RC in a friendly

[Sheffields Finest]

Padders has a point, sometimes it's just best to call a spade a spade.

Friendly or not you know it should have been a red card.

As referees we need to show integrity and, for want of a better word, courage. As the commandant at RMAS used to say "Do the right thing, not the easy thing."

They players will come out the all the good ones, like "you've ruined the game", "it's only a friendly" etc etc, but as you do more games your confidence will grow, and before you know it, it will be like water off a ducks back.

I ruined over 500 games.... still didn't get a thank you from any league boss though!! A few thank you's from the more pragmatic sensible ones who respected the one man crusade that I was on... Didn't seek friendships but the ones you do make are good ones!!!

 

[GraemeS]

Why should you candy coat something that he sought 'professional' advice for and then ignored it!!

1. Because that's not what he said - he said he wasn't sure, to which it's still perfectly possible to refer him to the LOTG in a polite way and explain why it benefits both him and the players if he follows it.
2. Because it's his first post on the forum and there's no real reason to be a dick to him.
3. Because this happened in his First. ****ing. Game.

Going on about how wonderfully you've got your point across over a 500 game career is entirely irrelevant to this (probably) young guy who at the very least was concerned enough about what he let happen to find a forum and ask the question. This is a good thing. It bodes well for his future if he takes time out of his day to try and develop himself as a referee. And it absolutely is not the mentality of someone who we should be telling to hang up the whistle! I am absolutely genuinely shocked that a referee would say that to a new referee after his first game.

When you're thinking about how you would have dealt with this, don't think about your last game, think about the first time you stepped out there wearing the black and think about what you would have done if you'd have both managers agreeing with what seems like a reasonable course of action. He made a mistake, he came on here to ask a question about it and that should be commended, not met with suggestions to quit! FFS, the idea that some of you people would call yourselves "mentors" with that attitude is mind boggling.

 

[Sheffields Finest]

I've never said he should quit! That was mentioned by someone else..... Pull your horns in Fan Boy!

 

[zarathustra]

For clarity, I'm fully aware the laws don't permit a sub for an RC'd player!

The argument made to me was that it's a training game for all, most games will be 11v11 throughout during the season so it's beneficial for all if the teams played the remainder as close to "normal" as possible.

The reason I'm asking for opinions is if it happened again, not sure what I'd do.

I guess a good question is - if it happened to you and both managers want 11v11 in a friendly, would you say no and insist on 11v10?

When you're thinking about how you would have dealt with this, don't think about your last game, think about the first time you stepped out there wearing the black and think about what you would have done if you'd have both managers agreeing with what seems like a reasonable course of action. He made a mistake, he came on here to ask a question about it and that should be commended, not met with suggestions to quit! FFS, the idea that some of you people would call yourselves "mentors" with that attitude is mind boggling.

The quote I have emphasised is, what I believe, to be the sticking point here.

We all make mistakes, 15 minutes into my first ever game I failed to send someone off for a handball on the line, don't know why I didn't had a brain fart at the time and the thought never crossed my mind.

But, after the game I knew I'd made a mistake and knew I wouldn't allow myself to do the same thing again.

The OP knows they've made a pretty big error in law, which could have had serious ramifications both on the pitch, in terms of further misconduct, and off the pitch in terms of disciplinary action being taken against him if his CFA were to have found out. But they still say they don't know what they would do if faced with a similar situation.

This isn't about interpretation of some obscure part of the laws, the incident described in the first post is probably one of the most obvious cases of VC you can get, and the laws are clear what action needs to be taken.

Only Padders has suggested they pack in refereeing, which is a bit extreme, but hopefully the responses in this thread will help the OP realise that this needs to be a red in the future, regardless of whether it's the FA Cup final, or friendly down the local rec between Dog & Duck FC and The Nags Head United.

 

[GraemeS]

The quote I have emphasised is, what I believe, to be the sticking point here.

And that, as he said later in the thread was after only two people had answered and there wasn't an informed consensus. If you look further down after more people tell him it should have been red, his answer isn't the same. To directly quote him at that point: "Lesson Learned".

And frankly, I don't think "I didn't say he should quit" is good enough. You both (and many others) quoted Padders posts and/or liked them, agreeing with the bulk of them and failed to point out that you disagreed with the bit where he told a young referee, in no uncertain terms, to quit after 1 match. Deliberate or not, a large number of people on here have reinforced that message and possibly led to him considering quitting after one game where he otherwise wouldn't have done. That's pretty shameful.

 

[RefJef]

HE KNOWS IT SHOULD BE A RED, HE KNEW THAT AT THE TIME AND KNOWS THAT SINCE - he sent the offending player off.



