Say a team has a Messi like player who can do a lot of damage if he is dribbling. When could a defensive mid or something (not the last defender) grab him or his jersey to stop the play, and NOT get a card for it? Would grabbing the player and making it clear that you are not trying to hurt him do the trick?

(Asking for a friend who happens to be a defender)

aTmAg said:

---

Say a team has a Messi like player who can do a lot of damage if he is dribbling. When could a defensive mid or something (not the last defender) grab him or his jersey to stop the play, and NOT get a card for it? Would grabbing the player and making it clear that you are not trying to hurt him do the trick?

(Asking for a friend who happens to be a defender)

---

I would imagine the current way of looking at it depends on what you are preventing from happening. Is the attacking player transitioning into a "dangerous" possession, like was the ball turned over and the attacking team has a numbers advantage. If so, card.

If you have persistent infringment (I think thats the term) basically if the same player gets fouled enough you might see a card out, or if the defender is fouling enough people the card might be issued.

PatAg said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Say a team has a Messi like player who can do a lot of damage if he is dribbling. When could a defensive mid or something (not the last defender) grab him or his jersey to stop the play, and NOT get a card for it? Would grabbing the player and making it clear that you are not trying to hurt him do the trick?

(Asking for a friend who happens to be a defender)

---

I would imagine the current way of looking at it depends on what you are preventing from happening. Is the attacking player transitioning into a "dangerous" possession, like was the ball turned over and the attacking team has a numbers advantage. If so, card.

If you have persistent infringment (I think thats the term) basically if the same player gets fouled enough you might see a card out, or if the defender is fouling enough people the card might be issued.

---

Don't the rules basically say that every instance is a card? Yet I rarely see it carded. If I'm right about how the rule is written, then I think the way it seems to get called in the real game makes more sense than the written rule.

Imagine a scenario where a player gets the ball in the center circle and starts dribbling to goal. The midfielder could just try to do an over the top tackle right there. If he gets all ball, then great. No foul. If he doesn't and trips the guy, then the whistle is blown, and a free kick awarded (but likely no card, unless he's done it too many times already).

However, there is a chance of injury on the offensive player in that circumstance. If the defender instead grabs the player and just keeps him from going anywhere, then to me that seems to be a way of fouling the guy on purpose without risking injuring him. To me, carding that 100% of the time would encourage more defenders to resort to a violent tackle instead. So I can understand if the ref guidance is to allow it once or twice (warn the guy), and then pull out the card.

Am I smoking crack?

Mathguy will show up at some point to make it more clear.

aTmAg said:

---

PatAg said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Say a team has a Messi like player who can do a lot of damage if he is dribbling. When could a defensive mid or something (not the last defender) grab him or his jersey to stop the play, and NOT get a card for it? Would grabbing the player and making it clear that you are not trying to hurt him do the trick?

(Asking for a friend who happens to be a defender)

---

I would imagine the current way of looking at it depends on what you are preventing from happening. Is the attacking player transitioning into a "dangerous" possession, like was the ball turned over and the attacking team has a numbers advantage. If so, card.

If you have persistent infringment (I think thats the term) basically if the same player gets fouled enough you might see a card out, or if the defender is fouling enough people the card might be issued.

---

Don't the rules basically say that every instance is a card? Yet I rarely see it carded. If I'm right about how the rule is written, then I think the way it seems to get called in the real game makes more sense than the written rule.

Imagine a scenario where a player gets the ball in the center circle and starts dribbling to goal. The midfielder could just try to do an over the top tackle right there. If he gets all ball, then great. No foul. If he doesn't and trips the guy, then the whistle is blown, and a free kick awarded (but likely no card, unless he's done it too many times already).

However, there is a chance of injury on the offensive player in that circumstance. If the defender instead grabs the player and just keeps him from going anywhere, then to me that seems to be a way of fouling the guy on purpose without risking injuring him. To me, carding that 100% of the time would encourage more defenders to resort to a violent tackle instead. So I can understand if the ref guidance is to allow it once or twice (warn the guy), and then pull out the card.

Am I smoking crack?

---

Unless the rules have been rewritten, that doesn't give you a card 100% of the time. My example for a non-physical foul earning a yellow would be if a player is breaking through the midfield into the attack, and the attacking team has a numbers advantage, and you reached out and grabbed his jersey to keep him from continuing, you get a yellow card. I may have just misunderstood your initial question

PatAg said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

PatAg said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Say a team has a Messi like player who can do a lot of damage if he is dribbling. When could a defensive mid or something (not the last defender) grab him or his jersey to stop the play, and NOT get a card for it? Would grabbing the player and making it clear that you are not trying to hurt him do the trick?

(Asking for a friend who happens to be a defender)

---

I would imagine the current way of looking at it depends on what you are preventing from happening. Is the attacking player transitioning into a "dangerous" possession, like was the ball turned over and the attacking team has a numbers advantage. If so, card.

