Question Number: 20119

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/30/2008

RE: Other

Steve Shuler of Bryant, Arkansas USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 20074

I've been told that if the ball is in play (not dead due to ball rolling out of touch, over the end line, foul, goal, end of half, etc.), then this would be called serious foul play. It doesn't matter if the keeper is holding it, or for that matter if the offense happens on the other end of the field from the ball; as long as the ball is in play somewhere on the field, this is serious foul play. Violent conduct can only occur when the ball is dead due to some form of stoppage. Am I right, or is there another distinction that I haven't heard about?

By the way, I don't really see the need in differentiating between SFP and VC, but since FIFA does, I just want to be sure I'm reporting it correctly on the referee report.

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

Steve, I think you've confused SFP and VC. The biggest reason for the differentiation between the two has to do with extra sanctions that can be brought against a player found guilty of VC by the leagues that are not true of SFP. A player sent off for VC may receive an extra game ban and/or a fine for the violent conduct, in addition to the regular one game ban accompanying any sendoff.

VC can happen at anytime, anywhere - whether the ball is in play or not, on the field or not, between opponents, teammates or against subs, team officials or fans. It is kind of a catchall for extreme behavior that requires a player, sub or subbed player be sent off. It's counterpart in cautions is unsporting behavior.

Here is the latest on it from FIFA via the Additional Instructions and Guidelines issued by USSF: A player is guilty of violent conduct for using excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball.
A player is also guilty of violent conduct for usng excessive force or brutality against a teammate, spectator, match official or any other person.
Violent conduct may occur either on the field of play or outside its boundaries, whether the ball is in play or not.
Advantage should not be applied in situations involving violent conduct unless there is a clear subsequent opportunity to score a goal. The referee shall send off the player guilty of violent conduct when the ball is next out of play
Referees are reminded that violent conduct often leads to mass confrontation therefore they must try to avert this with active intervention.
A player, substitute or substituted player who is guilty of violent conduct shall be sent off.

Where and how the restart is performed will depend a great deal on how the incident occurred. You can find more information on this in the AIG's which are posted on the USSF website, or are in the back of the Laws of the Game posted on the FIFA website.

Serious foul play is narrowly defined, and requires the ball be in play, on the field, and that the player to be charged with the use of excessive force is challenging for the ball against an opponent. In the original question, the keeper had the ball, and when the keeper has possession, he cannot be challenged for the ball. If there is no challenge possible, then the only possible send off is for VC.

If two opponents get into a fight in the penalty area on the opposite end of the field from where play around the ball is happening, they will be sent off for VC, not SFP, because they don't meet the definition of challenging for the ball.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

You are wrong. Serious foul play occurs when the ball is in play, the action takes place on the field and the action is such that one player is challenging for the ball. Violent conduct can occur anytime. In the question, it was and is my opinion that there was no challenge for the ball, rather, just a cheap shot on the keeper, hence violent conduct.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Key here as an opinion you as referee see the event unfold in real time. A keeper reaches for the ball and at the same time a harsh stiff leg challange comes in from an opponent just as the keeper grasps the ball the referee can see although the action was excessive it was directed as a play for the ball not withstanding it was forcefull and placed the keeper at risk. Now take the keeper he reaches down grabs the ball stands up. The opponent who has time to avert the challange now goes to ground and peforms a stiff legged tackle that destroys the keeper! This is VC violent conduct as there was no legitamate play to be made on the ball. The ball was CLEARLY in the keeper's hands, the keeper had absolute control and possession and the laws DO NOT permit a keeper to be challanged when they have ball possession in their hands for that brief 6 seconds.


Imagine the keeper begins to run with the ball and an opponent slides in and trips him. . It might be careless in the opponent fell in front of him while trying to impede him thus the DFK rather than indfk. It is likely cautionable as USB as the action itself is unsporting given you are not to interfere witha release anyways.
Since the keeper was NOT legally challangable what distinction could you make on that action if it was EXCESSIVE? SFP cannot apply as the ball was not only unwinable it was unavailable.
I think the same as a player in midfield releases a pass into the centre, if the tackle arrives a fraction of a second late we can conclude that it was a careless, reckless or excessive attempt to play the ball thus a DFK , DFK caution or SFP red card.

Where the SFP becomes an issue is how late, where is the ball?

That ball must be within a reasonable playing distance at the time the tackle is began. Granted the ball flight will occur quickly on this cross but what if that tackle has NOT YET began until after the ball is on its way? The player who crossed it relaxed and then bam his clock is cleaned ! How can you say just because the ball is on the field in play that that tackle is anything but violent conduct designed to injure an opponent. The ball is not available to be played!

WE do look at mitigating circumstances if the grass is wet and slippery and if the opponent was unable to check his momentum or change direction but we can see he is trying too.
I recently had an attacker attempt to change direction, trip and flailing his arms for balance caught the keeper a glancing blow with his hand arcoss forehead/shoulder. In my opinion it was clearly not on purpose but I deemed the tackle was at minimum reckless as the choice to challange at such a forward pace, placed the opposition keeper in at risk .

Cheers