The Ref Stop

Argentina v Switzerland

one said:
Let's say player A recklessly challenges an opponent and gains posession of the ball. The referee misses this reckless challenge. Within a few seconds another opponent, player B, challenges player A in a fair manner. The referee deems this reckless, stops play and cautions player B.

With the 'new' interpretation this is mistaken identity which is ridiculous. They just found a way of getting VAR to fix bad mistakes which are otherwise not reviewable.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it is. Those are two incidents, not a single incident in which the wrong player was cautioned. I mean, this is all pretty simple. FIFA (maybe just Colllina), decided they wanted simulation reviewable when an opponent was carded. Whether mpby saying “well, they are both USB, so it’s mistaken identity” or by just making it up, that is how refs were instructed. It’s a feature not a bug. Shrug.
 
The Ref Stop
RefereeX said:
Embolo sent off after VAR mistaken identity review, second yellow for simulation.

I can’t agree with this, again.
I said when it happened in the USA game before. This is NOT mistaken identity. It’s an incorrectly judged foul.
The wrong player has been booked, yes, but not because his identity was mistaken.

If people think that should be in VAR’s remit, then fine; but it should not be called mistaken identity
Click to expand...
I completely agree. Mistaken identity is when yellow no.2 has committed the offence but the ref mistakenly punished yellow no.6.
 
Dicky Herts said:
Never been a problem for me, as long as it doesn’t delay the restart for too long And they are not provocative.
Click to expand...
Despite the fact that it's contrary to Law 12?
The concern is that it becomes the norm, then becomes a chance to show off, then becomes provocative. Better to keep the genie in the bottle, rather than trying to reverse a behavioural trend, IMHO.
 
Dicky Herts said:
Never been a problem for me, as long as it doesn’t delay the restart for too long And they are not provocative.
Click to expand...
I do agree it generally isn't an issue and we have to pick our battles a little, however some of the instances at the WC have been outrageous so I can see what Chas is getting at.

ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
Despite the fact that it's contrary to Law 12?
The concern is that it becomes the norm, then becomes a chance to show off, then becomes provocative. Better to keep the genie in the bottle, rather than trying to reverse a behavioural trend, IMHO.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, are you really booking all of them? What would you say is the best course of action from an Obs perspective? Tough one to judge.
 
ocj1998 said:
I do agree it generally isn't an issue and we have to pick our battles a little, however some of the instances at the WC have been outrageous so I can see what Chas is getting at.


On the other hand, are you really booking all of them? What would you say is the best course of action from an Obs perspective? Tough one to judge.
Click to expand...
Needs a clear message at the outset of the season, after FIFA turned two blind eyes.
 
Clearly not in the case of law, but I've been taught that context is important in these situations.

If it is a 90th minute winner and the subs that enter the pitch don't run the full distance of the pitch to get involved or cause any delay to the game restarting, I think you'd let it go. If they are obviously excessive, delay the game or if it happened in the 60th minute rather than the 90th, I think there's more basis to caution. Again, dependant on the circumstances, but you might be better advised to caution the worst offender rather than all 5, despite theoretically them all committing an offence. I think it's something to be judged on a case by case basis and something you're never going to get a consistent approach to, unless the FA put out a message as above to make it clear that a zero tolerance approach should be adopted... but that's unlikely as these messages usually come after discussion with stakeholders including clubs and I doubt it's anywhere near their priority list.
 
I reffed a team managed by a fellow level 7 referee in a Sunday league friendly several years back. After the game he told me he thought I missed a caution. I asked what for, to be told that I should have cautioned his midfielder for leaving the FOP without permission when he was injured (and he was being deadly serious too). Suffice to say he hasn't quite made it in refereeing.
 
RefereeX said:
Clearly not in the case of law, but I've been taught that context is important in these situations.