What he was unsure of was whether or not, in a friendly, with both managers agreeing, and having only done one game - one game - the sent off player could be replaced by a sub to keep the game a reasonable contest for the other 22+ blokes.

I still think that that was a reasonable question, particularly for someone who has done one game.

Padders may have been the only one who suggested he quit, but a significant number of other members thanked his post(s), thereby implying their support for his stance.

We have had a new member of the forum, and a new member of the referring community, reaching out to us for help and, with our collective responses, I don't think that this has been our finest hour. I think (I hope) that some misunderstanding has arisen as some members may have skim read the thread and thought he didn't dismiss the original miscreant, which he did.

Fortunately I know that the OP hasn't hung up his whistle and he has his second game coming up soon. Hopefully he'll be back to tell us how it went, and hopefully we can all be a little more empathetic if/when he next asks us for the benefit of our experience

 

[josh91]

The quote I have emphasised is, what I believe, to be the sticking point here.

We all make mistakes, 15 minutes into my first ever game I failed to send someone off for a handball on the line, don't know why I didn't had a brain fart at the time and the thought never crossed my mind.

But, after the game I knew I'd made a mistake and knew I wouldn't allow myself to do the same thing again.

The OP knows they've made a pretty big error in law, which could have had serious ramifications both on the pitch, in terms of further misconduct, and off the pitch in terms of disciplinary action being taken against him if his CFA were to have found out. But they still say they don't know what they would do if faced with a similar situation.

This isn't about interpretation of some obscure part of the laws, the incident described in the first post is probably one of the most obvious cases of VC you can get, and the laws are clear what action needs to be taken.

Only Padders has suggested they pack in refereeing, which is a bit extreme, but hopefully the responses in this thread will help the OP realise that this needs to be a red in the future, regardless of whether it's the FA Cup final, or friendly down the local rec between Dog & Duck FC and The Nags Head United.

Folks, I understand why that's the sticking point. I want to be really clear that I said that after 2 responses, which weren't unanimous! I have no issue with people above being blunt - I'm a fan of being told the truth straight up - but what I said was taken out of context. I asked the question to the forum because I genuinely didn't know, and I still wasn't clear after those first two replies. I hope people can understand that I was not ignoring responses or advice, it just wasn't clear to me at that point! I wouldn't have asked the question if I didn't want to reflect on it, and make sure that if it happens again I can do the right thing.

Obviously, I now realise my decision to allow the sub was incorrect, but on the spot (in my first game, in a difficult situation) it seemed like it was the right thing to do. One of the biggest errors I made was treating the friendly as different to any other game (which is what lead to my mistake, rather than misunderstanding the LOTG). As zarathustra said above, that's a key learning point for me.

Please be assured that if this situation happens again, I know exactly what I would do - and I thank everyone who has posted for your help.

I haven't thrown my whistle in the bin just yet. Onwards and upwards.

 

[zarathustra]

Folks, I understand why that's the sticking point. I want to be really clear that I said that after 2 responses, which weren't unanimous! I have no issue with people above being blunt - I'm a fan of being told the truth straight up - but what I said was taken out of context. I asked the question to the forum because I genuinely didn't know, and I still wasn't clear after those first two replies. I hope people can understand that I was not ignoring responses or advice, it just wasn't clear to me at that point! I wouldn't have asked the question if I didn't want to reflect on it, and make sure that if it happens again I can do the right thing.

Obviously, I now realise my decision to allow the sub was incorrect, but on the spot (in my first game, in a difficult situation) it seemed like it was the right thing to do. One of the biggest errors I made was treating the friendly as different to any other game (which is what lead to my mistake, rather than misunderstanding the LOTG). As zarathustra said above, that's a key learning point for me.

Please be assured that if this situation happens again, I know exactly what I would do - and I thank everyone who has posted for your help.

I haven't thrown my whistle in the bin just yet. Onwards and upwards.

That's good to hear.

I am lucky that I've never been put in the same situation as you, but when you've never experienced a particular situation before it can be difficult to know what to do.

Also, withstanding pressure from players and/or team officials does get easier as time goes on, but you will always get some who will try and push their luck.

 

[Padfoot]

If you are honestly not sure what you would do in an identical circumstance, even after admitting to yourself you were utterly incorrect in law, then maybe the whistle isn't for you?

Right....lets get something absolutely crystal clear here.......I did not TELL him to quit.......I did however make it clear that maybe some reflection was necessary on whether taking up the whistle was right for him, if he was still unwilling to make the tough call following his own realisation about his error and the advice given on here.

Clearly the OP has taken the time to reflect, decided that actually they have learned from their mistake and are willing to carry on officiating a little bit wiser.

 

[zarathustra]

And that, as he said later in the thread was after only two people had answered and there wasn't an informed consensus. If you look further down after more people tell him it should have been red, his answer isn't the same. To directly quote him at that point: "Lesson Learned".

