|
Post by CalgaryPotter on Jun 17, 2016 3:41:43 GMT
Back in the day, if a player ran across you and blocked you getting to the ball without making an effort to play it, it used to be an obstruction.
Saw Joe Allen do it on Walker and forced a free kick for Wales.
When did the rules change?
|
|
|
Post by kustokie on Jun 17, 2016 3:56:01 GMT
The law didn't change, they just don't enforce it like they used to. Playing the ball while on the ground is dangerous play but rarely enforced.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Jun 17, 2016 5:16:21 GMT
Back in the day, if a player ran across you and blocked you getting to the ball without making an effort to play it, it used to be an obstruction. Saw Joe Allen do it on Walker and forced a free kick for Wales. When did the rules change? Said the same thing to my lad at the same incident, if you run across somebody and not following the line of the ball its a foul for obstruction, should have been a foul to us not Wales.
|
|
|
Post by MuddyWoody on Jun 17, 2016 5:43:09 GMT
Yep, exactly what is said to my mate watching the game. It's almost like refs don't know the rules.
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Jun 17, 2016 5:47:57 GMT
That's how I learned to tackle. Get between the other player and the ball, then block them from it. If they run through the back of you it's a foul on them.
|
|
|
Post by CalgaryPotter on Jun 17, 2016 5:48:07 GMT
Just glad I'm not losing the plot
|
|
|
Post by CalgaryPotter on Jun 17, 2016 5:50:08 GMT
That's how I learned to tackle. Get between the other player and the ball, then block them from it. If they run through the back of you it's a foul on them. Different than me, get in front of them and play the ball. Out of interest, how old are you?
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Jun 17, 2016 5:53:51 GMT
That's how I learned to tackle. Get between the other player and the ball, then block them from it. If they run through the back of you it's a foul on them. Different than me, get in front of them and play the ball. Out of interest, how old are you? Learned it from my college coach, 99-03. I'm in my thirties.
|
|
|
Post by CalgaryPotter on Jun 17, 2016 5:58:48 GMT
Different than me, get in front of them and play the ball. Out of interest, how old are you? Learned it from my college coach, 99-03. I'm in my thirties. I'm 45 and from 82 to 89 that was obstruction and a manager never told me to wait for a challenge from behind.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jun 17, 2016 7:50:38 GMT
That's how I learned to tackle. Get between the other player and the ball, then block them from it. If they run through the back of you it's a foul on them. So your coach taught you how to take a tackle from behind? Sounds like he should be locked up to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by PerCyfilth ....Captains Log on Jun 17, 2016 8:08:56 GMT
We see people taking people out and holding people off when the ball is not within"playing distance" all the time. It needs stopping. In the old days if they did that you were quite within your rights to charge them in the back.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2016 8:12:48 GMT
Yeah, I see it as obstruction. He was looking at the ball, but actually made no attempt to play the ball whatsoever.
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Jun 17, 2016 8:14:47 GMT
I don't want to be pedantic but there's no such thing as obstruction anymore. I'm sure I remember my lad telling me this years ago when he did his junior refs course. I think it's now called impeding the progress of another player and it relies on other rules ie holding or charging for it to become an offence. It appears it's been re-designed for those clever players, like Allen, to get in front and 'obstruct' an opponent and draw the foul.
|
|
|
Post by Stoke711 on Jun 17, 2016 8:16:41 GMT
Usually depends where on the field it happens. If its in midfield or in the attacking half its obstruction. If its the defender trying to let it go out its great defending.
The other day it should've been a penalty. The defender blatently took.the striker out so it would run for a goal kick. Anywhere else on the pitch its a foul.
|
|
|
Post by imho on Jun 17, 2016 8:23:01 GMT
I think the change occurred when the tackle from behind was stopped. With the thinking being the player getting in between the attacker (for instance) and the ball can't see behind himself, therefore not obstruction but is fouled when the said attacker goes into the back of him (since the tackle from behind was banned) .
