The Ref Stop

players equipment

Stop worrying about what happens in the premier League and concentrate on applying the laws correctly in your own games.
 
The Ref Stop
If a player is wearing or using unauthorised/dangerous equipment or jewellery, the referee must order the player to:
- remove the item
- leave the field of play at the next stoppage if the player is unable or unwilling to comply.
A player who refuses to comply or wears the item again must be cautioned.

Where do you go if they still refuse to remove the item or leave the pitch? Is it then a 2nd yellow for the same offence or could their refusal be seen as dissent?
 
andy75 said:
If a player is wearing or using unauthorised/dangerous equipment or jewellery, the referee must order the player to:
- remove the item
- leave the field of play at the next stoppage if the player is unable or unwilling to comply.
A player who refuses to comply or wears the item again must be cautioned.

Where do you go if they still refuse to remove the item or leave the pitch? Is it then a 2nd yellow for the same offence or could their refusal be seen as dissent?
Click to expand...

Abandon?

You can't be expected to stay around all day, you've got plans.
 
Over the years I have had a few players comment that "so and so was wearing jewellery last night and he wasn't told to take it off!" My reply is always that I wasn't refereeing that game, and he wasn't playing in it!

The usual one is "it doesn't come off" - "then you can't play" usually means it miraculously manages to come off after all.

I've had players with plaster casts on their wrists and massive bangles try to play - either of these is essentially a club if the arm is swung in a challenge. I have also had a player with a tag on his ankle. I stopped him playing because I felt this came under the jewellery heading. The CFA said this was wrong. However, he didn't have shin pads on so couldn't play anyway.

I've also had players who don't seem to have shin pads and when checked they've folded paper up and are wearing that under their socks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
markref said:
Over the years I have had a few players comment that "so and so was wearing jewellery last night and he wasn't told to take it off!" My reply is always that I wasn't refereeing that game, and he wasn't playing in it!

The usual one is "it doesn't come off" - "then you can't play" usually means it miraculously manages to come off after all.

I've had players with plaster casts on their wrists and massive bangles try to play - either of these is essentially a club if the arm is swung in a challenge. I have also had a player with a tag on his ankle. I stopped him playing because I felt this came under the jewellery heading. The CFA said this was wrong. However, he didn't have shin pads on so couldn't play anyway.

I've also had players who don't seem to have shin pads and when checked they've folded paper up and are wearing that under their socks!
Click to expand...
You should apply to be Scotland's Tourism minister. You have an innate ability to portray a fabulous picture of the north!
 
RustyRef said:
Comes up all the time, there is nothing underneath it. They tape it to show that they normally wear a ring, presumably to avoid grief from the other half for taking it off.

I'm still not buying that RR - apart from my previously stated reasons I'm now seeing tape on non wedding ring fingers - the 'reason for that is???????????????????????????????
Click to expand...
 
AlexF said:
What is wrong with tape on a finger? A wrist? Otherwise?

Nothing. There's only a problem if there's something underneath it.
Click to expand...

As I've said before I've seen tunnel camera footage of the 'equipment check' in the Championship and in that particular footage there was no way that the players were even asked if there was a ring under the tape, let alone the AR actually physically looking/checking!
 
zarathustra said:
Stop worrying about what happens in the premier League and concentrate on applying the laws correctly in your own games.
Click to expand...

We've had this argument before as well - Is it not valid to query why the top level of the game ignores certain laws - Ref/GK wearing same colours/ GK 6 second law for example. Think it helps all of us understand why it is so and if it is valid and/or relevant to us.

We are always being offered chances to attend meetings/listen to PL refs - if we are to ignore what they do what's the point of inviting them to speak to us mere mortals?
 
PinnerPaul said:
We've had this argument before as well - Is it not valid to query why the top level of the game ignores certain laws - Ref/GK wearing same colours/ GK 6 second law for example. Think it helps all of us understand why it is so and if it is valid and/or relevant to us.

We are always being offered chances to attend meetings/listen to PL refs - if we are to ignore what they do what's the point of inviting them to speak to us mere mortals?
Click to expand...
Of course it's valid to query what the top refs do.

But people need to stop using what happens in the Premier League as a shield to hide behind when things don't go well in their games.

If a player won't take their ring off it is because other referees in that league have let them keep it on, not because someone wore a ring on match of the day.

And if you are unable to make the player take off their ring without getting drawn into a debate about it, then maybe you should look at how you handle such situations in the future.

I've had games where players have been getting in my face and I've lost match control. I didn't blame it on the Premier League not cautioning for dissent etc. I looked at how I performed, identified mistakes I may have made and sought to rectify those moving forwards.
 
zarathustra said:
But people need to stop using what happens in the Premier League as a shield to hide behind when things don't go well in their games.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody is doing that.

I ran the line for a L4 ref in a cup semi final and he asked me to do the equipment check. I told a player he needed to remove his earing. He said he was a sub and would take it out before he came on.

When he was about to come on he still had it in. I told him to take it out. He said he couldn't. The ref came over to see what the delay was and said he could play wearing it. After the game the ref told me he wasn't going to be an arsehole about an earing because the player had come a long distance for the match.

