'Afters' after advantage

[Moortz]

Hello again. Nearly there with my first season, had an interesting one yesterday which was ok as it happened but made me think about it afterwards.

u15s lower league boys, decent game, one of the top teams against one of the bottom teams but the weaker (home) team were winning and had been physically dominating the better (away) team. Manager of the losing team was getting a bit mardy with the physical game but I'd vocalised to the players and coaches early on that I was happy to let the game flow as long as they kept the challenges fair. (he wanted every little touch to be a free kick, ex pro player). To be fair to the away team they were giving as good as they got but getting pulled into the physical game instead of playing football...

So the losing team are getting a bit radgy, it's 2-1 with about 10 minutes left. One of the losing teams smaller players (at this age you get kids like him who look about 12 and some who look about 22) had been leaving a bit on in tackles a couple of times, nothing serious so I'd had a word with him in passing to pack it in, in order to let the game flow - however, in the centre circle he gets the ball and is fouled clearly and strongly by a poor slide tackle (a bit of retribution for the tackles he had been leaving a bit on) - the ball pops out to one of his team mates - whistle is in the lips ready to blow for the foul, but I can see the wingers made a run and the midfielder is about to pass it so I shout 'advantage' for the losing team, do the one hand signal and go to run to keep up with the game.

As I go to run past the (fouled) lad on the floor, he gets up and pushes the other lad over, who gets up and pushes him back and another player gets involved - I blow the whistle (quite loudly), everyone stops apart from the altercation and I step in and sort it out, have a chat with the two players involved and the captains and then award the free kick to the away team for the original foul. Losing team manager is angry with me for bringing it back, but it seemed like the right thing to do to prevent escalation and possible violence/cards being issued.

So I understand you can play advantage if you are issuing a card for the offence, even if it's a red as I understand, but what if the offence continues into 'afters' after you've played the advantage...

cheers for your thoughts. I think I'm going to do more 15s-18s next season, its a better mind set and easier to work with than the 13s and 14s who just gob off all the time.

 

[Anubis]

From the picture in my head, there was clearly too much risk in this advantage
Am sure if you could replay this incident, you would simply award the fk
2-1, ten mins left, centre circle, even the prev of the player(s) involved. Free kick every day of the week.

It also reads like you opted not to caution what read like stonewall cautionable offences. Very minimum it reads like a yc to each player, the fouled and the fouler, adopting aggressive attitude....

this yc to each team reinforces your control, and shoud help see you out the last ten mins. " Handbags" is not acceptable and requires the referee to deal, we are equipped with cards, they are our control tools, we need use them.

it sounds like there was far too much risk factor to consider an advantage here and also the misconduct was not correctly handled. You have no remit to avoid showing cards when they are needed, Based purely on your post, they were needed.

advantage, is a match control tool. Sadly your ' advantage' lost you control, not, enhanced it

 

[JamesL]

It sounds like the temperature of this game was rising and we haven't recognised it..

As referees we need to sense when to let the game flow and when to kill it.

This advantage was too risky, given location on pitch and what was happening.

There's an art to letting a game flow and when to, or when to take the bull by the horns and kill it.

 

[Moortz]

Fair points. Trouble is, and I understand it in regards to how I have described the situation, what if it's the same offence, the same players but it's an obvious goal scoring opportunity? Do you allow the advantage and possible goal at the expense of the situation becoming volatile, or blow up for the free kick, prevent the escalation from the foul but then face the escalation of the manager/players for not allowing the advantage. You see the point of my question, which one takes precendence?

 

[JamesL]

Fair points. Trouble is, and I understand it in regards to how I have described the situation, what if it's the same offence, the same players but it's an obvious goal scoring opportunity? Do you allow the advantage and possible goal at the expense of the situation becoming volatile, or blow up for the free kick, prevent the escalation from the foul but then face the escalation of the manager/players for not allowing the advantage. You see the point of my question, which one takes precendence?

I'd go for free kick. Unless the ball. Is in the net before I can stop play.

As I see it both players have offended thus matey that retaliated costs his team the chance to score a goal.

Of course every scenario is different but fighting, I'm going safe everytime stopping and having eyes on the flash point.

 

[Anubis]

Fair points. Trouble is, and I understand it in regards to how I have described the situation, what if it's the same offence, the same players but it's an obvious goal scoring opportunity? Do you allow the advantage and possible goal at the expense of the situation becoming volatile, or blow up for the free kick, prevent the escalation from the foul but then face the escalation of the manager/players for not allowing the advantage. You see the point of my question, which one takes precendence?

