Junior/Youth U13 game OFFINABUS gesture
- Thread starter RespectTheRef
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
I do appreciate that there's a difference between similar and the same, but in the example given by @RespectTheRef I'd be astounded if a CFA Safeguarding team would get involved and seek to discipline him for not reporting something (and if they did I know a good solicitor).
The only possible safeguarding issues that might need reporting is the adult spectators laughing at a player, but in circumstances where the reason they are laughing is because said player has been kicking an opposition player and then tripped, I don't see how it crosses the threshold for a report, let alone failing to do so resulting in action against the referee.
The only report I can see that needs to be made is against the coach for remonstrating with the referee, and the biggest learning being that an earlier intervention by the referee might have prevented it all.
I've refereed lots of U13s/U14s games and still do. I make no apologies for trying to manage situations where I can if the context of the offence and the game allows it but I would always explain to the player in question (either loud enough for coaches to hear or with a separate subsequent conversation with the coach). To give two examples from the same U14s game this weekend. Team A winger knocks it past fullback inside Team B's half, and with no attempt to play the ball Team B's left back blatantly trips him to stop him getting there. I had no hesitation in issuing a YC for SPA/FT. Towards then end of the game, a different Team B player challenges for the ball when the keeper is kicking it from hand. I blow for the IDFK and explain to the kid - who clearly didn't know the LOTG - that by law it's a mandatory caution but please not to do it again. That in and of itself is risky, because if said player commits another YC offence and I've not cautioned the first one he will remain on the pitch when he ought not to be. However, the game had one minute left on the clock and was effectively over as a contest, hence I felt able to 'manage' it.
I have certainly tried to manage situations before that, either in hindsight or on review of VEO footage, I shouldn't have done and therefore I 'manage' much less than I used to because it risks doing the players, the game and our colleagues a disservice. As a parent of a now U14s player, little is more frustrating than a qualified referee keeping their cards in their pocket solely due to age, and I've seen games even at this age and below get out of hand as a result.
We can quibble with not taking action sooner, but anyone who thinks @RespectTheRef was wrong to RC is in "last weeks ref" territory.
Anyone who fails to report safeguarding here is beyond last weeks ref given my previous knowledge they are in disciplinary territory.
In the scenario I previously mentioned the referee in question was told that his failure to report was severe lack of judgement and called into question his handling of the overall incident he did face some repercussions for his failure to report to so everyone telling him to ignore me and patting him on the back is doing this referee a huge disservice.
one
RefChat Addict
Good post as a whole. Just a note that while this can be a caution if you deem it so, it is not mandatory.
Do you mind sharing the scenario, because if a CFA or League are taking action against a referee in the circumstances of the OP (eg some U13s players and/or parents laughing because a player who was kicking one of their players fell over in the process) for failing to report a safeguarding concerns the CFA or League is on very shaky ground when reading the FA's safeguarding guidance?
There is at least some learning happening in this thread.My bad @one - I said that because of the "a player is cautioned...for delaying the restart of play" law, and I've always viewed this is DRP, but of course it's not a restart...!
I'm really failing to see a safeguarding issue here. I suspect we might have apples and oranges. Of course what you say is 100% correct, I just dont believe that it applies to the context of the OP.
I will disclose what I can
firstly it was the CFA were the ones who took action also not my game however I was present as my friend and myself had games at same venue so he drove us both and I stayed for his game.
U14s game winger nutmegs player the nutmegged player takes a kick at the player massive airswing cue cheering and jeers from other parent including one particular dad very minor verbals nothing abusive but this is a grown man and a 14 year old anyway my friend cautions player for the tackle despite the advantage.
Player picks up 2nd caution and he’s off frustrated but nothing major.
2 days later my friend receives a call saying they have had a safeguarding concern raised and asking him why he did not report turns out 2 parents had reported that interaction after the first yellow my mate was severely reprimanded for failing to report and was removed from a county cup game while the hearing was pending to me this seems similar and at the time I saw nothing in my mates but now see it as a warning.
That's helpful context, and I think for most they'll see some similarities between this scenario and the OP.
