Shepherding or obstruction?

[Paul O'Brien]

The two incidents at Saturday’s game where there were cases of shepherding over the line made me think. I’m not grumbling about Matty’s foul – it could easily have been one from where I was standing – nor about the Spireites’ forcing our player away: that could have been construed as shoulder to shoulder (maybe).

No, it’s more about what you lot think about the current interpretation of the rule at all. It seems to me that in many cases there is obstruction which would be given as a foul anywhere else on the pitch: a forward knocks the ball past or runs onto a through ball and the defender steps in the way and then runs towards the ball blocking all attempts to get it.

I spoke to a Nationwide League ref some years ago when I met him at a dinner party and he said he didn’t give them as fouls because although the defender didn’t touch the ball, he could do so if he wanted to and therefore was in control of the ball. That seemed rubbish to me since that would apply to almost any case of obstruction, but I dropped it because it was a social occasion.

However, how do you see it? Should 95% of them be fouls? Or is the current situation right? I tend towards the former.

 

[The H]

they are all blatant obstructions....

perhaps their will be a new UEFA directive just in time for Euro2004

 

[Edmundo]

I think the ref you spoke to was right, but also that the rule could and perhaps should be changed. At the moment the ref has to decide whether the shielding player remains close enough to the ball, thus remaining "in control" of it. Maybe the rule should be changed so that the restart, be it throw in, corner, or goal kick, is awarded against the side whose player either touched it last, or was in control of it last? This would be the kind of innovation favouring attacking sides that FIFA has tended to like in the past. There will still be disputes over interpretation, of course.

 

[Deleted member 2202]

Let's face it, they're all obstructions. However, it is sort of an unwritten rule that he who shepherds the ball out has not committed a foul. Like you say, if it happens anywhere else on the pitch, it's a foul.

 

[simon_porter00]

as a recent graduate of ref school, let me clarify the ruling. of course if any of you have actually read the fa rule book alot of fouls that we see given arent written down but left to interpretation.

in this instance every player has his 'playing area or space' in which he can legally shield the ball. this depends on the ref, and seeing as matt is a fairly small bloke lets consider this to be 4ft or so. he can move around the ball preventing the opponent from playing the ball but any movement back into the player is a foul - what we know as obstruction, similarly if the ref deems the 'playing space' to be too big i.e. ball is 10ft away, this is also obstruction.

the opponent in his attempt to move around the player can't push/shove/kick out/do anything to forcefully otherwise this is also a foul.

what we had at gp was a technical situation known as
"six of one, half a dozen of the other" this is also not covered by text in the rulebook.

sadly the ref decided matty's 'bumming' action outwieghed any other chesterfields player's 'bumming' action so the free kik was given. hope that clarifys it for you.

and of course i am free to ref any brentford game, unbiasedly, should the need arise :suspect: :suspect: :brow:

 

[Banana]

Banana agrees with simon_porter00's definition - and it seems to me it hasn't changed for eons. If you "shield the ball" it must be withing playing distance (i.e. you can stick you foot out and touch the ball). You can dance around as much as you want but "backing in" is a no-no. Banana is surprised that the great and good don't understand the rules of the game.

Unable to comment on the specifics of Mr Somner as I wasn't there.

 

[Deleted member 2202]

Banana agrees with simon_porter00's definition...
Banana is surprised that the great and good don't understand the rules of the game.

And Banana likes talking about himself in the third person

 

[Alex]

Alex is suprised Banana agrees with anyone.

 

[simon_porter00]

i am honoured that someone of such high standing shares my views