Try thinking of it like traffic lights and driving

Defensive area, is a red light, A no go. Well, you could decide to go, subject to circumstances, extra care, extra awareness, and you know there is a big risk

Midfield ( your area in the post), is amber, Its a maybe, Again, subject to conditions

Attacking third, is a green light, but its the same as when driving, its green, but we still glance each way, as much as we are driving out car, we cant account for other drivers etc.


like James above, when operating alone, match control outweighs possible goal, end of day, if the players cant behave, am really not overly concerned about their chances to score. You try ruin my game, am happy to ruin yours.....you play nice with me, am happy to let things play out.

 

[Moortz]

I see you're an experienced ref there so your point interests me. If the game is getting fractious towards the end and I start increasing control (free kicks and cards and slowing it all down) isn't that making it in the interest of the winning team to make the game more fractious (which they were doing)? As a ref, do you need to be consistent (i.e letting the game flow all game) or do managing the game (not letting it flow) even if it benefits one team over another?

 

[Moortz]

Ok thanks for the responses, I understand a little better - decisions sometimes relate to who is involved (and where it is) so in this case as it's the little aggro fella who has been fouled, and its in the middle, get on the foul and blow up early to make sure there aren't any handbags.
I feel a little like, as has been covered before, yellow cards for the two lads involved would have been harsh at this age group, but I take into account what you have said, maybe if it was early second half I would need to stop that before it starts.
I'm a little confused in general about 'leaving a bit on', a couple of times in kids football when it's happened I've noticed but not blown up in an attempt to 'let the game flow'. I suppose these build up during the game and create these flashpoints, which is part of game management early on?

 

[GraemeS]

Yeah, the other half of the point that @JamesL and @Anubis are making is that it doesn't actually sound like a particularly good advantage (I mean that in terms of quality of the opportunity rather than quality of your decision).

If the ball is going directly towards the goal, with a high chance of the ball ending up in the back of then net then yeah, play the advantage even in the most fractious game with the most awful foul you've ever seen. But a midfielder about to poke the ball to a winger isn't that exciting - you can stop the game, give the card, restart with a free kick and the "game state" will be pretty similar to what it was without the advantage.

 

[GraemeS]

Ok thanks for the responses, I understand a little better - decisions sometimes relate to who is involved (and where it is) so in this case as it's the little aggro fella who has been fouled, and its in the middle, get on the foul and blow up early to make sure there aren't any handbags.
I feel a little like, as has been covered before, yellow cards for the two lads involved would have been harsh at this age group, but I take into account what you have said, maybe if it was early second half I would need to stop that before it starts.
I'm a little confused in general about 'leaving a bit on', a couple of times in kids football when it's happened I've noticed but not blown up in an attempt to 'let the game flow'. I suppose these build up during the game and create these flashpoints, which is part of game management early on?

The important point with anything repeated (late nudges/kicks, pushes under a high ball, dissent) is that you're visibly seen to have recognised the pattern. So you don't necessarily need to stop the game more than you otherwise would for the early ones, but when the next stoppage does come, delay the restart, get all eyes on you and go and talk to the player in question. Get the captain in if it's a pattern involving multiple players from the same team and make it clear that you're approaching a card for Persistent Infringement.

7 or 8 times out of 10, the next foul/dissent that would actually require a card then doesn't happen - and if it does, no one will be surprised when the card does come out.

 

[JamesL]

I see you're an experienced ref there so your point interests me. If the game is getting fractious towards the end and I start increasing control (free kicks and cards and slowing it all down) isn't that making it in the interest of the winning team to make the game more fractious (which they were doing)? As a ref, do you need to be consistent (i.e letting the game flow all game) or do managing the game (not letting it flow) even if it benefits one team over another?

It can, but you also run the risk of allowing the game to spiral out of control by not dealing with it so there's your trade off.

You seem to be placing an awful lot of emphasis on letting the game flow. Games that you allow to flow, are the games that flow on their own.

If its flowing nicely already we can maybe let the little trifling fouls go, the slight tug, the small trip but posession retained as examples. But when it isn't we use those fouls to raise our profile and remind players we are refereeing the game.

 

[CA1992]

You mention in your original post, that the tackle which led to the flare up was a bit of retribution for what in the eyes of one team, were late challenges from one player that were not dealt with by the referee, so they took the law in to their own hands.

In the build up to the incident, looking back, could you have dealt with the persistent offender differently to prevent the whole situation from happening at all?

