Arsenal v. Fulham

[Rufusabc]

I watched a lot of the games this weekend, and one play sticks out in my mind. I don't know if it is up on YouTube (they have had some talks with the EPL...sorry BPL....about using video onthe site).

Around the 81-82 min of the Fulham-Arsenal match, an Arsenal forward stride through with the ball near the top of the area, he cuts left and Bocanegra unfortunately can't get out of his way. He impedes with impact, and both players tumble. It is a clear foul, and direct because of the contact.

My quetion is: Bocanegra appears to have one foot outside the area, and one foot in, and the contact is with the side of the body that is outside the area. He pleads his case for a free kick OUTSIDE the penalty area, but the referee gives the penalty.

Knowing what you know from my description, (one foot in and one foot out, and the contact is just outside) is the call correct?

R

[Ref Flunkie]

I watched a lot of the games this weekend, and one play sticks out in my mind. I don't know if it is up on YouTube (they have had some talks with the EPL...sorry BPL....about using video onthe site).

Around the 81-82 min of the Fulham-Arsenal match, an Arsenal forward stride through with the ball near the top of the area, he cuts left and Bocanegra unfortunately can't get out of his way. He impedes with impact, and both players tumble. It is a clear foul, and direct because of the contact.

My quetion is: Bocanegra appears to have one foot outside the area, and one foot in, and the contact is with the side of the body that is outside the area. He pleads his case for a free kick OUTSIDE the penalty area, but the referee gives the penalty.

Knowing what you know from my description, (one foot in and one foot out, and the contact is just outside) is the call correct?

R


I saw the play live and I thought he was clearly in the PA. However, if we assume the play was as you described, then I would think if the contact occurred outside the PA, then it is not a PK. Recall though that the line is part of the PA.

[SoccerScottWV]

From what I understand(and I just passed my exam yesterday so please correct me if I'm wrong) the position of the player that was fouled determines where the restart is.

Scott

[falcon.7]

From what I understand(and I just passed my exam yesterday so please correct me if I'm wrong) the position of the player that was fouled determines where the restart is.

Not exactly. As Ref Flunkie stated, if the contact occured outside the area then it cannot be a penalty kick. If the referee in the Arsenal-Fulham game thought the contact occured inside the penalty area, then the restart (PK) was correct. Remember also, if a foul starts outside the penalty area (like a shirt pull) and continues inside, the restart is a penalty kick.

[Ref Flunkie]

Not exactly. As Ref Flunkie stated, if the contact occured outside the area then it cannot be a penalty kick. If the referee in the Arsenal-Fulham game thought the contact occured inside the penalty area, then the restart (PK) was correct. Remember also, if a foul starts outside the penalty area (like a shirt pull) and continues inside, the restart is a penalty kick.

Yup, and on this play there was no continuation....it was a simple shoulder into the chest of the attacker.

[GlennAA11]

In this case I think Boca sort of stuck his leg out which may have been his undoing.

This is the sort of play though that I have always had a problem with. The attacker plays the ball past, puts his head down, and bangs into the defender who frankly has nothing he can do. The forward gets this call 99% of the time. What is the defender supposed to do when his opponent smashes into him? Does he have a right to stand in his space on the field? Or must he move? I am inclined to think he has a right to stay where he is and the opponent is free go around him. If the defender moves to block him for sure he is guilty of impeding. But how many times do you see the forward initiate the contact and get the call?

[bluedevils]

My quetion is: Bocanegra appears to have one foot outside the area, and one foot in, and the contact is with the side of the body that is outside the area. He pleads his case for a free kick OUTSIDE the penalty area, but the referee gives the penalty.

Knowing what you know from my description, (one foot in and one foot out, and the contact is just outside) is the call correct?

R

I didn't see the play or the match. If it happened as you describe, sounds like a DFK outside the PA.

In this case I think Boca sort of stuck his leg out which may have been his undoing.

This is the sort of play though that I have always had a problem with. The attacker plays the ball past, puts his head down, and bangs into the defender who frankly has nothing he can do. The forward gets this call 99% of the time. What is the defender supposed to do when his opponent smashes into him? Does he have a right to stand in his space on the field? Or must he move? I am inclined to think he has a right to stay where he is and the opponent is free go around him. If the defender moves to block him for sure he is guilty of impeding. But how many times do you see the forward initiate the contact and get the call?
I am a referee, seemingly very rare, who takes pride in NOT calling fouls when I see the attacker run through contact that I feel he could/should avoid and when I think he is 'looking' for the contact and trying to 'draw' the foul. I feel that this is a very advanced foul recognition skill, but the players -- and assessors -- don't always see it that way :)

Again, I did NOT see this play but generally speaking the defender DOES have the right to remain in his space. If the attacker initiates the contact, he is not getting the call in MY game.