If you have persistent infringment (I think thats the term) basically if the same player gets fouled enough you might see a card out, or if the defender is fouling enough people the card might be issued.

---

Don't the rules basically say that every instance is a card? Yet I rarely see it carded. If I'm right about how the rule is written, then I think the way it seems to get called in the real game makes more sense than the written rule.

Imagine a scenario where a player gets the ball in the center circle and starts dribbling to goal. The midfielder could just try to do an over the top tackle right there. If he gets all ball, then great. No foul. If he doesn't and trips the guy, then the whistle is blown, and a free kick awarded (but likely no card, unless he's done it too many times already).

However, there is a chance of injury on the offensive player in that circumstance. If the defender instead grabs the player and just keeps him from going anywhere, then to me that seems to be a way of fouling the guy on purpose without risking injuring him. To me, carding that 100% of the time would encourage more defenders to resort to a violent tackle instead. So I can understand if the ref guidance is to allow it once or twice (warn the guy), and then pull out the card.

Am I smoking crack?

---

Unless the rules have been rewritten, that doesn't give you a card 100% of the time. My example for a non-physical foul earning a yellow would be if a player is breaking through the midfield into the attack, and the attacking team has a numbers advantage, and you reached out and grabbed his jersey to keep him from continuing, you get a yellow card. I may have just misunderstood your initial question

---

I got the 100% from a forum somewhere where somebody asked a similar question. But it was some random dude on the internet answering, so I have no idea if he's clueless or not. So I decided to ask random dudes on this forum myself because clearly TexAgs is superior.

So it sounds like you are basically saying "if you intentionally foul to stop a scoring opportunity then you get a card"

The goal is to kick the person in the back of the ankles just as they receive the ball. If you allow them to gain control and run with the ball almost any foul will get a card.

If done right you can kick a guy like Messi 5 to 6 times before your get a card.

I wish petulant fools were yellows. If you are not making a serious play for the ball it should be a yellow. Dont care if it is a counter or not.

aTmAg said:

---

Say a team has a Messi like player who can do a lot of damage if he is dribbling. When could a defensive mid or something (not the last defender) grab him or his jersey to stop the play, and NOT get a card for it? Would grabbing the player and making it clear that you are not trying to hurt him do the trick?

(Asking for a friend who happens to be a defender)

---

Grabbing/holding a player intentionally to stop a promising attack, aka a professional or cynical foul, is a yellow card offense. Not hurting a player has nothing to do with it. You committed a foul to stop an attack. The card is red if you commit that foul in the act of DOGSO.

Is it always punished accordingly? Of course not. Pro and international soccer does things so differently it might as well be a different game.

mathguy86 said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Say a team has a Messi like player who can do a lot of damage if he is dribbling. When could a defensive mid or something (not the last defender) grab him or his jersey to stop the play, and NOT get a card for it? Would grabbing the player and making it clear that you are not trying to hurt him do the trick?

(Asking for a friend who happens to be a defender)

---

Grabbing/holding a player intentionally to stop a promising attack, aka a professional or cynical foul, is a yellow card offense. Not hurting a player has nothing to do with it. You committed a foul to stop an attack. The card is red if you commit that foul in the act of DOGSO.

Is it always punished accordingly? Of course not. Pro and international soccer does things so differently it might as well be a different game.

---

What is DOGSO?

I assume denial of goal scoring opportunity

wangus12 said:

---

I assume denial of goal scoring opportunity

---

Yep. Technically denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity. It's based on fouling an opponent as the last defender where the offensive player has 4 things in their favor. Distance to ball, distance to defender(s), direction of play (towards goal) and Distance to goal. What's a scoring opportunity in the pros and what is in HS or U18 versus U13 is vastly different.

caution (yellow):
UB - unsporting behavior
DT - dissent (by word or action)
PI - persistent infringement
DR - delay restart

send off:
SFP - serious foul play
VC - violent conduct
S - spits at opponent
DGH - denies an obvious goal-scoring opportunity
AL - abusive language
2CT - second caution/yellow

Referee interpretation of the laws is such a big part of the game. What the OP is asking about becomes the referee's interpretation as a yellow card cautionable offense for UB can include "committing a tactical foul designed to interfere or impede an opposing team's attacking play, while a send off offense for DGH is similar, but denying an even more obvious goal-scoring opportunity (intentional hand ball in the box, last defender/ keeper intentional foul). I do think it's entirely possible to foul during a counter attack in the middle third and not get a yellow if its clear you're tackling the ball and not the opponent, going shoulder to shoulder with no arms extended/ no grabbing to hold up, etc., but any ref can (and probably will) show yellow depending on the attacking situation and you can't blame them.