The Ref Stop

I should know this but.....

P

PinnerPaul

RefChat Addict
On Sunday I noticed that the manager of one of the teams was also a named substitute.

That got me thinking (Dangerous I know!) If she was 'sent off' in her capacity as a manager, presumably that means that she wouldn't have been able to take part in the match as a substitute?

Also, if she had been sent off as a (playing) substitute, she couldn't then remain in technical area as the manager?

I'm more confident about the 2nd scenario but not 100% sure about the first one.

Level 5 referee I was out with yesterday, agreed with me that if dismissed as a manager she couldn't then play, but he didn't seem 100% sure either!

Game was 'easy' by the way, and she behaved perfectly as a manager, so question is purely hypothetical!

Thanks all
 
The Ref Stop
We had this 1 a while back and it sparked a real debate.

The way I see it is if you are dismissing the manager whilst he is a named substitute or playing then they must leave the vicinity of the FOP. Therefore until the point at which they are substituted off they should be dealt with in their capacity as a substitute/player. After that then in their capacity as a team official unless repeat substitutuons are allowed. Either way should result in them being removed. Period.
 
James Long said:
We had this 1 a while back and it sparked a real debate.

The way I see it is if you are dismissing the manager whilst he is a named substitute or playing then they must leave the vicinity of the FOP. Therefore until the point at which they are substituted off they should be dealt with in their capacity as a substitute/player. After that then in their capacity as a team official unless repeat substitutuons are allowed. Either way should result in them being removed. Period.
Click to expand...

Thanks James - Think I follow your logic, you're saying whatever they do to be dismissed, you're treating them as an unused substitute, until that no longer becomes the case.

Yes I can see that works and prevents them trying to play after committing the 'offence' as the 'manager'

Cheers
 
PinnerPaul said:
Thanks James - Think I follow your logic, you're saying whatever they do to be dismissed, you're treating them as an unused substitute, until that no longer becomes the case.

Yes I can see that works and prevents them trying to play after committing the 'offence' as the 'manager'

Cheers
Click to expand...
I suppose the only issue at our level is if they also happen to be he bloke woth bucket and sponge :wall:
 
I think the conclusion we reached last time was that if there were sent off for an LOTG "red card" offence, then they shouldn't be anywhere near the FOP after, including on the bench. And that applied regardless if they committed that offence standing on the sidelines or on the pitch as a player.

However there was a short list of "technical" offences, which you would send a manager away for, but which wouldn't be a red card - kicking a water bottle could perhaps be seen as a dissent yellow card at most, but you're required to send a manager away for that. So if that was the case, you'd send them "to the stands", but still allow them back on as a sub?
 
GraemeS said:
I think the conclusion we reached last time was that if there were sent off for an LOTG "red card" offence, then they shouldn't be anywhere near the FOP after, including on the bench. And that applied regardless if they committed that offence standing on the sidelines or on the pitch as a player.

However there was a short list of "technical" offences, which you would send a manager away for, but which wouldn't be a red card - kicking a water bottle could perhaps be seen as a dissent yellow card at most, but you're required to send a manager away for that. So if that was the case, you'd send them "to the stands", but still allow them back on as a sub?
Click to expand...

Yes, there is precedence for it, Andy Hessenthaler when manager at Gillingham was sent to the stands for misbehaving but was then allowed to bring himself on as a substitute.

So things like ...

- Persistently leaving technical area
- Arguing with opposition coaching staff but with no violence
- Arguing with match officials but with no offensive, insulting or abusive language
- Kicking a water (unless it hits someone)
- Generally not behaving in a responsible manner

.... could see a player manager sent to the stands but they could still come on. Not really sure where you would send them in a grass roots game in a local park though?
 
My logic is that you don't need a substitute or manager according to the laws of the game so if this person is dismissed from whatever role he/she is doing at the time of dismissal they need to leave the vicinity and not return. Not your issue if their other role is unfulfiled because of their dismissal. I would even go as far as to suggest we are not doing our job if we allow them to return in any capacity (why them and not other dismissed players). A dismissal is a dismissal. We are not dismissing the role we are dismissing the person for thier behaviour.