I frequently do NOT call impeding or pushing/charging/holding (whatever you feel it is when it would be a DFK) in situations when players are expecting such a call, and I find myself telling the players, 'he doesn't need to get out of your way.' In my opinion, the defender is NOT required to move out of the way if he is in a position for reasonable means and not trying to move and impede the attacker.

The 1st division men's amateur team I played on for a few years had a forward who was by far more aggressive in 'shielding' the ball than any other player I've ever seen. This guy would move away from the ball and into the defender, charging very vigorously with a LOT of contact. He always got away with it, and I never understood why. The defender would not have gotten away with the same amount of contact, so why should the attacker?

[Ref Flunkie]

I frequently do NOT call impeding or pushing/charging/holding (whatever you feel it is when it would be a DFK) in situations when players are expecting such a call, and I find myself telling the players, 'he doesn't need to get out of your way.' In my opinion, the defender is NOT required to move out of the way if he is in a position for reasonable means and not trying to move and impede the attacker.


My only comment (and thought process) on this is, yes, the defender has a right to his space. However, I do not think he has a right to occupy the space for no reason (if that makes any sense). Let's say an attacker plays the ball by a defender. Typically, a defender will try to go after the ball (or at the very least, start to turn around to go get it), yes? Basic soccer says this. Now, lets say the defender, knowing that the attacker was directly in front of him (however far that is), thinks "Well, no way I'm going to get the ball, so I'll make it harder for the attacker to get and just not move from my spot.". Is this not impeding at the very least? This is even more obvious of a foul if he makes his body bigger by extending arms/legs a bit. Clearly, you need to determine if the attacker is simply trying to get the call or is actually trying to get the ball. I feel that in this case (Arsenal v. Fulham), the attacker was going to the goal and was trying to get to the ball, while the defender stood there, extended his shoulder out (and possibly his leg), and never made a turn to play the ball.

[bluedevils]

If the defender changes the position of his body by sticking out a shoulder or arm or leg or butt cheek or whatever...that is not the same as just standing still. Truly standing still and electing NOT to get out of the attacker's way is a legitimate 'play' for a defender to make and not illegal, in my opinion. It may be the case that most of the time, the defender instinctively moves or sticks out a body part to impede the attacker -- in which case he should be penalized.

[chrisrun]

It looks like contact was inside the penalty area to me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1u0zr-uZoM

PS: Don't know how long this video will be up, as they seem to be more diligent about pulling highlight clips now.

[JohnR]

Reading these descriptions make the call of an infraction seem questionable. However, if you watch Chris's clip you can see that Boca was moving to his left, the defender cut to Boca's right, and then Boca stopped, leaned to the right, stuck out his leg, and caught the attacker with both leg & shoulder.

So while I would empathsize with Boca if he were truly standing still and Boa Morte crashed into him, the reality is he (along with 2 previous Fulham defenders) got smoked by skillful Boa Morte, and Boca did what fairly awkward defender who get smoked tend to do, that is take the guy down.

Looked pretty clearly that the contact was either on the line or just inside the line, thus a PK was the correct call, but I suppose that could be more fairly argued.

[bluedevils]

Having seen the clip, sure looks like a PK to me.

[Rufusabc]

Now having seen the clip again...it is a penalty...I think Bocanegra argues about his positioning unaware of where he actually was.

he has one foot barely on the line of the area, and the rest of his body inside..

Now, I'm not saying that the referees favor the big four or anything but if Fulham had the same play down the other way, what chances do you think the Cottagers would have gotten the penalty call?

Anyway, in further discussing the impeding call, the Liverpool winner was set up on a impeding foul. That one (if memory serves me) was a lot along the lines of the defender not having time to react to a cut back by an attacker. And the resulting goal (beauty by Gerrard) only underscores how tough it is to referee in the BPL.

Rog

[intechpc]

Having seen the clip, this is no doubt a PK. Boca's right foot, which is well out ahead of the rest of his body, is only ON the PA line with his toes maybe slightly past. The contact begins at his knee (definitely at the line or inside it) and continues to the chest (well inside the PA). Referee got this one spot on in my book, not even close after watching the replay.

[Craig P]

In this case I think Boca sort of stuck his leg out which may have been his undoing.

This is the sort of play though that I have always had a problem with. The attacker plays the ball past, puts his head down, and bangs into the defender who frankly has nothing he can do. The forward gets this call 99% of the time. What is the defender supposed to do when his opponent smashes into him? Does he have a right to stand in his space on the field? Or must he move? I am inclined to think he has a right to stay where he is and the opponent is free go around him. If the defender moves to block him for sure he is guilty of impeding. But how many times do you see the forward initiate the contact and get the call?
I'd want to see a different angle of the play. The only replays I've seen are from the side, which makes it almost impossible to see if Bocanegra moved in front of the runner or not.

If he didn't move in front, IMLO it should be a foul on the attacker. Bocanegra has a right to the space he's occupying. (And if that's not the case, it should be the case.)

I will say that the majority of cases that I see, even if it looks initially like the defender was standing still, when you replay it you find that he moved into the path of the attacker.