A&H

Disciplinary Hearing

higdawgy

higdawgy

Member
I have a disciplinary hearing Thursday in relation to this match https://refchat.co.uk/threads/keeper-losing-his-mind.19168/

The player involved was sent off and then tried to fight a bunch of people off the field, he is also the player/coach who confronted me and my assistants earlier in the season.

I am assuming that the hearing is in regard to him getting a considerable ban from the game but I haven't heard any other info. I am also in Australia so our season has just finished and any bans wouldn't come into effect until next season.

I haven't been involved in a hearing like this before and was curious about any sage advice. I am happy with my statement, I'm not going to speculate on anything and to be honest, I'm not really sure what else I can add to the proceedings.
My send-off report included what happened after the match as the player didn't leave the ground without further incident.

And as happens in a small town, my son plays for the Under 14s for the same club that he plays for. We have the club presentation night on Saturday, two days after the discipline hearing. :D
 
The Referee Store
Never been involved in a hearing myself but just remember you aren't the subject of the hearing so it should just be confirming the facts you have reported and anything else they want to know about what you saw, good luck :)
 
From the UK, specifically England perspective (others may be different Ron which case I’ll defer to Anubis et al).

1. Person charged confirms their details and desire to appeal.

2. Referee report read aloud and then referee is asked if there is anything they wish to add. Usual advice is to say “No”. You reported factually at the time and the appellant will be challenging your statement of events.

3. Panel will hear representations from the appellant and their witnesses if called.

4. A Q and A between the panel and appellant. Questions can only be asked of the referee by the panel, not directly.

5. Once this is done referee leaves and collects expenses if offered and then departs.

6. Panel makes a decision and advises the appellant - dismiss, uphold, mitigate.

Ultimately in our system the referee is simply a witness, and not on trial themselves, although it may feel like it.

Be prepared to hear misrepresentation, BS and outright lies in some cases.

I did once have the dubious pleasure of this, only for a witness to be called who totally contradicted his mate’s “evidence” and agreed with everything I wrote my report.

Took some satisfaction from that one 🙂
 
In England the rule of thumb is:
"Anything to add to your report, Mr Referee?"
"No thank you, sir"
Questions to you from the club are channeled via the chair of the panel, who chooses whether to allow them.
Currently the great majority of cases are held on Zoom or similar.
Stay calm, you are a witness for the prosecution. Good luck.
 
Tealeaf said:
From the UK, specifically England perspective (others may be different Ron which case I’ll defer to Anubis et al).

1. Person charged confirms their details and desire to appeal.

2. Referee report read aloud and then referee is asked if there is anything they wish to add. Usual advice is to say “No”. You reported factually at the time and the appellant will be challenging your statement of events.

3. Panel will hear representations from the appellant and their witnesses if called.

4. A Q and A between the panel and appellant. Questions can only be asked of the referee by the panel, not directly.

5. Once this is done referee leaves and collects expenses if offered and then departs.

6. Panel makes a decision and advises the appellant - dismiss, uphold, mitigate.

Ultimately in our system the referee is simply a witness, and not on trial themselves, although it may feel like it.

Be prepared to hear misrepresentation, BS and outright lies in some cases.

I did once have the dubious pleasure of this, only for a witness to be called who totally contradicted his mate’s “evidence” and agreed with everything I wrote my report.

Took some satisfaction from that one 🙂
Click to expand...
Have to disagree with that. First season reffing last year, and season finished with a FA hearing regarding a manager throwing punches at a linesman. I was asked questions by the manager, (over Zoom) and even questioned about wearing of reading glasses, for the hearing,from the manager, who was questioning my eyesight!
I felt like I was completely on trial, and was a bit shocked when it finished tbh. Gave up reffing that league now.
 
Muchomacho said:
Have to disagree with that. First season reffing last year, and season finished with a FA hearing regarding a manager throwing punches at a linesman. I was asked questions by the manager, (over Zoom) and even questioned about wearing of reading glasses, for the hearing,from the manager, who was questioning my eyesight!
I felt like I was completely on trial, and was a bit shocked when it finished tbh. Gave up reffing that league now.
Click to expand...
Hence my points about you not being on trial and being prepared to hear lies and BS.

Your experience demonstrates those - the manager in question tried to undermine your integrity by a personal attack. That’s the BS in action.

And my point about not being on trial, I made exactly because of situations like yours - you may feel under attack, but it’s their trial not yours. This is a known-tactic, but I’m hoping to reassure anyone that it genuine isn’t the case.

Hearings aren’t pleasant and it sounds like you had one of the worst ones. 😕
 
I’ve had both good and bad at hearings.
I had one where I got so much grief from the chairman of the commission that the player apologised afterwards for putting me through it! However, the charge was still found proven, they just wanted to make sure I stood by my report.
I also had an occasion where, as the secretary read my report the player’s phone rang. I was never asked a single question, apart from “do you have anything to add to your report” (the answer must always be “no.” If you wanted to add anything it should already be in the report) The player got hell for 20 minutes and then we went home.
From personal experience, the more “witnesses” the more likely they are to contradict each other.
I reported a manager who came 40 yards down the touch line and 30 yards on the pitch to scream at me. Five witnesses all agreed he had never left the technical area, despite my ARs both saying otherwise. The 6th witness then stated that “yes, I suppose he did, but he didn’t go that far down the line and he wasn’t very far on the pitch.” I looked at the panel to see them all smiling. The manager not so much!
 