That L4 is probably still making it difficult for referees that follow him to apply the laws properly. He probably aspires to be a PL referee one day.
 
Trip said:
I don't think anybody is doing that.

I ran the line for a L4 ref in a cup semi final and he asked me to do the equipment check. I told a player he needed to remove his earing. He said he was a sub and would take it out before he came on.

When he was about to come on he still had it in. I told him to take it out. He said he couldn't. The ref came over to see what the delay was and said he could play wearing it. After the game the ref told me he wasn't going to be an arsehole about an earing because the player had come a long distance for the match.

That L4 is probably still making it difficult for referees that follow him to apply the laws properly. He probably aspires to be a PL referee one day.
Click to expand...

Of course they are, because they are blaming the premier League for things going wrong in their games.

It's not Mike Dean's fault that a player in one of my matches doesn't want to take his ring off. He's either just trying it on, or thinks I'll give in because other referees have in the past. If the discussion about taking the ring off turns into a debate then the chances are that I could have done something differently.
 
Trip said:
I'm not sure if you read my post past the first line but it sounds like we are in violent agreement.
Click to expand...
The absurdity is lost on some folk. Don't worry about it
We referee a game whereby it's one rule for some and another for others. It's part of the challenge!
 
Trip said:
I'm not sure if you read my post past the first line but it sounds like we are in violent agreement.
Click to expand...
I read your post, and we are in agreement about other referees, such as the level 4 in your example, making things harder for those who follow.

But my point still stands that there are some users who like to use the actions of referees in PGMOL as a shield to hide behind. Mainly to try and make themselves better when things go wrong.

It's easier to blame Anthony Taylor for letting/missing a player wearing a wedding ring than admit that the way you handled asking a player to take his jewelry off wasn't the best.

It's easier to blame Mike Dean for not cautioning a player for dissent than to admit that you lost your match control and were unable to get it back.
 
PinnerPaul said:
As I've said before I've seen tunnel camera footage of the 'equipment check' in the Championship and in that particular footage there was no way that the players were even asked if there was a ring under the tape, let alone the AR actually physically looking/checking!
Click to expand...
At top levels, they actually do an equipment check in or outside of the changerooms, then a cursory double-check one in the lineup to go out.
 
zarathustra said:
I read your post, and we are in agreement about other referees, such as the level 4 in your example, making things harder for those who follow.
Click to expand...

It's true that "last week's ref" is more of a problem than PL players getting away with it. My point is that "last week's ref" watches the PL too.
 
Trip said:
It's true that "last week's ref" is more of a problem than PL players getting away with it. My point is that "last week's ref" watches the PL too.
Click to expand...

I agree, my point is that we can't blame the PL referees for what someone does on a Sunday morning.

All qualified referees should know the laws, especially around jewelry etc as it's so simple.

You can't blame the EPL if someone sees a player wearing a ring on match of the day and then decides they don't want to apply the laws correctly on Sunday morning.

I've seen referees let people play with jewelry in when I've been acting as a CAR for the team my wife used to play for. And they did so solely because they wanted an easy life, not because of something they saw on match of the day.

There are lots of things that happen in the EPL that I don't like, their (lack of) action with regards to dissent and offinabus is one. But I'm not going to blame the EPL if I get dissent or offinabus in one of my games.
 
With regards to equipment checks, nobody is indicating that they will ignore the LOTG because of a precedent seen on TV
Note 1... we all ignore other Laws due to the way the pro game is refereed
Note 2... I may ignore boot checks, but this has nothing to do with 'as seen on tv'
I/we are not blaming an EPL ref because we allowed a player to play with their signets on. I/we are saying that it's very wrong that EPL players can get away with it. I/we are saying that rings on tv (or tape over ring fingers) makes our lives more difficult than it ought to be (nothing more than this!)
The message regarding jewellery, should be black & white at all levels. So simple, that it does not even cause this kind of misunderstanding between referees. Not difficult FGS
 
A player wearing a ring on TV is not making your life more difficult.

Other referees in the leagues you officiate that either don't check or don't care that players are wearing jewelry are making your life more difficult.
 
zarathustra said:
Of course it's valid to query what the top refs do.

But people need to stop using what happens in the Premier League as a shield to hide behind when things don't go well in their games.

If a player won't take their ring off it is because other referees in that league have let them keep it on, not because someone wore a ring on match of the day.

And if you are unable to make the player take off their ring without getting drawn into a debate about it, then maybe you should look at how you handle such situations in the future.

I've had games where players have been getting in my face and I've lost match control. I didn't blame it on the Premier League not cautioning for dissent etc. I looked at how I performed, identified mistakes I may have made and sought to rectify those moving forwards.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply and what you say may well apply to some, but not to me. I'm coming from the angles I posted in my reply to you.

Surely whole point of the PGMOL officials being contracted to attend RA meetings etc is so that we can learn from them, if its a case of 'Do what I say, not what I do' then I accept that, but think you'll agree that can be a little confusing/annoying?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top