A&H

IFAB Meeting

My worse ever outcome in a game (20 man brawl) was caused because I allowed two players back on in a very early pre season 'kickabout', (i'll not even call it a friendly) 4-5 years ago...They appeared to 'calm down', eventually shook hands at half time and that truce lasted another 15 minutes before retribution was sought and delivered. Absolute Blue tackle followed by a proper bar room dust up... 2 sine die, 1 player in hospital, ambulance on the pitch.... Any more good ideas!!! :)
 
The Referee Store
Rolling subs are a good idea at lowest level football, easy to manage as long as there is a maximum number which can be named. Sin bins for youth level I can see the advantages and disadvantages. No yellow for a foul in the area in DOGSO complete lunacy. It would be open season on FT in the box with no comeback. I understand that VC SFP trips and pulls would still be reds but a player in law could then try to play the ball and make a foul twice and still be on the pitch to do it a third time. Try pulling out a yellow card for the third one for persistent fouling and trying to explain that to an angry defender who thinks he has carte blanche to miss time tackles and only give away a penalty and have no sanction. The current system I think works quite well.
 
No yellow for a foul in the area in DOGSO complete lunacy. It would be open season on FT in the box with no comeback.
That's not what they're suggesting.

They're suggesting SPA is not YC in the penalty area, because a promising attack is being re-created (in the form of PK). DOGSO still can be YC in the penalty area.
 
They're suggesting SPA is not YC in the penalty area
Although we haven't seen the actual wording of the change yet, based on the description on the IFAB website, they're not even going quite that far. It will still be a yellow card for stopping a promising attack if the challenge was not a genuine attempt to play the ball.
 
It will still be a yellow card for stopping a promising attack if the challenge was not a genuine attempt to play the ball.
Good catch -- I neglected that part.

I like this suggested change, because it really brings SPA in line with the prior DOGSO changes. Consistency is good.
 
Sorry for being ignorant but what is the difference between SPA and DOGSO when in the penalty area or close by?
If some one could clarify this for me that would be great.
 
Rolling subs are a good idea at lowest level football, easy to manage as long as there is a maximum number which can be named. Sin bins for youth level I can see the advantages and disadvantages. No yellow for a foul in the area in DOGSO complete lunacy. It would be open season on FT in the box with no comeback. I understand that VC SFP trips and pulls would still be reds but a player in law could then try to play the ball and make a foul twice and still be on the pitch to do it a third time. Try pulling out a yellow card for the third one for persistent fouling and trying to explain that to an angry defender who thinks he has carte blanche to miss time tackles and only give away a penalty and have no sanction. The current system I think works quite well.
but there is not a maximum number of subs that is the problem
 
but there is not a maximum number of subs that is the problem

In the youth league in which I ref, and all Schools competitions I am involved in, there is a maximum number of subs that can be named, although they can roll on and off.

Typically 5 named subs, but one competition is 3.
 
I've been mulling over this sin-bin idea for a while now and the obvious question is how are those of us at grass roots going to deal with them if/when they are introduced. After a bit of thinking I think I've come up with a semi workable idea. Hear me out and see what you think.

I always have a few blank pieces of paper in my refs wallet for jotting down things that don't go on my match card (pen shoot-outs, names of people from technical areas that I've dismissed or sometimes just a quick word or three to help jog my memory after a red card incident on the pitch) These small pieces of paper will be used in any sin-bin situations:

Player commits an infringement that required him to be sin-binned. Call him over, explain the reasons, as per the yellow card procedure already, then, using one of the pieces of paper you write his shirt number on it. Below this you, after checking one of your watches, write a time ten minutes from the actual time on your watch (eg, its 15:30 - half hour in for a 3pm kick off so you write a time of 15:40 on it) You then hand this to the player and it is then up to him/his manager to manage the 10 minute time. Players/managers/teams are aware of this (it'll be in the league rules and made crystal clear pre-season) and there isn't a manager out there who doesn't wear a watch/stopwatch and can count ten minutes.

In order for the player to be allowed back, a break in play must happen, and you must then be re-presented with the piece of paper that you gave him when he was sin-binned 10 minutes ago. Whether that happens by you the ref going to the half way line (as per substitution procedure) or by the player coming to you to hand over the paper is still undecided. As long as the time on your watch is greater than the time on the paper the player rejoins the match.

Problems I can see:

* Players trying it on and coming back early. Simple they go back off until their time is up. Done a second time in same sin-bin then its yellow card for (delaying/USB/whatever - if yellow cards are still used?!)

* Players "losing" the piece of paper - not sure what to do in this situation - possibly tough sanction of play no further part in that particular half (bit extreme maybe) or re-issue with another 10 minute sin-bin.

* Sin-bins that would overlap the HT interval. Tough one that I don't think I can answer. Added on time at the end of a half throws the 'time' bit out of the window. Maybe first half sin bins should end when the HT whistle goes? (but then that opens a whole new door up)

I'm sure that others will read this and pick holes in it. Like I say its just my mulling over and trying to come up with an idea that may work at grass-roots.

I know it will be easier to manage with NAR's (Senior AR can manage the time for you and be in charge of signalling when the player is allowed back onto the FoP) I agree it will be extremely tough out on your own on a November Sunday morning in the D&D League division 3. If it comes in the powers that be HAVE to let us know of a workable solution for managing it at grass-roots that is uniform and across the board.

All in all my personal opinion is that I don't want to see them introduced. Its good in theory, but will be very tough to manage at the level where the vast majority of us 'grass-roots' referees operate. It will cause issues and more problems than it solves and what's that old saying....if it ain't broke, don't fix it! Yellow and red cards have worked for years, I don't think we really need to tinker with them.
 
Sorry for being ignorant but what is the difference between SPA and DOGSO when in the penalty area or close by?
If some one could clarify this for me that would be great.
DOGSO -- there's an OBVIOUS (and immediate) goal scoring opportunity that just got denied by an offence. Considerations as per Laws.

SPA -- There's an attack that's promising (whether from the possibility of a shot, a pass, or something else), but not an OBVIOUS (and immediate) goal scoring opportunity, and it was just stopped by an offence.
 
DOGSO -- there's an OBVIOUS (and immediate) goal scoring opportunity that just got denied by an offence. Considerations as per Laws.
This - the Laws give four specific criteria for establishing whether an offence constitutes DOGSO. Theoretically at least, you could still have a promising attack even if none of the conditions for DOGSO were present.
SPA -- There's an attack that's promising (whether from the possibility of a shot, a pass, or something else), but not an OBVIOUS (and immediate) goal scoring opportunity, and it was just stopped by an offence.
Another point here that may be of issue (and has been previously discussed on here) is that some referees seem to issue a yellow card every time they award a penalty, apparently based on a belief that any time a foul occurs in the penalty area, a promising attack has been stopped. Again, we won't know until or unless we see the actual wording (plus any explanation of the reasoning behind the change) but this might also be an effort to prevent that practice, similar to the change to the wording on when a handling offence merits a caution.
 
Back
Top