a foul. Makes no sense, and a coach screaming for a foul to be let go when it was called by saying it was a "professional foul" makes himself to sound like an idiot IMHO.