1st late challenge - warning
2nd late challenge - stop game and public warning
3rd late challenge - caution

The 'victims' of the challenges can clearly see that they have been acknowledged and dealt with by the referee - could that have avoided the firm challenge and following handbags?

Taking the situation as it happened - In agreement with Anubis & James on the advantage - in the middle of the pitch, with temperatures rising and an incoming caution for the offender on a reckless foul, unless the immediate pass after your advantage puts someone clear through on goal, I'm blowing for the free kick, running towards the incident to prevent any flare up and dealing with the offender.

 

[Moortz]

@CA1992 not late challenges, just little bits of 'afters', a little attempt at a kick out after a missed tackle, verbals with other players, walking 'accidentally' into players after free kicks given - just low level aggro. Nothing specific which is why I just had a word with him to calm it down. If he had done a reckless tackle or dissent I would have happily cautioned him, but he didnt do anything blatant so it was just a chat until this incident.

 

[Moortz]

WIth regards to @Anubis comment about not booking the two players, in junior football, to me it feels like a card needs to be clear and obvious to everyone, it's not like adult football where cards are used in almost every game. I reffed a game of u13s that was a nightmare to control, I tried everything to not escalate to a card but ended up booking two lads, one sin bin for dissent and one for persistant fouling. One parent after complained 'You reffed that like an adult game'. It was the first time they had had an assigned ref that season and only their 3rd or 4th 11-a-side game - so I'm trying to find the balance between control, letting the kids play, teaching them some of the laws by explaining when it's a free kick and why, and also keeping it safe and fair. It's a struggle sometimes.

I felt at the time, and to bring it back to the points above, a card for aggro lad would have been right for his aggressive behaviour especially after I'd spoken to him, but a card for the other kid would have been disproportionate - his foul wasn't worthy of a card really, but I couldn't have booked one without booking the other one. so ended up booking neither. I reckon at the time I'm stuck with that 'you reffed that like an adult game' comment in my head so would rather not book them unless it's a clearly explainable card.

<edit> just reading that back, I do understand (with hindsight) that the tackle was a yellow card because of the potential flashpoint, rather than because of the tackle itself and *thats* where I stop the game and get involved

does that make sense? It's hard sometimes because it seems like the more experienced referees here are in open age or up the pyramid so cards are your go to place for match control, but in kids football it can seem harsh to everyone when you book a 12 or 13 year old (or even a 15 year old) , even if you've done everything you can to try and stop it happening.

 

[Anubis]

WIth regards to @Anubis comment about not booking the two players, in junior football, to me it feels like a card needs to be clear and obvious to everyone, it's not like adult football where cards are used in almost every game. I reffed a game of u13s that was a nightmare to control, I tried everything to not escalate to a card but ended up booking two lads, one sin bin for dissent and one for persistant fouling. One parent after complained 'You reffed that like an adult game'. It was the first time they had had an assigned ref that season and only their 3rd or 4th 11-a-side game - so I'm trying to find the balance between control, letting the kids play, teaching them some of the laws by explaining when it's a free kick and why, and also keeping it safe and fair. It's a struggle sometimes.

I felt at the time, and to bring it back to the points above, a card for aggro lad would have been right for his aggressive behaviour especially after I'd spoken to him, but a card for the other kid would have been disproportionate - his foul wasn't worthy of a card really, but I couldn't have booked one without booking the other one. so ended up booking neither. I reckon at the time I'm stuck with that 'you reffed that like an adult game' comment in my head so would rather not book them unless it's a clearly explainable card.

<edit> just reading that back, I do understand (with hindsight) that the tackle was a yellow card because of the potential flashpoint, rather than because of the tackle itself and *thats* where I stop the game and get involved

does that make sense? It's hard sometimes because it seems like the more experienced referees here are in open age or up the pyramid so cards are your go to place for match control, but in kids football it can seem harsh to everyone when you book a 12 or 13 year old (or even a 15 year old) , even if you've done everything you can to try and stop it happening.

" nightmare to control, i tried not to use cards"


case open and closed your honour! We have both the issue, and the solution




there is nothing harsh in cautioning players who committ cautionable offences,In your example, ping them both a yellow, and see out the last ten mins
not to card sends out a message of, what happened was within the lotg and not worthy of further action. Its always good to remind players that we have the tools required to perform our role,

issuing a warning with ten to go is, ( no offence and not personal), a waste of time,

 

[Kes]

<edit> just reading that back, I do understand (with hindsight) that the tackle was a yellow card because of the potential flashpoint, rather than because of the tackle itself and *thats* where I stop the game and get involved

does that make sense? It's hard sometimes because it seems like the more experienced referees here are in open age or up the pyramid so cards are your go to place for match control, but in kids football it can seem harsh to everyone when you book a 12 or 13 year old (or even a 15 year old) , even if you've done everything you can to try and stop it happening.