If it is a 90th minute winner and the subs that enter the pitch don't run the full distance of the pitch to get involved or cause any delay to the game restarting, I think you'd let it go. If they are obviously excessive, delay the game or if it happened in the 60th minute rather than the 90th, I think there's more basis to caution. Again, dependant on the circumstances, but you might be better advised to caution the worst offender rather than all 5, despite theoretically them all committing an offence. I think it's something to be judged on a case by case basis and something you're never going to get a consistent approach to, unless the FA put out a message as above to make it clear that a zero tolerance approach should be adopted... but that's unlikely as these messages usually come after discussion with stakeholders including clubs and I doubt it's anywhere near their priority list.
Click to expand...
Spot on, where like most things, not a case of one size fits all - all depends upon the exact circumstances etc at the time of the incident.
 
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
Despite the fact that it's contrary to Law 12?
The concern is that it becomes the norm, then becomes a chance to show off, then becomes provocative. Better to keep the genie in the bottle, rather than trying to reverse a behavioural trend, IMHO.
Click to expand...
But it doesn’t become the norm. I’ve had it a few times and If I was expected to caution everyone who did it I’m issuing between 5-8 yellows. Ain’t gonna happen. I give them a few seconds to celebrate then whistle and ask them to get off the pitch and players to get ready to restart. If at that point they refuse I’m giving cautions. And if during the celebration anyone does anything provocative or intimidating I’m dealing with them too. If you’re a Referee observer I’m shocked.
 
ladbroke8745 said:
Can i ask why they seem to be ignoring this law when it comes to cautions?
I get emotions etc but you should not replace laws because of it.

View attachment 8792

Now the reason why I highlighted this is because L. Martinez was already on a caution when, after scoring the third goal, ran to the crowd and more or less jumped in.. this still was taken before the mob.....
If cautioned, he'd have been suspended after being sent off.

View attachment 8791
Click to expand...
We know the bar for a second yellow is (slightly) higher for all of us. That’s even more true in big business entertainment like the World Cup.

The argument on this occasion would be that he got lucky, because, whilst he certainly fulfilled the first part of the criteria, there were in fact no safety concerns or issues actually created. A good time was had by all 😊
 
Dicky Herts said:
But it doesn’t become the norm. I’ve had it a few times and If I was expected to caution everyone who did it I’m issuing between 5-8 yellows. Ain’t gonna happen. I give them a few seconds to celebrate then whistle and ask them to get off the pitch and players to get ready to restart. If at that point they refuse I’m giving cautions. And if during the celebration anyone does anything provocative or intimidating I’m dealing with them too. If you’re a Referee observer I’m shocked.
Click to expand...
My concern is that all the World Cup shenanigans may well be copied in local football in the new season.
As all Observers know, and has been said here earlier, context is important - we look for an appropriate response to what happens during the game.
Your approach is appropriate, but bearing in mind that we have a lot of newer officials in this forum they need to be aware that this may happen, and the possibility of a caution or two being necessary.
 
Referees who apply the laws too literally often get themselves into serious issues. I've referred to this before, but I sat on a disciplinary commission years ago where a game had been abandoned by the referee. A team had walked off the pitch in protest at his decisions so he cautioned them all, he told them if they didn't come back he would abandon the game. There was a bit of a delay, then they came back on, only for him to give second cautions to the first five and duly abandon the game. Technically speaking he was right to caution them for leaving without permission, but it was argued (and agreed) that in telling them they had to come back on to avoid the game being abandoned he had given permission to re-enter the field of play.

That's obviously a very extreme example, but you have a similar problem with excessive celebrations. If 15 subs run on the pitch to celebrate a goal, and there are that many in the World Cup, who are you cautioning? They've all committed identical offences, and that law wasn't designed for that purpose, rather it was to prevent subs going onto the pitch to influence the play, something they obviously can't do when play is stopped after a goal. If the celebration causes a problem then by all means the referee needs to get involved, but if not they are just going to be accused of being the fun police.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top