IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpanxx/v13y2013i2p553-566.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Soccer coaches’ and referees’ perceptions of tackle incidents with respect to the laws of the game

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua Coleclough

Abstract

The purpose of the current investigation was to examine the perceptions of coaches and referees about decisions made by the match referees about player to player contact situations during the UEFA Euro 2012 soccer tournament. A video was produced of 106 incidents and analysed with respect to the laws of the game. The match referees made the correct decision for 91 of the 106 incidents and applied the correct sanction for 88 of the incidents. Seven coaches and six referees viewed the video indicating whether or not they agreed with the match referees’ decisions and sanctions, providing supporting comments where they disagreed. The correctness of the coaches and referees decisions was similar to that of the match referees. The supporting comments revealed that the four elements of Mascarenhas et al.’s (2005) ‘Cornerstones Model’ developed for rugby union refereeing were all transferrable to soccer refereeing. The study found that refereeing decisions involve interpretation of the laws of the game. The participants perceived that decisions were influenced by contextual factors, referees needed to balance game management and control with correct application of the laws of the game and that referee movement and positioning was important to good decision making.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua Coleclough, 2013. "Soccer coaches’ and referees’ perceptions of tackle incidents with respect to the laws of the game," International Journal of Performance Analysis in Sport, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 553-566, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpanxx:v:13:y:2013:i:2:p:553-566
    DOI: 10.1080/24748668.2013.11868669
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/24748668.2013.11868669
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/24748668.2013.11868669?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpanxx:v:13:y:2013:i:2:p:553-566. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPAN20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.