A&H

SinBin Usage

Do you use the SinBin?

  • Yes

    Votes: 39 83.0%

  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Ocassionally

    Votes: 3 6.4%

  • They don't apply to the competition(s)/level I officiate on

    Votes: 5 10.6%
  • Total voters
    47
Big Cat said:
Very much agree
Adding to that, effective use of the Sin Bin is quite an 'advanced competency'. The 'Stepped Approach' takes practice and a mis-timed Sin Bin (too early or too late) can make matters worse for the Referee
Click to expand...
Whilst as an observer myself I understand the "stepped approach" I would never mark a candidate negatively for using the Sin Bin "too early".

Dissent is dissent full stop. Every referee has a "level" shall we say and some have theirs way too high whilst very few (in my experience) have it too low. The Stepped Approach can work if it's just for a bit of repetitive moaning or "trying to get in the ref's head" but for actual dissent - no way Pedro!! :D I'll use the stepped approach for challenges/tackles where PI might become an issue but that's all.

Having said all the above, I've only used the Sin Bin twice this season (16 matches). ;):)
 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
Kes said:
Whilst as an observer myself I understand the "stepped approach" I would never mark a candidate negatively for using the Sin Bin "too early".

Dissent is dissent full stop. Every referee has a "level" shall we say and some have theirs way too high whilst very few (in my experience) have it too low. The Stepped Approach can work if it's just for a bit of repetitive moaning or "trying to get in the ref's head" but for actual dissent - no way Pedro!! :D I'll use the stepped approach for challenges/tackles where PI might become an issue but that's all.

Having said all the above, I've only used the Sin Bin twice this season (16 matches). ;):)
Click to expand...
Yeh, I average one Sin Bin every 5 games (OA Step 5/6)
Who knows though, that figure might be 1 in 4 or even less if we merely issued yellow cards. Maybe
 
I find them much more difficult to use than old-school dissent cautions. I never had any real issue using the stepped approach to walk someone to a dissent caution if they needed it - this probably only got to the point where I needed to take action every 3-5 games, but the threat of doing it was simple and well-understood. And sometimes a player will just commit a straightforward act of dissent - again, a card for that was usually relatively accepted.

Sin bin feels harsher, so I always feel like I need to give that little bit of extra rope before taking action. Which I know is wrong, but it's not the first time in football we've seen punishments made harsher and immediately enforced less. As a result, I can only think of one time when I've given a sin bin for persistent dissent, it only ever feels correct when it's been for one loud and visible act.

For whatever reason, no one ever seems to expect a sin bin - so it surprises the player in question, and often leads to further dissent or negotiation. Multiple times I've had players ask why I'm sin binning rather than just carding, or tried to persuade me to treat it as a different offence! And I vividly recall being confronted with "you f***ing **** gonna send me to the sin bin?" the first time I ever tried to use it, meaning a sending off as a direct response to the concept of a sin bin.

In my experience, the immediate response to a sin bin is generally 10 more-irritated teammates, at least some of which will be directed at you, whereas no one generally cared about a teammate getting booked for dissent, they would just let you get on with it. It's also, as others have pointed out, an absolute pain to run. 10 minutes of "when can he come back on ref?" is the best-case scenario - if you're unlucky, that player will reoffend and then you have potential for a huge mistake on your hands if you happen to show the wrong card at the wrong time.
 
GraemeS said:
I find them much more difficult to use than old-school dissent cautions. I never had any real issue using the stepped approach to walk someone to a dissent caution if they needed it - this probably only got to the point where I needed to take action every 3-5 games, but the threat of doing it was simple and well-understood. And sometimes a player will just commit a straightforward act of dissent - again, a card for that was usually relatively accepted.

Sin bin feels harsher, so I always feel like I need to give that little bit of extra rope before taking action. Which I know is wrong, but it's not the first time in football we've seen punishments made harsher and immediately enforced less. As a result, I can only think of one time when I've given a sin bin for persistent dissent, it only ever feels correct when it's been for one loud and visible act.

