Deliberable foul in shooting area

[chickster25]

Hi all

I play a solo league and accidentally came across a very unusual, and unexpected situation today when Man Utd were playing Liverpool at Old Trafford - had to happen during this match didnt it!

My solo rules state that

1. If a defending player touches either an attacking player or ball in the shooting area (but outside the penalty area), the attacking team get a direct free kick. The defending side can either move 3 attackers or build a 4 man wall.
2. If a defending player touches either an attacking player or ball in the penalty area, the attacking team get a penalty.

So, during the game, Man Utd get the break and end up with a player in the shooting area with the ball dead ahead with only the keeper to beat. Chances are Man Utd will score as Liverpool do not have any defenders nearby.

Liverpool have a defending move but cannot block between attacking player and ball as not enough space. The defending player slides in and bashes the ball clear off the pitch. Liverpool claim it was accidental but Man Utd appeal that it was deliberate, plus it was a clear goal scoring opportunity.

The referee consults the rules and his only choice is to award a direct free kick. Man Utd are not happy and it is made even worse when Liverpool build a 4 man wall and the subsequent free kick is blocked.

In all my matches i think this is the first time this has happened. Fouls are usually because the defending player clips an attacking player, or knocks the ball when it isnt such a clear scoring opportunity.

I think there is a gap in my rules, as anytime there is a clear chance to score, a defender 'could' just intercept the ball and then have a chance to defend the free kick. I am wondering whether to introduce a red card, but how would you judge between a 'deliberate' foul or a player accidentally touching the ball. Plus, if I introduce red cards (which I do not use currently), would I need a red card for fouls in the penalty area too?

Has anyone else come across this scenario and what rules do you use?

[hargy]

2 options occur to me.

If FIFA rules are the basis, you'd dismiss the offender with a red card and award a direct free kick. It's not satisfactory in the real game so dissatisfaction in a Subbuteo game would be an appropriate replicant.

Alternatively, if a situation of a clear goal-scoring opportunity arises as described (i.e. no space for a legal defending move) the defending team might be required to forfeit their move, allowing the attacking team to continue to attempt their opportunity. If they score fine, if they miss, carry on as normal.

[villa1957]

Hi chickster

This does happen from time to time in my games. I play a similar rule to yourself which is as follows:

If the defensive flick hits an attacker or touches the ball a free kick is awarded. If in the penalty area a penalty is awarded. The attacker now has 3 options

a) Take the free kick
b) Play an advantage by replacing the attacker and ball to their approximate original position and the Offender is moved parallel to the goal line in any direction and must 90mm from the ball and 25mm from another figure, (In other words it keeps moving until it complies).
c) The attack just simply plays on with no repositioning of figures or ball.

The choice is down to the attacker at the time of the offence. in the scenario you have described I would have chosen option "b" as it would be the most advantageous option for the attack, if the offence had happened in the penalty area option "a" would be taken as a penalty would be awarded.

I find it works for me and covers 99.9% of situations that has arisen in my games

[chickster25]

Thanks for the info.

I like your idea (b) of returning the ball to the approx position and playing an advantage, although it feels like the defending team should be penalised further than just having a shot against them and a player moved out of harms way.

When the incident happened, it was such a goal scoring opportunity, a penalty felt like the fairest answer, but of course it was not in the rules

As a solo player, every 'incident' on the pitch is not deliberate, but it felt it as a lot worse action, than when a defensive player lightly touches the ball by accident.

I guess I like my rules to be quite rigid, so I am not able to 'influence' a match by having to make an objective decision - plus if i do ever play against another person, it would be useful for my rules to apply accordingly. But it would be very difficult to judge between a 'soft' accidental touch versus a 'hard' deliberate touch.

[BlackpoolRock]

Perhaps an old sixties rule could prevent a similar incident from happening again.

If the attacker wishes to shoot, he may call "Shooting", which cancels the immediate blocking flick, making the shot a duel involving only the forward and goalkeeper.

[villa1957]

When I played in Tournaments in my youth all misdemeanours by a defenders blocking flick was not a foul but the attacker could just play on or claim a back. A back meant that the the figures and ball were restored to their former positions before the misdemeanour, the attack would then carry on and the defender would forego their immediate blocking flick as a penalty. A rule in one form or another has been around for many years.
All well and good when playing an opponent. I found playing solo that my games were best served with my interpretation above, because:
a) I don't use continual defensive flicks, but a limited form, I find continual blocking solo slows the game down a little too much.
b) It gives the attack options depending on the situation they find themselves in after the misdemeanour.
c By making a block misdemeanour a foul, can result in a penalty, and makes the defender just that more careful in certain areas of the pitch.

I'm not sure what form of the rules you adhere to, or what house rules you've incorporated, for me my rules seems to have most or all my bases covered, and remove the grey areas I found crop up from time to time in my solo games. I also apply the same rules to onside blocking flicks as well because it suits my game. That's the beauty of solo play it's all down to the individual.

If you go to my blog (link at the bottom) on the downloads page are various rule sets from 60's to modern day I'm sure you'll find some inspiration from them, and adapt or modify rules to suit your style of play.

BTW if you ever play in Tournaments don't expect rigid rules it's all down to how good the ref is, or the dirty tricks players employ just the same as in real football, not everyone is as sporting, as you to your credit appear to be.

[villa1957]

Perhaps an old sixties rule could prevent a similar incident from happening again.

If the attacker wishes to shoot, he may call "Shooting", which cancels the immediate blocking flick, making the shot a duel involving only the forward and goalkeeper.

You're quite correct David playing the mid 60's way as you do, would have ensured that the OP's scenario would never have occurred, my way I would have played my advantage rule, same result just a different way of getting there, no right or wrong answer here.

[chickster25]

Thanks all, I think I will incorporate some of that into my rule set, just got to work out which will fit the best.

I may tweek my defensive moves too, as like someone said, a defensive move every time can cause issues with the flow of the game.

Man Utd still won the game 3-2 so luckily Liverpool’s dirty tricks didn’t work.