Open Age Dealing with 'Main Character' players

Hi All,

Had a good game yesterday, bottom vs top on a just about thawed pitch - both teams were very well behaved, and aside from a few words here and there, there was very little for me to do, and as you'd expect, the top team won very comfortably, 8-1.

I did however have a bit of an issue with a player from the bottom (losing) team, can only describe him as a bit of a 'main character' - big chap, very loud, constantly giving everyone, and I mean everyone, BANTER.

His 'banter' never quite entered into the dissent bracket for me so I found it a bit difficult to manage - he was the big targetman for the bottom team, though at least a few yards off the pace most of the time, but the winning team centre backs were persistently complaining about him sneaking little elbows in off the ball, 'jokingly' trying to grab them and tickle them (I know) etc.

He was in persistent 'banter' mode with the other team's manager pretty much throughout the entire game and aside from a few instances of him shouting/screeching at opposing players he wasn't doing much wrong that I could actually see - I had a few stern words and brought the captain in for one of these to warn him about verbally distracting which seem to stop him from doing that.

Before he was subbed off, the other team's centre backs were on the edge of potentially of losing their rag with him - I was sympathetic and made sure to have public words, but never actually saw him doing any of the above.

At the end, both his manager and captain apologised for him, and seemed pretty annoyed with how he is.

Anyway, long story short, any advice on how to deal with these types of players whose behaviour doesn't neatly fall into any offence brackets i.e. USB or dissent.

Dissent can only be committed against a match official.

What you are describing seems to be flirting with unsporting behaviour.

We manage this in the same way though. Pull him in, explain the behaviour you are unhappy with and maybe why if it will help, and what will happen, i.e. a caution, if they dont stop that behaviour.

You recognised that this could have affected your match control. The next step is to take action to prevent it and not leave it up to chance

Other members will have a more "touchy-feely" type of advice to offer I'm sure but if his "niggly" behaviour is becoming a problem for you or the game, one option you have is calling him to you and warning him that he risks a caution for USB (showing a lack of respect for the game) if his behaviour/distraction continues.

Thank you, both - excellent advice, much appreciated.

Dissent can be one isolated verbal/act on the more severe side, or a collection of little ones.

On the general poor behavior side, recognising it is the first step which you did. Taking initial action (warning) is the next which you did. If it doesn't stop, not taking action or taking similar action and not 'upping' it will only undermine your own authority. If the warning doesn't work there has to be bigger consequences. IMO if match control was still intact is more due to luck rather then good match management.

JamesL said:

Pull him in, explain the behaviour you are unhappy with and maybe why if it will help, and what will happen, i.e. a caution, if they dont stop that behaviour.

Click to expand...

I know this will work well for you and more experienced referees James but I am hesitant to advise referees with less experience to back themselves into a corner. Once that ultimatum is given the response to any indiscretion has to be a caution and has to be prompt, even if it is a small one and in isolation it is not a caution. It's very easy to think "not this time" in your head and ignore it (or give another warning) and as a consequence lose credibility on your word. "there may/will be more serious action" is more neutral.

one said:

Dissent can be one isolated verbal/act on the more severe side, or a collection of little ones.

On the general poor behavior side, recognising it is the first step which you did. Taking initial action (warning) is the next which you did. If it doesn't stop, not taking action or taking similar action and not 'upping' it will only undermine your own authority. If the warning doesn't work there has to be bigger consequences. IMO if match control was still intact is more due to luck rather then good match management.


I know this will work well for you and more experienced referees James but I am hesitant to advise referees with less experience to back themselves into a corner. Once that ultimatum is given the response to any indiscretion has to be a caution and has to be prompt, even if it is a small one and in isolation it is not a caution. It's very easy to think "not this time" in your head and ignore it (or give another warning) and as a consequence lose credibility on your word. "there may/will be more serious action" is more neutral.

Click to expand...

Yes. Bas typing on my part. I generally go with run the risk of a caution but fair point

JamesL said:

Bas typing on my part.

Click to expand...

Irony

Who is Bas? And why are you letting him type on your part?

RefereeX said:

Irony

Who is Bas? And why are you letting him type on your part?

Click to expand...

I was about to leap in but you've done my job for me. Bravo Sir.