My favourite one was in Surrey, where a Subbuteo pitch was set out for the manager to show his view of the sending off incident, i. e. where the players were, where the referee (me) was at the time. The chairman then invited me to amend the positions of the players and referee if I wished. I didn't, as the referee was correctly shown as three metres from the incident:).
Next witness was the club's assistant manager, who was on the halfway line/ touchline when the dismissal incident occurred near the penalty mark.
He was invited to amend the Subbuteo set-up if he disputed anything. He picked up the board from the table, turned it round 180 degrees and sat down.
The commission chairman asked why he had done that, without moving any of the players' or referee's positions.
Answer: "Well. I was standing this side of the pitch"
Commission members kept straight faces (somehow)
Case proven.
 
I had a good one sent a player off for striking an opponent and he appealed on the basis that he slapped the opponent not punched him. Needless to say I was in the hearing for about 5 minutes and the look on the panels faces were why are we even here and the player was slapped with an additional weeks suspension (it was in the days of timed suspensions as opposed to the current match bans) for the frivolous appeal.
 
I've been on both sides of the appeal table, had several as a referee, and have sat on loads as a member of the CFA disciplinary committee, as chair for a few of them. The experience the referee gets ultimately comes down to how good the commission members, and especially the chair, are. These days they should be very good as there is mandatory training and there is no way some of the things mentioned here should be allowed to happen. If you are unhappy at how the hearing has gone, I would recommend emailing the CEO of the CFA running it setting out your concerns. When I was involved it was a lot less regulated, was generally just CFA Council members selected to sit on hearings and they didn't necessarily have any training.

When on the "right" side of the table, my experience was that the player or club requesting a hearing would almost certainly tie themselves in knots. They'd often call witnesses, who could only come in one at a time, and they would contradict each other. The better commission members would ask questions that will stretch the charged persons and witnesses, and they fall apart.

The key thing when you are called as a referee is to not contradict anything in your report. If asked "do you have anything to add to your report" the answer has to be no every single time, as if you add anything it will be seized upon as to why it wasn't in there. If asked a question about anything, whether by the panel or the charged persons through the chair, always start your answer, if possible, with "as stated in my report".
 
So the hearing was a bit ****.

Felt quite unprofessional. The chair first asked me to disregard my send-off report and explain to us what happened in my own words.
I just repeated what was written in my report.
They then asked me about whether the free kick was unsporting, no it was fair that's why I allowed it.
Then questioned a bunch of silly things about the supporters and other people. None of which I could have known about as I was so far away from what happened.

All in all a very disappointing experience. I expected better from them.
I've been in the Navy for nearly 15 years so I guess I expected things to run a lot differently given my experience of discipline hearings.

I fully expect the player to get some sort of token punishment as they just spent the whole time trying to find excuses for what he did.
 
It sounds like commissions used to be here before they became more professional, as Rusty says.
I had one where they did a similar thing to me and I took it really personally. The player got away with a head butt because his manager told him to say he was trying to kiss the opponent! When he told him what to say the player said “I can’t say that!” - I was seated 3 feet away from them so heard them concocting the story. The panel took my story apart and then said his story could have been true because it was so stupid. He was found not guilty, which I was appalled by, as I was 6 feet from the incident and heard the victim’s comments. He swore at the player as he attacked him, while the story they told was that he asked the player to give him a kiss!!!

As I say, I took it as a personal insult that they believed the rubbish that was put instead of my report. However, I’ve learnt to ignore it if they are stupid, and just accept that I did my job on the day. I am always professional when I attend these, even if I am the only one who is.

Some commissions are run better than others - as has been said, it depends who is chairing it. Don’t worry that this one was like it was. Hopefully the next will be more professional.
 
higdawgy said:
I have a disciplinary hearing Thursday in relation to this match https://refchat.co.uk/threads/keeper-losing-his-mind.19168/

The player involved was sent off and then tried to fight a bunch of people off the field, he is also the player/coach who confronted me and my assistants earlier in the season.

I am assuming that the hearing is in regard to him getting a considerable ban from the game but I haven't heard any other info. I am also in Australia so our season has just finished and any bans wouldn't come into effect until next season.

I haven't been involved in a hearing like this before and was curious about any sage advice. I am happy with my statement, I'm not going to speculate on anything and to be honest, I'm not really sure what else I can add to the proceedings.
My send-off report included what happened after the match as the player didn't leave the ground without further incident.

And as happens in a small town, my son plays for the Under 14s for the same club that he plays for. We have the club presentation night on Saturday, two days after the discipline hearing. :D
Click to expand...
It sounds like you are worried about your son's future play. Don't worry, dignity comes first. If you are confident in your decision, there is nothing to be afraid of.

Hi all.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top