RefSix

Can we? Match incident

#1
Watching a game on Saturday in local amateur league in Cape Town (Premier Division). Player commits a bad foul and the ref blows for the free kick and issues a yellow card. On receiving the yellow, the offending player makes a nasty remark to the ref and the ref then issues another yellow card for dissent and then produces the red card. Is this correct? The discussion afterwards is that should the second yellow have been a straight red. I know this is semantics but what is the correct procedure?
 
#3
I accept that but that is not the question. Did the ref apply the correct procedure by giving two yellows and then a red in the same incident. As I understood it, the second yellow was for dissent and not foul and abusive language. The ref deemed that both offences were consistent infringements and that is why he gave the red after the second yellow.
 

Nij

Active Member
#5
Watching a game on Saturday in local amateur league in Cape Town (Premier Division). Player commits a bad foul and the ref blows for the free kick and issues a yellow card. On receiving the yellow, the offending player makes a nasty remark to the ref and the ref then issues another yellow card for dissent and then produces the red card. Is this correct? The discussion afterwards is that should the second yellow have been a straight red. I know this is semantics but what is the correct procedure?
If they have deemed the "nasty remark" to be dissent, then it is a caution, and the yellow card shown a second time. Then the player is dismissed for a second caution, and is shown the red card.
If they have deemed the remark to be offensive or insulting or abusive, then it is a dismissal, and the red card shown directly, no second yellow.
Since you've already stated it was the former situation, they were perfectly correct.
 

one

RefChat Addict
#6
I think the question OP is asking if the ref can produce a second yellow before play restarts having stopped play for the first yellow foul. The answer is yes. It is not the same incident. The yellows are for two different incidents in quick succession. Ball in play or not, has play restarted or not don't come into consideration.
 
#9
This was not applying two yellows in the same incident; it is two separate incidents in quick succession: namely, a reckless challenge (UB) and dissent by word or action. The referee is correct to show the yellow card twice and then the red card. There was a similar situation in the Prem some years ago where Rooney was cautioned for a challenge and subsequently cautioned and sent off for sarcastically clapping the referee.
 
#10
Had a similar scenario in a match on Sunday. Cautioned a player for a reckless tackle and got attitude when explaining why he was being cautioned. Another yellow for dissent but no red as it was a sin bin.
 
#11
Side note: it used to be that a second yellow was never shown, only the red. The idea then was the only thing that mattered was that the player was dismissed. The idea now is that the ref should communicate that the reason for the red was a second yellow rather than a straight send off. (I believe the change came with the first great re-write, at the same time cards were actually introduced into the Laws. )
 

RustyRef

Administrator
Staff member
#12
Wasn't for dissent, but similar to how Chris Baird was sent off for Northern Ireland a few years ago. Committed a reckless foul, referee played advantage with a view to going back for the caution, he then broke up a promising attack. Referee stopped play, showed a yellow for the first foul then another for the second followed by a red. Like I said there was no dissent involved, but shows the same player can be cautioned twice in a single stoppage of play.
 
#13
I accept that but that is not the question. Did the ref apply the correct procedure by giving two yellows and then a red in the same incident. As I understood it, the second yellow was for dissent and not foul and abusive language. The ref deemed that both offences were consistent infringements and that is why he gave the red after the second yellow.
Perhaps we can make this simple: if this was not permissible, it would mean any player cautioned would have free reign to dissent as much as he wanted until the ball was in play. That way lies madness.
 
#14
Perhaps we can make this simple: if this was not permissible, it would mean any player cautioned would have free reign to dissent as much as he wanted until the ball was in play. That way lies madness.
No, I think Capetown was asking about the process of showing the second yellow card in such quick succession and then the red card as opposed to just showing the red card.
 
#15
There's also the fact that the IFAB (perhaps because of questions like this) made a particular point of saying the following, in IFAB Circular 11, issued 25 September, 2017:
TWO OFFENCES AT THE SAME TIME/IN QUICK SUCCESSION
Where two separate cautionable (YC) offences are committed (even in close proximity), they should result in 2 x cautions (YCs)
 
Top