Charge down puts oppo on side

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,073
Post Likes
2,345
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
We just need a definition of a charge down.
If you make all the actions of a charge down, does it matter where the ball goes, or is it still a charge down regardless.

I suspect a clarification from WR would fail to address all the questions!
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
477
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
We just need a definition of a charge down.
If you make all the actions of a charge down, does it matter where the ball goes, or is it still a charge down regardless.

I suspect a clarification from WR would fail to address all the questions!
Rather than defining a charge down, I think a clarification on the difference between a charge down versus when the "ball touches or is played by an opponent" would be significant, thus directly clarifying application of law 10.4.c.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
Rather than defining a charge down, I think a clarification on the difference between a charge down versus when the "ball touches or is played by an opponent" would be significant, thus directly clarifying application of law 10.4.c.
Yes I think this is the only situation where a definition is needed
 

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
While I agree some sort of clarification between "played at" vs "charged down" will help with clearing up offside and 10m-offside interpretation, I have a just another opinion to throw out there. The focus in this thread seems to be at the action of the ball - why is 'charge down' not the action of the player being the key here instead?
A players 'charges down' another player or the ball they don't "charge up"??? To me the players action of being "down" is the operative part.

Perhaps the 'charge down' was to describe the action of the player alone and not the outcome/flight of the ball? That's how I have tended to think about it (and for me it fits the narrative of the laws and the conventions?)
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
While I agree some sort of clarification between "played at" vs "charged down" will help with clearing up offside and 10m-offside interpretation, I have a just another opinion to throw out there. The focus in this thread seems to be at the action of the ball - why is 'charge down' not the action of the player being the key here instead?
A players 'charges down' another player or the ball they don't "charge up"??? To me the players action of being "down" is the operative part.

Perhaps the 'charge down' was to describe the action of the player alone and not the outcome/flight of the ball? That's how I have tended to think about it (and for me it fits the narrative of the laws and the conventions?)
So in the OP incident, was that a charge down?
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,032
Post Likes
1,775
While I agree some sort of clarification between "played at" vs "charged down" will help with clearing up offside and 10m-offside interpretation, I have a just another opinion to throw out there. The focus in this thread seems to be at the action of the ball - why is 'charge down' not the action of the player being the key here instead?
A players 'charges down' another player or the ball they don't "charge up"??? To me the players action of being "down" is the operative part.

Perhaps the 'charge down' was to describe the action of the player alone and not the outcome/flight of the ball? That's how I have tended to think about it (and for me it fits the narrative of the laws and the conventions?)
but many charge downs involve the player jumping up with outstretched arms?
 

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
but many charge downs involve the player jumping up with outstretched arms?
Yes...charge down and jumps, for me is still a charge down ( and as ball rising) he's not "waiting" to catch/deflect the ball.


But that's how I view it...not saying I'm more right than anyone else.

I guess with no clear definition I've made that my narrative. #shrug.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
so if a player turns his back and the ball hits him, is that a charge down?
this is an interesting scenario.
In the OP let's turn the Bath player round, and say the ball hits him on the shoulder and continues on it's way in the same flight path.

Played : The ball is played when it is intentionally touched by a player


10.1 A player is offside in open play if that player is in front of a team-mate who is carrying the ball or who last played it. An offside player must not interfere with play. This includes:


10.4.c [..] This is known as the 10-metre law and still applies if the ball touches or is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down.


So now
1 The Bath player has NOT have played the ball (as not intentional)
2 So the Leicester players are all offside, as the last player to play the ball was the kicker
3 and the 10m rule would apply as the ball touched a defender, so they need to retire
 
Last edited:

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
No.
But I think you knew that already and you're just playing semantics and twisting words with what you know is pretty obvious.
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
we could turn this the other way round

10.4.c [..] This is known as the 10-metre law and still applies if the ball touches or is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down.


for anyone who thinks the OP scenario IS a charge down - give an example scenario of 'played' that is not a charge down
 

Phil E


Referees in England
Staff member
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
16,073
Post Likes
2,345
Current Referee grade:
Level 8
I wonder if football referees have these kind of discussions?
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
477
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
Honestly, I think this whole scenario would be better if laws 10.4.c and 10.7.b.iv were modified and aligned to just focus on whether the ball was intentionally played/touched, e.g.