Personally I would get rid of obstruction as the only time it's really given is when an attacker goes on a run and collides with the defender, without the defender moving - why should the defender 'get out of the way'
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2016 8:51:52 GMT
Calgary. I agree completely. It seems to me that referees and linesmen play to their own rules these days. Going up for a header is another one. Time after time you see fouls and nothing is given. It is so frustrating to watch IMHO.
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Jun 17, 2016 14:34:29 GMT
That's how I learned to tackle. Get between the other player and the ball, then block them from it. If they run through the back of you it's a foul on them. So your coach taught you how to take a tackle from behind? Sounds like he should be locked up to be honest. he taught me how to get between a player and the ball and then initiate contact. He was a good coach, but he expected us to play physically.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Jun 17, 2016 14:50:45 GMT
Learned it from my college coach, 99-03. I'm in my thirties. I'm 45 and from 82 to 89 that was obstruction and a manager never told me to wait for a challenge from behind. depends though really.... if he gets between the player and the ball but is in line with the path of the ball then that's fine. if he gets between the player and the ball and isn't in line with the ball's direction (and the attacker IS following the line of the ball) then you are just obstructing them. what shart has described sounds more like shepherding the ball really rather than obstructing it. it's the direction the ball is going in and the direction you're going in which makes the difference really
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Jun 17, 2016 14:51:39 GMT
So your coach taught you how to take a tackle from behind? Sounds like he should be locked up to be honest. he taught me how to get between a player and the ball and then initiate contact. He was a good coach, but he expected us to play physically. ? learning how to initiate contact so you can get a free kick is pretty much the exact opposite of playing physically
|
|
|
Post by ElworthPotter on Jun 17, 2016 14:57:34 GMT
In my opinion the player with the ball should never be looking to initiate contact. I'm also of the opinion that he should stay on his feet unless the contact is enough to go down. I know when I play I only ever hit the deck when I'm tripped or pushed etc with enough force to make me fall over. Call me old fashioned but there we go
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Jun 17, 2016 15:08:37 GMT
Learned it from my college coach, 99-03. I'm in my thirties. I'm 45 and from 82 to 89 that was obstruction and a manager never told me to wait for a challenge from behind. I still play in a competitive league and use the same tactic to win the ball. I would never just stand there and wait for the other player to run into me, timing is everything. And With what you've written it seems that I would just turn my back and stop. What I do is get close then time it so I can get between the player and the ball, sometime I can go shoulder to shoulder, sometimes I can position myself between them and the ball. If I can shield them from the ball I want to take control of it, and look for a pass while preventing the player from having a clear path toward regaining possession. But there are so players that get frustrated and they will try to run through the opposing player when dispossessed. And when I do get fouled I have heard them plea for obstruction. When I went to college I had only played as a midfielder and a forward and the coach wanted me to become a fullback. So we worked on a variety of ways to win the ball in one on one situations. I can assure you he knew what he was talking about as fullback was his position when he played professionally in South America. Basically he showed me how I can get between them and the ball then take possession or delay them enough for another defender to clean up the leftovers. Sure, this frustrates some players and they might try to charge through me but has long as I don't use my arms or hold them, I've never been called for obstruction.