Totally different if they are the medic but there is also a massive thread on that.
 
If they are a manager, and have named themselves as a sub, it makes life so much easier when you want to bin them.

Just bin them as a sub, show them the cherry, and that's them done. Just about anything they can do to get binned as a manager, certainly at grassroots level, can be translated to a standard red card offence, normally S6 is my particular favourite to use....although I have binned them in the past for VC.......
 
WilliamD said:
My logic is that you don't need a substitute or manager according to the laws of the game so if this person is dismissed from whatever role he/she is doing at the time of dismissal they need to leave the vicinity and not return. Not your issue if their other role is unfulfiled because of their dismissal. I would even go as far as to suggest we are not doing our job if we allow them to return in any capacity (why them and not other dismissed players). A dismissal is a dismissal. We are not dismissing the role we are dismissing the person for thier behaviour.

Totally different if they are the medic but there is also a massive thread on that.
Click to expand...

In that case you would need to find a reason to show them a red card as that is the only way you can get rid of them and not let them come back as a sub.
 
I find it strange that this isn't explicitly mentioned in LOTG as player/manager situations are quite common in lower senior levels of the game although in my opinion of the player/manager is red carded either as a substitute, player or manager then (s)/he should be in the changing rooms or driving home - that is the risk with trying to be both roles.
 
I have came across this before and seeked advice - wouldn't say theres a specific answer, just go with what you think is best. Personally, I would treat them as a player. This makes your life hell of a lot easier in my eyes.
 
I like @Padfoot 's idea and that's going in my tool kit. In this situation it will be a dismissal as a sub and then no chance they come on as a sub after being binned as a manager (nuts!)

@RustyRef i don't see how that is backed up by the LoTG. A player is dismissed (the person) not the roles. If someone is dismissed they must leave the vicinity of the field of play AND the technical area (pg 87)
 
WilliamD said:
I like @Padfoot 's idea and that's going in my tool kit. In this situation it will be a dismissal as a sub and then no chance they come on as a sub after being binned as a manager (nuts!)

@RustyRef i don't see how that is backed up by the LoTG. A player is dismissed (the person) not the roles. If someone is dismissed they must leave the vicinity of the field of play AND the technical area (pg 87)
Click to expand...

Yes, so in the real life example I gave at Gillingham the manager did both as he went to sit in the stand. He then came back from the stand to come on as a sub, which means he came back into the technical area, albeit briefly.

This also came up when I was a level 4 and there was a document from the FA confirming this to be the case. If they are named as a player then they are only permanently excluded from the game if they commit an offence that would be punished by a red card on the field of play.
 
If you CAN show the card, do it. A sub/manager is a lot easier to deal with than a manager, IMO - because we can card for dissent, which keeps things simpler. If they're sent, they're sent.
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
If you CAN show the card, do it. A sub/manager is a lot easier to deal with than a manager, IMO - because we can card for dissent, which keeps things simpler. If they're sent, they're sent.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is the sensible approach - cards are easily understood and a good communication tool, a non-card dismissal is always confusing.
 
GraemeS said:
Yeah, this is the sensible approach - cards are easily understood and a good communication tool, a non-card dismissal is always confusing.
Click to expand...
I always wondered why it isn't the case that you show a card anyway to the manager.
 
Hi
For me the player manager gets treated as a substitute. If I have occasion to speak with him during play I treat him like a player / substitute. If the action deserves a caution such as dissent, entering the FOP without permission,USB then he so be it he gets a yellow card. He carries that card on to the FOP if he comes on. A second yellow and he is gone. If the action deserves a straight red card such as OFFINABUS, VC then he takes no further part in the game, period.
The only concession I might make is If I am having a word with him (same as a player) due to what was said I am telling him that if I have to return it is a card. A third return and he is gone with a second yellow.
For me we cannot have a substitute "sent off" and then gets to come on as a sub just because he is a "manager"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top