Giving a 'Warning'

[JH]

What is your logic of giving a warning?

Say for whatever reason you are warning a player for something they have done, but not fouls or dissent (stepped approach). Possibly kicking the ball just enough away that it is not a caution, but you want to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Does your warning apply for:
1. All 22 players on the pitch - caution next player that does it.
2. All 11 players on their team - caution if a teammate does it but warn an opponent for a first offence.
3. Just that player - caution if the player repeats, but warn all other players before caution.

After talking to a couple of refs, I can see that opinion is divided if/which players then deserve that same warning.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

Don't think there can be a set answer to that. Depends on all the usual mitigating factors.
Based on the kicking ball away, certainly to the player in question and very probably to their team, but, not including the opponents for me
Someone will justify all 3 answers and in certain circumstances I suppose that will be fine too

You need to draw the line somewhere and only you when you are out there, based on game tempo, score, time, your own exp and everything else, can make that call

If I have given what I feel is a crystal clear warning to someone and prob been a bit dramatic with it, then, leaning towards a caution for certainly him and more than likely his team mate on repeat. I would prob when cautioning make a point of saying to the player also, did you think I was going to warn each and every one of you personally? or so on

Kinda leaning towards a life to each team though, again, depending on circumstances...

Absolutely if after a warning to each team, someone does it again, then, your as good as obligated to caution, and, the players will be expecting it too.... so give them what they expect !!!

 

[GraemeS]

It's very situational to be honest. Although I would say, 1 is very rare and would usually only come AFTER a few yellows or a bit of a low-key load of handbags, where I would have a quick word with the captains and try to take some time out of the game and make it clear that I'm going to start clamping down on things.

2 is something I would use for technical offenses in a otherwise well-tempered match - things like kicking the ball away, blocking a quick FK or timewasting. Things where you would be well within your rights to just whip out a card, but want to avoid that if possible as it risks making the match taking a turn for the worse. I've also done this for the first reckless-ish foul in a match as well, where something was a bit nasty but I didn't want to set a too low bar early on.

And 3 is pretty common - obviously for things like persistent infringements, but also for low-level dissent.

 

[one]

Some general rules:
No player gets more than one warnings for the same sort of acts before a card comes out
No player gets more than two warnings for different sorts of acts before the card comes out

For both above if there is another 'incident' you don't want to card the player for (for whatever reason), then don't go for another warning.

As for how it applies to others, as above, context dependent. How bad was the first act and how the warning was delivered. Was it a quiet word on the run, captain involved, public bollocking that woke up people sleeping in the next suburb... It could mean anything like "that was the last one for you", "that one was the last one for your team" or "that one was the last one in this game".

 

[spuddy1878]

Its a bit similar to say one particular player on a team being constantly fouled but say 5/6 different players, years ago more so you would see a ref let a few tackles go but caution say the 4th one which was no worse than the previous three, is that right, is that fair ?

 

[socal lurker]

I think there is a lot of nuance here, and looking for general rules is tough. If you think a team is targeting an opponent, you should make clear that you've seen it before throwing a card--the same pointing at the spots of the prior fouls and making clear you've seen it means the card doesn't come as surprise.

And be thoughtful when you give warnings. "If you do it again you get a card!" is not where you want to go--never box yourself in with a commitment, as that next event might not be one you want to give the card for, but if you've said you would and you don't, you've lost a lot of credibility. A warning doesn't have to be a threat. "Gentlemen, you know better than that," is a warning that doesn't box you--but it has to actaully be something that is clear that they know they shouldn't be doing.

Finally, regardless of what some players think, warnings don't have to be player by player. I've actually had players respond to cards with "but I didn't do it before!" But we don't cycle through the whole team doing something once before we get to the card stage.

 

[Kes]

I've actually had players respond to cards with "but I didn't do it before!" But we don't cycle through the whole team doing something once before we get to the card stage.

Yep. Me too. Many a time.

Often, if pulling out a yellow for a reckless challenge or SPA, I'll get "But that's my first foul ref!!!"

 

[Ciley Myrus]

Yep. Me too. Many a time.

Often, if pulling out a yellow for a reckless challenge or SPA, I'll get "But that's my first foul ref!!!"

Yes, quickly met with "and I hope you enjoyed it because its also your last"

 

[Sheffields Finest]

First foul, fourth foul, it doesn't matter, its the severity and then continuation that's important

 

[SurreySuperRef]

The warning I give depends on a number of factors. It depends what for and how its received.

The purpose of a warning is to give a player a heads up that it isn't going to be tolerated and that he or she needs to try to refrain from doing whatever it is you have warned them about.

If they continue, then you've already set them up to be cautioned. If they turn round and say "ref it's his first one," or "ref it's not a card," then you can turn round and say "sorry gents but I warned the player, he /she persisted with misconduct and now I have no choice but to sanction him/her appropriately."

Usually at that point, they say "fair enough ref," and turn round to have a go at the player for giving away a silly foul lol.

 

[QuaverRef]

Its a bit similar to say one particular player on a team being constantly fouled but say 5/6 different players, years ago more so you would see a ref let a few tackles go but caution say the 4th one which was no worse than the previous three, is that right, is that fair ?

Yes. I’m not sure how many years you’re going back but that’s persistently infringing the LOTG and we should still be applying that logic now