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Jun 17, 2016 15:18:29 GMT
he taught me how to get between a player and the ball and then initiate contact. He was a good coach, but he expected us to play physically. ? learning how to initiate contact so you can get a free kick is pretty much the exact opposite of playing physically a defender should never ever count on getting call in his favor, I would never hit the deck unless I was tripped, pulled, or shoved.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Jun 17, 2016 15:26:14 GMT
? learning how to initiate contact so you can get a free kick is pretty much the exact opposite of playing physically a defender should never ever count on getting call in his favor, I would never hit the deck unless I was tripped, pulled, or shoved. so why try to initiate contact? if you're shielding the ball then you should 100% expect a player to be niggling at you, kicking your heels etc. to try to win the ball back. that's part and parcel of the game (especially if you're playing physically) and would happen pretty much all of the time anyway. may be just phraseology mate but whenever i've heard people use the term "try to initiate contact" it's been to describe a player intentionally trying to win a free kick and that's what i'm referring to when i say it's the exact opposite of physical football. Physical football for me (and i'd imagine anyone else over the age of 35 or so) is you play football, if the ref gives a foul then fine, if not you just carry on. you don't intentionally try to "initiate contact" with anyone. when i was younger you'd be labelled a cheat and even the ref would see it as gamesmanship
|
|
|
Post by thedeadlyshart on Jun 17, 2016 15:40:09 GMT
a defender should never ever count on getting call in his favor, I would never hit the deck unless I was tripped, pulled, or shoved. so why try to initiate contact? if you're shielding the ball then you should 100% expect a player to be niggling at you, kicking your heels etc. to try to win the ball back. that's part and parcel of the game (especially if you're playing physically) and would happen pretty much all of the time anyway. may be just phraseology mate but whenever i've heard people use the term "try to initiate contact" it's been to describe a player intentionally trying to win a free kick and that's what i'm referring to when i say it's the exact opposite of physical football. Physical football for me (and i'd imagine anyone else over the age of 35 or so) is you play football, if the ref gives a foul then fine, if not you just carry on. you don't intentionally try to "initiate contact" with anyone. when i was younger you'd be labelled a cheat and even the ref would see it as gamesmanship must be the phraseology then, when I say initiate contact I mean get physical, give them a shoulder, a nudge off the ball, use my body to knock them off a bit. But if the other player fouls me and the ref calls it, I'm happy too because I won the ball. What your describing I would call simulation, which is where a player uses little or no contact to try to convince the ref of a foul. Which a lot of players do, I just wouldn't suggest defensive players do that because if there's no whistle you essentially given the other team a huge advantage.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Jun 17, 2016 15:52:26 GMT
"Obstruction" is perfectly legal as long as the ball is within playing distance
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on Jun 17, 2016 15:52:56 GMT
so why try to initiate contact? if you're shielding the ball then you should 100% expect a player to be niggling at you, kicking your heels etc. to try to win the ball back. that's part and parcel of the game (especially if you're playing physically) and would happen pretty much all of the time anyway. may be just phraseology mate but whenever i've heard people use the term "try to initiate contact" it's been to describe a player intentionally trying to win a free kick and that's what i'm referring to when i say it's the exact opposite of physical football. Physical football for me (and i'd imagine anyone else over the age of 35 or so) is you play football, if the ref gives a foul then fine, if not you just carry on. you don't intentionally try to "initiate contact" with anyone. when i was younger you'd be labelled a cheat and even the ref would see it as gamesmanship must be the phraseology then, when I say initiate contact I mean get physical, give them a shoulder, a nudge off the ball, use my body to knock them off a bit. But if the other player fouls me and the ref calls it, I'm happy too because I won the ball. What your describing I would call simulation, which is where a player uses little or no contact to try to convince the ref of a foul. Which a lot of players do, I just wouldn't suggest defensive players do that because if there's no whistle you essentially given the other team a huge advantage. yeah just a different understanding of the terms then mate...as you were Mr. Shart
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Jun 17, 2016 16:08:42 GMT
Ibrahimovic had one given against him in the box earlier against Italy, I actually thought it was him who had been fouled because the Italian seemed to kick his leg then go down. However the ref went the other way.
No one really complained about it, I don't think the players know the score half the time.
|
|
|
Post by StoKeith on Jun 18, 2016 7:44:23 GMT
If I was in Joe Allen's position, I would have shoulder barged Walker and he'd have ended up off the side of the pitch. Most refs when I was a kid seemed to let that go, but modern officiating would almost certainly have given a free kick. Have shoulder barging rules changed?
|
|
|
Post by billybigtime on Jun 18, 2016 8:17:08 GMT
I seem to remember that obstruction is fine as long as the ball is within playing distance. Sadly the majority of incidents take place outside of this zone and refs turn a blind eye.
|
|