For whatever reason, no one ever seems to expect a sin bin - so it surprises the player in question, and often leads to further dissent or negotiation. Multiple times I've had players ask why I'm sin binning rather than just carding, or tried to persuade me to treat it as a different offence! And I vividly recall being confronted with "you f***ing **** gonna send me to the sin bin?" the first time I ever tried to use it, meaning a sending off as a direct response to the concept of a sin bin.

In my experience, the immediate response to a sin bin is generally 10 more-irritated teammates, at least some of which will be directed at you, whereas no one generally cared about a teammate getting booked for dissent, they would just let you get on with it. It's also, as others have pointed out, an absolute pain to run. 10 minutes of "when can he come back on ref?" is the best-case scenario - if you're unlucky, that player will reoffend and then you have potential for a huge mistake on your hands if you happen to show the wrong card at the wrong time.
Click to expand...
Very much in agreement
Back in the day, I recall a straight forward yellow card having the desired effect
Sin Bin can be effective, but the stakes are higher, no doubt
If they continue to penalise dissent on TV (like we've seen over the past fortnight), I'll probably lower my bar slightly
 
PinnerPaul said:
Hate being picky but on an official edict from the FA "Foul and abusive language is still a red card" ??!! :rolleyes: :eek:

Yes we can accept fans and pundits using out dated terminology but the FA - espcially in an email sent to referees!

I was on the line this week, player got a sin bin caution (after multiple warnings) for moaning about where a free kick was...for his team, as he walked off he shouted "F off ref, you've been s all game" - obviously he then got a red for his troubles!
Click to expand...
Damn and I thought swearing at the ref sometimes wasn't a red :angel:
 
Kes said:
It's not. (As you know very well by now ;)).

But these words:

Are "insulting" and possibly abusive all day long.

Only needs to tick one of em. Using a swear word ain't one of em ... ;)
Click to expand...
you sending someone off for saying "you've had a terrible game"? that's pretty insulting
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Kes
I've seen a bunch of good points raised here.

For me, the knowledge players have of the SinBin system, and the lack of fine are two of the biggest issues I face. Really interesting discussion though.
 
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
Kes has already explained it. Forget "swearing" - use the words in the LOTG.
Click to expand...
Though swearing does make it more likely that a comment is insulting or abusive. For me there is a line somewhere between “you’re lousy” and “you’re f-ing lousy.” But not the same line between “that was a lousy call” and “that was a f-ing lousy call.” The “you” changes a lot. And it goes without saying that tone and volume matter a lot.

One mnemonic I’ve heard is the three Ps. Personal, public, provocative. In my mind the more you have of one, the less you need of the others. But most OFFINABUS involves some level, of all three.
 
Big Cat said:
C2 Sin Bin is a lot more penal than C2
Paradoxically, I'm sure this has had the unintended consequence that a lot of Referees don't use the Sin Bin because they're nervous about doing so and the potential consequences (backlash)
So the FA can say 'Dissent is Down', but we all know that's hardly plausible
Click to expand...
I get what you are says and fully agree with the unintended consequence. But I'd argue about if it is more penal Or the resin behind the consequence. Sinbin could actually be less penal in many cases. I think the reason for the unintended consequence is that players take being binned a lot more 'personal'. And that means binning a player has a much higher chance of escalation.
 
one said:
I get what you are says and fully agree with the unintended consequence. But I'd argue about if it is more penal Or the resin behind the consequence. Sinbin could actually be less penal in many cases. I think the reason for the unintended consequence is that players take being binned a lot more 'personal'. And that means binning a player has a much higher chance of escalation.
Click to expand...
Erm ... I think you've basically just repeated what BC said there mate. ;) :D
 
My experience in a step 6 game on Saturday (being observed but that changes nothing for me). Centre half has a chew at me on the hour mark and the score is 0-0. Clearly a repeat offender by his mannerisms, hes just one of those players whose always at refs. I warn him publically. 70th minute I give a free kick and "your a joke ref" comes from his gob. Sin bin. 75th minute, the only goal of the game. End of the game the manager asks me why he was sin binned. I explained and he said nothing and walked off. Hes frustrated but he knows the fault is off the player. Also, that player was subbed at the end of his sin bin period. I imagine he's had an absolute rollicking from his manager and for me it was a well timed sin bin. Hopefully he learns bit I doubt it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top