A&H

Forgive me Refchat, for I (may) have sinned ....

Status
Not open for further replies.
Russell Jones

Russell Jones

RefChat Addict
Last 15 seconds of a recent Step 6 game. Up to this point, good natured, good banter, three cards all for 'professional' C1s ie deliberately breaking up promising attacks.

Recently introduced substitute lunges for ball in a clearly reckless fashion. Takes it without any contact with the opposition player. Obvious Yellow Card though no real appeals from other team. I blow for foul, isolate player and then notice he has a tiny nose stud, missed by my senior AR when allowing him on field. On the spur of the moment, I decide to have a strong word about the tackle and then require him to leave the FOP to remove the jewellry. Before he is able to return, blow full time whistle, handshakes all round, everyone happy. Post game, praise from both managers and various club officials for the way I handled the incident ....

Sooo, sensitive and empathetic refereeing in keeping with the temperature of the game ... or gross dereliction of my duties?? :angel::devil:
 
The Referee Store
Why did a nose stud change your decision to caution the player?

Just a thought, but if he's cleanly won the ball, and no one has appealed for a foul then perhaps your caution would have come as a surprise to most?
 
For clarity, players did loudly appeal for a foul but were not vocal in requesting anything more. The nose stud allowed me to legitmately ensure that the offending player was off the pitch, out of any harm's way, for the short remainder of the game
 
Russell Jones said:
For clarity, players did loudly appeal for a foul but were not vocal in requesting anything more. The nose stud allowed me to legitmately ensure that the offending player was off the pitch, out of any harm's way, for the short remainder of the game
Click to expand...

But what difference does it make to the challenge?

You'd already decided it was reckless, therefore a caution.....

I'm struggling to see the thought process whereby a nose stud overrides a mandatory caution?
 
Agree with Brian - shouldn't worry about the appeals. It's not parliament where decisions are made on whether the 'ayes' or 'nays' have it. Sometimes the players just don't appeal obvious decisions.

But it's the thought process here to go back from the caution I wonder about....

As for missing the nose stud - if you miss it, you miss it. Maybe the player wasn't even in attendance at the prematch check.
 
Padfoot said:
I'm struggling to see the thought process whereby a nose stud overrides a mandatory caution?
Click to expand...
The main purposes of a caution are to ensure that particular player is incentivised to control his behaviour for the rest of the game and to reduce the risk that opposition players feel the need to take the law into their own hands. The fortuitous opportunity to remove the offender for the remainder of the game managed to tick both these boxes without the need for the card

Brian Hamilton said:
I'm struggling to see why the players have to ask for an opponent to be cautioned before you'll issue one
Click to expand...
They don't. As I recall, there hadn't been requests from opposition players for any of the three previous cautions in this match either. This situation just 'felt' different at the time

CapnBloodbeard said:
As for missing the nose stud - if you miss it, you miss it. Maybe the player wasn't even in attendance at the prematch check.
Click to expand...
It was a substitute so what he was wearing pre match was irrelevant. It was missed by my assistant in his check at the time of the substitution
 
Russell Jones said:
The main purposes of a caution are to ensure that particular player is incentivised to control his behaviour for the rest of the game and to reduce the risk that opposition players feel the need to take the law into their own hands. The fortuitous opportunity to remove the offender for the remainder of the game managed to tick both these boxes without the need for the card

They don't. As I recall, there hadn't been requests from opposition players for any of the three previous cautions in this match either. This situation just 'felt' different at the time

It was a substitute so what he was wearing pre match was irrelevant. It was missed by my assistant in his check at the time of the substitution
Click to expand...
LWR
 
Bloody 'ell. Easy fellas, his thread title already says that he has sinned. Can we have maybe just one thread where the poster isn't hammered when they already acknowledge they have done something theh perhaps shouldn't have? But is then forced into defending a position he already acknowledges is not right?

This is a forum aimed at supporting and helping developing referees. A place of refuge from the savages that roam this world, ignorant of the laws of association football. Somewhere where posting is encouraged by supportive, constructive replies or advice. Not just criticism and abuse.
 
Russell Jones said:
The main purposes of a caution are to ensure that particular player is incentivised to control his behaviour for the rest of the game.
Click to expand...
It goes beyond the single game as well, due to the totting up process. This is a player that may have been on four yellows already, and one away from a one-match ban. He might now play in that match and score a decisive goal, when he shouldn't have been on the FOP...
 
SM said:
Bloody 'ell. Easy fellas, his thread title already says that he has sinned. Can we have maybe just one thread where the poster isn't hammered when they already acknowledge they have done something theh perhaps shouldn't have? But is then forced into defending a position he already acknowledges is not right?

This is a forum aimed at supporting and helping developing referees. A place of refuge from the savages that roam this world, ignorant of the laws of association football. Somewhere where posting is encouraged by supportive, constructive replies or advice. Not just criticism and abuse.
Click to expand...
He asked a question and he got an answer.
 
Brian Hamilton said:
Heck if you can't handle a few characters on a screen how do you cope with 22 players in each game?
Click to expand...
:D. Handling your input just fine thanks Brian. Was simply hoping for some more thoughtful, considered responses to what was very much a one off situation. But your perspective is clear and I shall redouble my efforts to not let you down in future :rolleyes:
 
Russell Jones said:
Post game, praise from both managers and various club officials for the way I handled the incident ....:angel::devil:
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, we referee football matches so the people taking part in them can enjoy them - if you've managed the incident to their satisfaction, then you've done your job on the day. It's probably not how I'd have handled it, and in a different context it could have been problematic for you, but both clubs are happy so all's well that ends well!
 
Ross said:
Well **** me! Have we all taken our perfect pills again? As @SM has said, can we try and actually give some constructive criticism rather than the usual "my **** don't stink" responses.
Click to expand...
:D:D:D:D:D:D

Haven't you heard matey we are the best referees you can ever get!! :cool::cool::cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: SM
Ross said:
It would certainly seem that way :wall:
Click to expand...

Hahaha I guess it's time to pop open that old scotch bottle you've been hiding in the cupboard. I would suggest the recent conversation demand it! :oops::oops:
 
Perhaps the approach taken, while strictly incorrect in law, is more understandable for, say, a borderline caution. I don't think the OP would have done the same thing for an aggressive tackle that absolutely needed a card.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top