How does that work then one team has the advantage by having a CAR there. Unless you are dismissing the CAR I can't see how you can possibly operate with 1.Nope.
How does that work then one team has the advantage by having a CAR there. Unless you are dismissing the CAR I can't see how you can possibly operate with 1.Nope.
Its possible. I have been in a position before where a club have been unable to provide. You take 1 side and get help from the other. Just adapting your positioning accordingly.How does that work then one team has the advantage by having a CAR there. Unless you are dismissing the CAR I can't see how you can possibly operate with 1.
How does that work then one team has the advantage by having a CAR there. Unless you are dismissing the CAR I can't see how you can possibly operate with 1.
You are far more likely to call someone offside if you have a AR CAR or not with his flag up then if you are trying to somehow work it out for yourself. Not all CAR are useless fair few of them are pretty decent I find. Personally if I'm not sure on an offside and I don't have one I will allow play to continue, if the CAR flags majority of time I will go with them. In my eyes it's a clear advantage and I would rather have 2 or 0.I come from an area where we didn't use CAR's at all - and sometimes we'd have one NAR, sometimes 2, sometimes none.
How do you figure one team has an advantage? I figure an incorrect decision is just as likely to go either way. Even for offside.
For those without offside, a CAR offers very little actual impact.
If a sub is acting as CAR then they can certainly be booked for dissent. Some interesting advice from others that if he's been booked for dissent, then it might be time to remove him as AR - and if the league requires a CAR then report the fact that no suitable CAR has been provided.
Did you send him away? Or just relieve him from CAR duties?
If so I am not sure this if this is a misconduct report to the county FA this would be a report to league/competition for a breach of competition rules, technically speaking. You deemed there CAR as unsuitable and they failed to provide an alternative. You only report misconduct for a manager if you send him away, you wouldnt if you have just spoken to him which in this case is how it reads.
FWIW you can still report this to the league, and I think you should for the sake of next weeks ref.
I agree with you here. On the odd occasions where one team has been unable to supply a CAR, I've made it very clear to the manager and/or captain and/or centre backs that because of their failure to provide an assistant, I will not be giving an offside decision up their end unless I'm 100% sure. I've never had any complaints with that approach, and most teams have been smart enough to avoid trying to play the offside trap as a result.You are far more likely to call someone offside if you have a AR CAR or not with his flag up then if you are trying to somehow work it out for yourself. Not all CAR are useless fair few of them are pretty decent I find. Personally if I'm not sure on an offside and I don't have one I will allow play to continue, if the CAR flags majority of time I will go with them. In my eyes it's a clear advantage and I would rather have 2 or 0.
He's a sub. He's committing dissent. Why aren't you carding him?Still can't see me ever thinking of carding an assistant in these circumstances. Lots of other actions but not a card.
The argument is that there's a point where you'd remove him as AR and a point further down the road where you'd card him for dissent. It does seem strange to me to reach the "dissent" point before you reach the "he's not acting like part of my team" point.He's a sub. He's committing dissent. Why aren't you carding him?
The argument is that there's a point where you'd remove him as AR and a point further down the road where you'd card him for dissent. It does seem strange to me to reach the "dissent" point before you reach the "he's not acting like part of my team" point.
Except that in this case, unless I've misread the posts, the caution was issued without removing the flag. The CAR voluntarily gave up the flag, apparently at some later point (as I understand it).At the end of the day he is a substitute, nothing more nothing less. So if you are removing the flag for an act of dissent he really needs to also be cautioned for it.
There's that - but we've passed that point already (and of course, sometimes the first comment may warrant a card)The argument is that there's a point where you'd remove him as AR and a point further down the road where you'd card him for dissent. It does seem strange to me to reach the "dissent" point before you reach the "he's not acting like part of my team" point.
CAR is still a named sub. Just means he gets stuck with some extra responsibilities. Nothing in the laws to say that a member of your team can't also be a player.Interesting scenario. I also don't see how you can card a CAR. Once you have accepted him as your AR (all be it a Club AR) he is more as part of your team than part of the other team. But I guess technically you can card him because he is in the teamsheet.
I agree with others that it should have never come to carding him and he should have been removed of his AR duties before that.
If first comment is that bad caution and take flag at same time?There's that - but we've passed that point already (and of course, sometimes the first comment may warrant a card)
CAR is still a named sub. Just means he gets stuck with some extra responsibilities. Nothing in the laws to say that a member of your team can't also be a player.
Sounds like you had an observer for a game where nothing happenedwhat do people think
I had an observer tonight, I just posted about it if you want the other extreme (eventful)