I think you're confusing yourself here mate. (No offence).

If the tackle deserved a caution then it was because it was either reckless or cynical (SPA). Full stop. You may view the resultant "flash point" that came afterwards as an extension of the challenge but it's a separate thing. You played advantage, so you can't caution for SPA but you can go back and caution for a reckless challenge. You could also have cautioned for USB (AA) by both players involved in the handbags, which, as I read it from your original post, is a separate action from both individuals.

 

[Moortz]

Riiight, no I get it. Handbags is a caution for both players. Tackling player causes the ruckus with a poor foul tackle (not reckless or dangerous) so deserves the yellow for retaliation in the following altercation anyway, knowing the aggro lad is going to come at him. Justifiable YCs

@Anubis do you ref kids football?

 

[GraemeS]

<edit> just reading that back, I do understand (with hindsight) that the tackle was a yellow card because of the potential flashpoint, rather than because of the tackle itself and *thats* where I stop the game and get involved

does that make sense? It's hard sometimes because it seems like the more experienced referees here are in open age or up the pyramid so cards are your go to place for match control, but in kids football it can seem harsh to everyone when you book a 12 or 13 year old (or even a 15 year old) , even if you've done everything you can to try and stop it happening.

There are a lot of reasons to treat any given match with a softer approach - as James says in post 11, a game that "wants" to flow can be allowed to do so and similarly, kids that want to behave like kids and have fun can be refereed as such.

But the players have to earn the right to a looser interpretation of law. In your case, you've specifically identified a player who is going out of his way to be "aggro", who is trying to wind up opponents and is deliberately fouling and hurting them to do so. You've also identified a player "leaving one on" him in retribution. Those players get no slack whatsoever from me as soon as I identify that behaviour - and the same would be true if he was playing U10's open age, vets, walking football or any other form you can think of.

EDIT: The other thing I'd add is that kids are perhaps even more receptive to "talking to's" than adults, as they're used to that to some extent from school. The real learning point here isn't that you didn't pull out the cards - it's that you missed opportunities to remind players that cards are an option and things then escalated to the point where you have to make a more difficult call. Don't get too focused on the actual inciting incident (although when to play advantage is a fair question) - much more interesting is the idea that you maybe could have done something to limit that behaviour before the point where cards became a necessity.

 

[Moortz]

Thanks @GraemeS ,it makes sense as I say it's a learning season for me, a lot of the situations I've had issues with have been what I would consider edge cases, things I wouldn't have thought about (a kid punching another kid as I look at the AR to see who's throw in it is for instance) and when I've asked experienced refs like on here they always identify where I can improve *before* the incident happens to either prevent it or to better handle it. I've used the advice given a couple of times and it really helps. The 'when to use cards' thing is a bit of an issue in kids football, especially boys in that u13/14 age group who I have mostly reffed this season who are at that awkard age where they dont know the laws and have attitudes, and have come through 7 a side and 9 a side games and probably never seen a ref give a card - but if I move over to the U15s-18s next season I can certainly accept that they should know the laws of the game and actually be affected by cards, in which case (as above) I can learn to use them to assist me in control.

 

[CA1992]

@CA1992 not late challenges, just little bits of 'afters', a little attempt at a kick out after a missed tackle, verbals with other players, walking 'accidentally' into players after free kicks given - just low level aggro. Nothing specific which is why I just had a word with him to calm it down. If he had done a reckless tackle or dissent I would have happily cautioned him, but he didnt do anything blatant so it was just a chat until this incident.

Like I say, take this as a learning point that can help you keep it at "low level aggro" without it escalating

First time he does it, get straight on top of it and warn him (ideally so other players can hear you)

If he does it again, stop the game, call him over to you and give him a public warning that everyone can see (this is your opportunity to give him a final chance to cut it out before sanctions come in and sends a message to all players that you've acknowledged what's happening and are trying to stamp it out)

3rd time - he's been warned twice, other players are getting frustrated with it, he's really given you no choice and only has himself to blame for a caution (it doesn't have to be reckless or dissent - you've got him for persistent infringement (C3))

Using the stepped approach, the whole thing may have stopped at step 2 - which would have taken the issue you encountered out of the game completely.

I get what you're saying about the age and I'm certainly not an advocate for dishing out cards willy nilly - but at U15 they're old enough and know full well what they're doing and the behavior affected your match control.