Dissent

[zarathustra]

Dissent is a difficult one, as we will all have our own limits to what we class as dissent.

A good indicator, is, as others have said, it is "obvious". I had a game at the weekend, hardly any moaning (the dismissal for OFFINABUS in the first half might have helped with that) but the one comment I did feel was dissent was a player shouting that a decision was ******** from about 25yds away.

He went straight in the book without a second thought.

However, sometimes it is better to give the players enough rope to hang themselves with. Player constantly chipping away, nothing major but on the edge of a dissent caution, or maybe some one who just argues every decision but not from the other side of the pitch etc. get them in, with captain if you think the captain will be of any use, and give them a public verbal warning, making it clear what will happen if they pipe up again.

You'll often find their teams mates will keep them quite, and if not there can be no complaints as everyone has seen/heard you warn them.

 

[BCMilan]

get them in, with captain if you think the captain will be of any use

Is it just me, or do you find the skipper is often the original culprit, or shows a bad example to the others ?

 

[RustyRef]

I'm planning on applying for promotion to level 6 next season, would you recommend squashing dissent during observed games or just treating it like normal?

As an observer I will only criticise an official if he consistently ignores dissent that is fairly low level. That doesn't mean he has to caution, it can just be a chat, use the captain, formal warning, etc, but doing nothing isn't an option.

Where I will criticise is where it is so public a caution is expected but this doesn't happen. Examples are slamming the ball down, blasting the ball into the adverting boards, very loud and public words of dissent, screaming in your face, and so on.

 

[RobOda]

I'm planning on applying for promotion to level 6 next season, would you recommend squashing dissent during observed games or just treating it like normal?

Well, don't referee differently just because the observers are there...

In my experience assessors have responded positively to:

* Cautioning players getting in your face - shouting, verbally disagreeing whilst approaching.
* Being consistent with it - Unusual that a player would be stupid enough to do it twice, but if he does, red should be coming out.
* Throwing/punching/slamming the ball after a decision.
* Applauding you after making a decision.

Clear issues sort of thing. I see Rusty already covered the same thing though so...

 

[Redster]

I find it handy to put the threshold away from myself and how I 'feel' about a particular action or phrase and consider whether it could undermine my future decisions and authority over the match.

There is less room for taking the thrusts personally and much more room to have a quiet (or public) word with a player which will generally be to the effect of: 'you are going very close to the line, if you continue in this fashion I will have to decide that you are dissenting and you will be cautioned'.

Most players will pull up their socks immediately, the stupid ones will not. The stupid ones are the ones that go in the book.