Obviously YBTBT for both, but the biggest difference for me is the reference to "minor verbals", which is absent in the OP. Again, detail is crucial but I can see why verbals directed from a parent to an U14 should be reported, as opposed to just a generic cheer.
It also depends on what was reported by others (assuming the opposition parents) and how accurate those reports were at what was said, and knowing sports regulators I could see a CFA being unnecessarily annoyed/put ou that it wasn't drawn to their attention, particularly if the initial reports were inaccurate or overstated what happened.
I still stand by the OPs RC action and that there is no need for a report, but at least understand given your local experience why you said what you did.
Thankfully it rarely happens, when it has it's largely at younger age groups and going through my records the only time I've issued cautions were at OA where once the player actually blocked the ball and I put it through as C1 USB (keepers' team chasing a late equaliser) and the other time because of the player's challenge the keeper caught him in the follow through and went down, so it went through as C1 DP.There is at least some learning happening in this thread.
Better to be lucky that good...
I think too many coaches are leaving player discipline up to us when they have a huge part to play. From my experience, players at that age regard the coaching staff as a guide more than a referee ever will. Rather than the coach having a go at the OP, they do need to take responsibility for their players' actions here.
Football is a spectator sport, so spectators, as long as they are respectful and not directly interfering, are part of the game. I fail to see anything that says they did anything wrong. The red cards are part of the LOTG - the rules of play. It really should be not made a big deal of in grassroots when they are applied correctly.
Football is a spectator sport, so spectators, as long as they are respectful and not directly interfering, are part of the game. I fail to see anything that says they did anything wrong. The red cards are part of the LOTG - the rules of play. It really should be not made a big deal of in grassroots when they are applied correctly.
As suspected..there is a little bit more in this one in that an adult has directly engaged with a child giving rise to a safeguarding issue.
Yes it wasn’t the interaction level which was the issue it was the failure to report which the CFA weren’t happy with though just trying to warn people as it wasn’t a pleasant experience for my mate so many people shouting me down but have zero real life scenarios of there own.
Yes. He didn't report an actual safeguarding concern.
The OP is not a safeguarding issue.
We've identified the key difference which is a direct interaction between an adult and child which did need to be reported Vs a similar scenario but where there was no direct interaction between an adult and a child that does not need to be reported.
one
RefChat Addict
If the interaction level is not an issue the not reporting would not be an issue either. Surly they dont expect a report for every interaction of a child with an adult. Not reporting only became an issue because the level and manner of intraction was an issue.
I can't speak for others but you have no idea what 'real life scenario' experiences I have.
I think I would find it extremely difficult to send a child off who was thirteen for a gesture of two fingers directed at an opponent. There is a sequence there to be dealt with, and I would have given the player a yellow, a stern talking to in the prescience of his Manager/Coach.
The Managers behaviour .. He had been cautioned. I would be reporting him.
Why? It's a sending off offence, and they're old enough to know what they're doing, and that their actions have consequences. As far as I can see, the only question here (as has been debated) is whether the player's actions prior to the offensive gesture were worthy of a red card in and of themselves. The OP has stated that they didn't deem it violent conduct, so IMO it should have been a caution for that first, followed by a straight red for the OFFINABUS.
For safeguarding the player themselves (or representative) have to let the referee know what the problem they have is. In which case (in Scotland) you note it in your match report. Unless the parents are those of the child then they should have left any concerns to the coach to report (unless that is what has happened).
He just had a call from CFA safeguarding officer saying he had failed to report a safeguarding issue which had been reported by a parent and wanted to know why he had not reported it and to let him know there would be a investigation into the incident and his failure to report anyone not reporting in op scenario after what I’ve mentioned 100% LWR and also could be on very thin ice with CFA if they appeal the red even if the appeal is dismissed OP may be asked to explain his lack of a safeguarding report.
Because the player is a child. And a young child at twelve and thirteen will display emotional immature behaviours. A child's brain at thirteen is not close to fully developed and the regions that govern reasoning develop last. Expect to see immature behaviours in immature humans.
Straight red to a thirteen year old for giving an opponent a two fingers. Sorry no.
Last edited: