Advice on Sliding Tackle not making contact

AndyGaut 7
foozbear 6
ragyrascal 5
The.Rampage.Rado 5
IRN BRU 5
Rutter 5
Bulsara 4
shepdogg 4
JiMMM 4
juveniliahockey 4

 The Field Hockey Forum is the resource for players, coaches and umpires of Field Hockey. Join FHF now to have full access to all that we have to offer! Don't be satisfied with lurking when you can interact with thousands of other FHF’rs, take part in Competitions, win Prizes, download Coaching Papers, discover our vast Photo library and get rid of this message - Register Now!

[Bulsara]

I have had a situation on Saturday which exceedingly riled a coach and made me think about my actions and so I thought I would open it to the wider audience of this forum. 

The situation was I had shown a yellow card for a sliding tackle earlier in the game for a ball which bounced off the body of the person who had slid (easy decision for breaking down play deliberately).  The decision which riled the coach so much was a subsequent slide by a player who had started his slide from about 5 metres away and went feet first towards the opposition player.  The opposition player got his stroke away (an aerial ball) although in my opinion his stroke was effected by the player who slid. 

The crux of the matter and the reason the coach got so riled was that no contact was made and therefore in his opinion no foul was committed.  Now in my opinion the player had no way of legally playing the ball once he slid and effected the stroke of the opposition player and therefore I showed a yellow card for dangerous play (he put himself and the opposition player in danger). 

Now, should I have shown the card (hardest decision), ignored the play (easiest decision) or had a word in the players ear after the game as the incident happened in the 68th minute (middle decision).  I would be interested on hearing other members thoughts on what the suitable action should have been considering no contact was made and also if a card is shown how do you 'sell' that card?

[mani]

Why has he no legal right to pay the ball once he slid?

[zippytime]

Why has he no legal right to pay the ball once he slid?

Thats not what Bulsara said mani,

Now in my opinion the player had no way of legally playing the ball once he slid and effected the stroke of the opposition player and therefore I showed a yellow card for dangerous play

Now that is what was written.

Im still thinking about this and trying to play it in my mind so i understand it better

[redumpire]

Presumably, Mani, because he was sliding in such a way that he couldn't possibly have used his stick?

Having said that has he actually committed a foul if he doesn't make contact?  I think he has as he could be deemed to be intimidating his opponent or even impeding him from playing his shot.  I'm not sure about the "no contact was made" argument: does that make a reckless tackle OK if the player being tackled manages to get out of the way just in time?

BUT it all has to be judged in context.  If this were the first such tackle in the 68th minute of a game I'd treat it very differently to if it were the third or fourth such tackle and it followed earlier cards (of any colour).

On balance I think you probably got it right Bulsara.

[keely]

I agree with red's assessment.

Had the second slide tackle been completely clean the coach would've had a case - however, in your assessment, danger was clearly present and the attacker was forced to change their stroke in order to avert that danger.

[CardHappy]

Ok, not like me playing devils advocate.. 

but couldn't the player have slid to get the ball... then realised he couldn't do it legally and then pulled out not making the tackle.

Carding a player for putting himself in danger is a hard sell eg. Suicide runner etc... I'm not saying its wrong to.

However, For me its all or nothing.. Yellow or play on with a knowing look and maybe a quick comment.

You have to be there to see it etc.. but for me on reflection play on and a quiet word..

[foozbear]

did this happen on sand or water turf?....if its sand...a red card for blood would be in order

nope I believe I would have done the same thing. and told the player in NO uncertain terms...""we" do not appreciate the carelessness of what ever you attempted to do there. we play with sticks here, not feet"

by your tone and look on your face it will make it VERY clear to the player that I wouldnt stand for any of that.

selling the card is easier once its closer to the defending goal. IF the player HAD to take LEGITAMATE evasive action due to the player sliding feet first...its danger...and you can call and signal as such.

and Mani....have you EVER been able to pull out of a sliding tackle? its an all or nothing move that Im surprised is allowed at some levels.

[nerd_is_the_word]

yeah the fact that he is sliding feet first is scary. I would probably pull a card in this situation, especially since there has already been one bad slide tackle in the game, you really want to tell everyone that its not allowed to happen.

side note: all i can think of is a soccer style slide tackle, unless im thinking of a feet first slide in the wrong manner would anybody else be close to pulling out the red if he dragged the player down?

[foozbear]

side note: all i can think of is a soccer style slide tackle, unless im thinking of a feet first slide in the wrong manner would anybody else be close to pulling out the red if he dragged the player down?

you know...id definatly be reaching for a card...and I might be suprised that ALL the cards on my pocket were red.

its stupid...blatant...and not in the best intrests of hockey. even if its 2 minutes or 52 minutes of playing left. 

feet first tackle...what was he thinking.

[Twister]

This is a tough one!

My initial reaction was that I wouldn't want to do anything other than have a strong word with the slider along the lines of "be very careful!".

But I do recall a previous situation where I had a similar incident - a slide which was aggressive, but made no contact resulted in two reds for the players involved next time they came together.  If I'd yellowed the slide, I'd have avoided the subsequent issues.

So it comes down to intent and intimidation.  If the slide was dangerous and intimidatory then yellow...

However - I'm having difficulty in thinking of any other situation where I'd also apply this - hence the reason it's such a difficult one.  Can anyone else think of a similar situation where you'd penalise an unsuccessful attempt to do something (I'm assuming that a missed punch/kick/headbutt etc would be a red, so that doesn't count!)

[nerd_is_the_word]

attempted murder?

[keely]

I know what you mean, Twisty. I think the idea of anything that's attempted that would be dangerous/bloody, doesn't connect but causes the player in possession to be disadvantaged (i.e. cough up the ball, have to leap over something, changed running path) would be along these lines. A defender throwing their stick, swinging wildly in a tackle (but missing) - that sort of thing.

As redumpire said, you can make a case - especially when it's the second time in the game and only 2 min. to go - that it's about intimidation.

CH, that's the thing. At 68 min., a quiet word for the second time the slide has been attempted just isn't enough. Hasn't the warning already been given with the first yellow?

[justin]

I yellow carded a 'keeper..who happens to be a friend and ex-clubmate!..... for rushing out of the circle with apparent intent to bring down an attacker, who just managed to dodge him!
I had just green-carded him for a heavy tackle in the circle.
This was in a festival game, too!
I'd only just GC'd him for a heavy tackle.

It was also an instance of my having previous knowledge of this player and his temperament....I knew that he had 'lost it' and had to be removed from the field before worse things happened

He's a nice fella off the field, a very good ump and a great umpire-coach from whom I've learnt a lot, but he has a temper which he cannot, it seems, always control when playing. (Fortunately, he's retired from playing)

[foozbear]

my friend got red carded for running up to the opposing goalkeeper and pulling down his thunder thighs while the ball was in the opposite circle.

clearly no danger...good for a chuckle...but a red card offence.

[Bulsara]

Thanks for the responses, as per usual you really had to be there to fully understand the situation but having read the responses and having had time to think about it on balance I think I got the decision right (sorry CH).  The difficulty is selling a decision such as this because it is essentially a card based on your perception of the potential and actual dangers of the tackle rather than an obvious and blatant offence. 

The point the coach was trying to make was that I would have to yellow card every slide on the hockey pitch as there is always going to be some inherent danger with that type of tackle. There was a complete lack of understanding or an unwillingness to understand the thought process which I had went through and with tackles such as these we deal with them on the danger they cause to themselves or others and their ability to play the ball in a legal manner.