No, refs do treat the game as a contact sport, albeit one where you've got to treat your opponent with a duty of care. I'm 100% with the modern refereeing climate on this one. The Hutton tackle on Shane Long last year was a great case-in-point. Won the ball but endangered his opponent in the process and nearly broke Long's ankle. It should have been a red all day long.
And yes, there doesn't have to be contact for it to be a foul. A player might evade a very dangerous tackle, but it'd still be a foul. Alternatively, the attempted tackle (usually in the case of a goalie coming out but being too late in a 1-on-1) might cause the attacker, by evading the tackle, to lose control of a ball he'd never have lost control of otherwise. That's also a foul in my view and if it denies a clear goalscoring opportunity then it would warrant a red.
Similarly an attempted tackle that missed the man altogether but which endangered an opponent and failed in the tackler's duty of care to the opponent would also potentially warrant a red in my book.
So, in my opinion, you can win the ball and still be penalised or sent off, and you can miss the man and still be penalised or sent off.
Bookmarks