I completed my 12th Supply League Assessment of the current season yesterday and after the game, it was the referee seeking my confirmation of his action, rather than me seeking to clarify a situation.
In essence what happened was that a player showed dissent by word as the game was ongoing. So as not to disadvantage his opponents who were in the attacking third and in possession of the ball, the referee allowed play to continue and at the next break in play, he called the player towards him with the obvious intention of cautioning him. As he reached for his notebook, the player clapped him and said something to the effect of "Well done ref". He therefore issued a caution for the original dissent and then issued a second caution for the second incident of dissent. I had no issue with his action, told him I felt he adjudged the situation correctly and the dismissal was justified.
Contrast this with my own game this morning where I made an error which has, after another 45 minutes, affected the result of the game. I had seen the goalkeeper collect the ball and run to the edge of his penalty area, apparently with the intention of kicking it upfield. As he ran forward he bounced the ball once and as he went to bounce it again, he did not catch it, it dropped to the floor and he bent over to pick it up again. In one of my early assessments when I was going for promotion to level 5, the same thing happened and the assessor penalised me for not seeing it. Since then, I have always ensured I have the goalkeeper in view while he has possession of the ball.
So having seen this incident, I blew the whistle, awarded the indirect free kick and went to manage the set play. As I gave the signal for play to restart, a player in the defensive wall tried to charge down the kick. Unfortunately I was so intent on sanctioning his action I didn't wait to see where the ball went and blew my whistle. The ball flew into the goal, despite the efforts of the goalkeeper to stop it! If I had delayed my whistle, I could have allowed the goal and probably gotten away with giving the player a talking to.
Talking players has certainly become a bigger part of my game since I came out of retirement. I had to do a fair share of it in today's two games as a number of players stood out repeatedly committing offences in games with relatively low foul counts. In the first game, I spoke to one player twice, the second time with his captain in attendance. This didn't have the desired effect and he was cautioned a few minutes later.
In the second game I had two players in the same team clocking up the foul count and for each I brought the captain in for a last warning, letting the captain do my talking for me. In both cases, the players didn't heed my words or those of their captain and both were cautioned soon afterwards. I didn't have a word of complaint from their manager about the decisions but he complained at length about my management of his "rolling" substitutions, saying that I didn't add enough time at the end of the game. It seemed to escape his notice that I added 5 minutes despite there not being any injuries or lengthy delays in the restart.
His viewpoint was that I didn't need to check the names and equipment of all the players as they joined/re-joined the game as they had proved their identity to the opposing manager through the use of their league registration cards and they were unlikely to have changed their boots. He wouldn't accept my point that I as referee could only allow substitutes to play who had been named before the game. In the case of "rolling" substitutes, I needed the names of all the players who were substitutes or were likely to become substitutes as the game progressed. As for player equipment checks, I wasn't watching the players when they weren't on the field of play, so from a law point of view, they had to be checked.
After the game a club official from the home team asked if they could ask the league to reserve me for the reverse fixture in 4 weeks time. I asked why they would want that considering my relative lack of mobility. I should point out that in the game this morning, the top 2-3 inches of the playing surface churned up into a mud souffle and in the afternoon game, it was like a Victoria sponge sapping any remaining strength out of my calves resulting in some late cramps in thigh, hamstring and calves. They assured me that I moved around the field with ease in comparison to some of the referees allocated (which I thought was an unfair comment) but I also refused to accept what they regarded as a physical approach by their opponents.
So maybe I have found my level after all this time ...
Continue reading...
In essence what happened was that a player showed dissent by word as the game was ongoing. So as not to disadvantage his opponents who were in the attacking third and in possession of the ball, the referee allowed play to continue and at the next break in play, he called the player towards him with the obvious intention of cautioning him. As he reached for his notebook, the player clapped him and said something to the effect of "Well done ref". He therefore issued a caution for the original dissent and then issued a second caution for the second incident of dissent. I had no issue with his action, told him I felt he adjudged the situation correctly and the dismissal was justified.
Contrast this with my own game this morning where I made an error which has, after another 45 minutes, affected the result of the game. I had seen the goalkeeper collect the ball and run to the edge of his penalty area, apparently with the intention of kicking it upfield. As he ran forward he bounced the ball once and as he went to bounce it again, he did not catch it, it dropped to the floor and he bent over to pick it up again. In one of my early assessments when I was going for promotion to level 5, the same thing happened and the assessor penalised me for not seeing it. Since then, I have always ensured I have the goalkeeper in view while he has possession of the ball.
So having seen this incident, I blew the whistle, awarded the indirect free kick and went to manage the set play. As I gave the signal for play to restart, a player in the defensive wall tried to charge down the kick. Unfortunately I was so intent on sanctioning his action I didn't wait to see where the ball went and blew my whistle. The ball flew into the goal, despite the efforts of the goalkeeper to stop it! If I had delayed my whistle, I could have allowed the goal and probably gotten away with giving the player a talking to.
Talking players has certainly become a bigger part of my game since I came out of retirement. I had to do a fair share of it in today's two games as a number of players stood out repeatedly committing offences in games with relatively low foul counts. In the first game, I spoke to one player twice, the second time with his captain in attendance. This didn't have the desired effect and he was cautioned a few minutes later.
In the second game I had two players in the same team clocking up the foul count and for each I brought the captain in for a last warning, letting the captain do my talking for me. In both cases, the players didn't heed my words or those of their captain and both were cautioned soon afterwards. I didn't have a word of complaint from their manager about the decisions but he complained at length about my management of his "rolling" substitutions, saying that I didn't add enough time at the end of the game. It seemed to escape his notice that I added 5 minutes despite there not being any injuries or lengthy delays in the restart.
His viewpoint was that I didn't need to check the names and equipment of all the players as they joined/re-joined the game as they had proved their identity to the opposing manager through the use of their league registration cards and they were unlikely to have changed their boots. He wouldn't accept my point that I as referee could only allow substitutes to play who had been named before the game. In the case of "rolling" substitutes, I needed the names of all the players who were substitutes or were likely to become substitutes as the game progressed. As for player equipment checks, I wasn't watching the players when they weren't on the field of play, so from a law point of view, they had to be checked.
After the game a club official from the home team asked if they could ask the league to reserve me for the reverse fixture in 4 weeks time. I asked why they would want that considering my relative lack of mobility. I should point out that in the game this morning, the top 2-3 inches of the playing surface churned up into a mud souffle and in the afternoon game, it was like a Victoria sponge sapping any remaining strength out of my calves resulting in some late cramps in thigh, hamstring and calves. They assured me that I moved around the field with ease in comparison to some of the referees allocated (which I thought was an unfair comment) but I also refused to accept what they regarded as a physical approach by their opponents.
So maybe I have found my level after all this time ...
Continue reading...