Law 10.4.c
An offside player may be penalised, if that player:
Was in front of a team-mate who kicked the ball and fails to retire immediately behind an onside team-mate or an imaginary line across the field 10 metres on that player’s side from where the ball is caught or lands, even if it hits a goal post or crossbar first. If this involves more than one player, then the player closest to where the ball lands or is caught is the one penalised. This is known as the 10-metre law and still applies if the ball touches or is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down.


Law 10.7.b.iv
Other than under Law 10.4c, an offside player can be put onside when:
An opponent of that player:
Intentionally touches the ball without gaining possession of it.
 

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
477
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
I wonder if football referees have these kind of discussions?
And miss out on all this fun?

(Seriously though, I do enjoy these discussions 😊 )
 

menace


Referees in Australia
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
3,657
Post Likes
633
Current Referee grade:
Level 2
we could turn this the other way round

10.4.c [..] This is known as the 10-metre law and still applies if the ball touches or is played by an opponent but not when the kick is charged down.


for anyone who thinks the OP scenario IS a charge down - give an example scenario of 'played' that is not a charge down
I'll play.

Imagine same scenario as OP...but there was no touch by blue at Green kick.

Ball sails over head of Green player standing still way down field...ball is tried to be caught by blue player 5m behind green player. But he drops it backwards. (See my expert graphic below).
Screenshot_20230308_215805_Chrome.jpg

As I understand it...
That Green player still has to retreat 10m away from the blue stick man even though blue has played at it and dropped it..ie green can't stand there nor take part (ie turn to go an tackle or chase ball) he has to retreat 10m away (and not take part until he's put onside his team).
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
I'll play.

Imagine same scenario as OP...but there was no touch by blue at Green kick.

Ball sails over head of Green player standing still way down field...ball is tried to be caught by blue player 5m behind green player. But he drops it backwards. (See my expert graphic below).


As I understand it...
That Green player still has to retreat 10m away from the blue stick man even though blue has played at it and dropped it..ie green can't stand there nor take part (ie turn to go an tackle or chase ball) he has to retreat 10m away (and not take part until he's put onside his team).
you may be right

one possible definition of a charge down could be : an attempt to block (but not catch) a kicked ball, close to the kicker, and immediately as the is kicked. Something like that.

but the touch in the OP then feels like not a charge down, as seems like an attempt to deflect it.
 

didds

Resident Club Coach
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
12,032
Post Likes
1,775
and of course then

- an attempted but failed catch cannot be a block
- an attempted block can become a catch eg a lick straight into the guts of an attempting blocker who closes his/her arms on the ball when it hits him/her
 

crossref


Referees in England
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
21,804
Post Likes
3,145
and of course then

- an attempted but failed catch cannot be a block
- an attempted block can become a catch eg a lick straight into the guts of an attempting blocker who closes his/her arms on the ball when it hits him/her
I think that's right.

if a player very, very close to the kicker tries to catch a grubber kick that comes straight at her, but fumbles it, I don't think we call it a charge down.
She could have done a charge down of the kick (she was so close) -- but instead she attempted to catch and failed -- so KO

And.. the Quins v Exeter game on Saturday one of the quins players charged down a kick - perhaps indeed off his belly - ball went upwards and he managed to catch his own charge down ..
 
Last edited:

Stu10


Referees in England
Joined
Mar 10, 2020
Messages
883
Post Likes
477
Current Referee grade:
Level 15 - 11
I'll play.

Imagine same scenario as OP...but there was no touch by blue at Green kick.

Ball sails over head of Green player standing still way down field...ball is tried to be caught by blue player 5m behind green player. But he drops it backwards. (See my expert graphic below).
View attachment 4563

As I understand it...
That Green player still has to retreat 10m away from the blue stick man even though blue has played at it and dropped it..ie green can't stand there nor take part (ie turn to go an tackle or chase ball) he has to retreat 10m away (and not take part until he's put onside his team).

Yes, you are correct. The 10m law dictates that an imaginary line is drawn across the FOP 10m towards the kicker's goal line measured from where the ball lands or is caught. All green players in front of that imaginary line must actively retreat behind an onside team-mate or that imaginary line. They cannot stand still waiting for a teammate to play them onside. No action by blue puts these green players onside, so blue playing and dropping the ball is irrelevant. In this photo, 2 green players are offside, neither are actively retreating, penalty.
 
Top