And frankly, I don't think "I didn't say he should quit" is good enough. You both (and many others) quoted Padders posts and/or liked them, agreeing with the bulk of them and failed to point out that you disagreed with the bit where he told a young referee, in no uncertain terms, to quit after 1 match. Deliberate or not, a large number of people on here have reinforced that message and possibly led to him considering quitting after one game where he otherwise wouldn't have done. That's pretty shameful.

Padders did not tell him to hang up the whistle in "no uncertain terms", what Padders actually said was:

If you are honestly not sure what you would do in an identical circumstance, even after admitting to yourself you were utterly incorrect in law, then maybe the whistle isn't for you?

There is nothing in that sentence which says to me the OP has to or should hang up his whistle, merely asks him to consider whether refereeing is for him.

 

[GraemeS]

Padders did not tell him to hang up the whistle in "no uncertain terms", what Padders actually said was:



There is nothing in that sentence which says to me the OP has to or should hang up his whistle, merely asks him to consider whether refereeing is for him.

So I got the exact wording wrong. You still think that's an appropriate thing to say to someone after one match? I don't.

 

[Padfoot]

So I got the exact wording wrong. You still think that's an appropriate thing to say to someone after one match? I don't.

Not only the wording but also the whole point of what was being said.......

It's ok, I'll consider that your apology for misrepresenting what I said......

 

[GraemeS]

Not only the wording but also the whole point of what was being said.......

It's ok, I'll consider that your apology for misrepresenting what I said......

Congratulations, you've won a meaningless semantic point. Well weaselled.

You still think it's appropriate to even question if a referee is suited to the job after one game? I still think that's a fairly awful thing to say regardless of how strongly worded it is.

 

[Padfoot]

Congratulations, you've won a meaningless semantic point. Well weaselled.

You still think it's appropriate to even question if a referee is suited to the job after one game? I still think that's a fairly awful thing to say regardless of how strongly worded it is.

Leaving your rather bitter personal attack to one side......

After how many games is it appropriate? 5? 10? 20?

I am a firm believer that you either have the personal fortitude to make those tough decisions or you don't.....it's not something that can be taught or acquired. I'm not talking about knowing the correct sanction to apply under the LOTG, I am talking about the inner strength to be able to stand there in front of 22 semi-troglodytes who you know that at least 50% of them are going to be really upset with you for making that decision.....and doing it regardless, having the courage to defend your decision and stand by it.

Look at it in a slightly different way.....in your first game, you may not know what reaction such a decision will bring, you may still believe that footballers respect the referees decision, so the sudden outpouring of abuse, grief and other assorted dismay at your decision comes as a big shock, shattering your illusion of the "beautiful" game. So, when your next game comes around, you know that another such decision is going to potentially provoke another virulent reaction.....that's when your personal fortitude is needed...knowing you are going to get slated but doing it anyway.
So, if you're not prepared to do that, or think you won't be able to do that, then absolutely it's right that you should take a moment to consider whether refereeing is right for you. If you then decide that, actually, you are strong enough to do that, you might just find that your confidence has grown a bit, because you've taken stock of yourself, realised you are strong enough to deal with and next time around you find it easier to make that decision.

Yes, there is always a chance, someone might reflect and decide they aren't strong enough to handle those situation and quit......but is that not better than quitting after 5, 10, 20 games that they muddled through not enjoying their experience because they were too intimidated to give big decisions?

 

[zarathustra]

I think Padders has summed it up pretty well.

We'll all have different approaches I wouldn't describe myself as the soft and fluffy type, but not quite as blunt as Padders.

 

[GraemeS]

Leaving your rather bitter personal attack to one side......

After how many games is it appropriate? 5? 10? 20?

I am a firm believer that you either have the personal fortitude to make those tough decisions or you don't.....it's not something that can be taught or acquired. I'm not talking about knowing the correct sanction to apply under the LOTG, I am talking about the inner strength to be able to stand there in front of 22 semi-troglodytes who you know that at least 50% of them are going to be really upset with you for making that decision.....and doing it regardless, having the courage to defend your decision and stand by it.

Look at it in a slightly different way.....in your first game, you may not know what reaction such a decision will bring, you may still believe that footballers respect the referees decision, so the sudden outpouring of abuse, grief and other assorted dismay at your decision comes as a big shock, shattering your illusion of the "beautiful" game. So, when your next game comes around, you know that another such decision is going to potentially provoke another virulent reaction.....that's when your personal fortitude is needed...knowing you are going to get slated but doing it anyway.
So, if you're not prepared to do that, or think you won't be able to do that, then absolutely it's right that you should take a moment to consider whether refereeing is right for you. If you then decide that, actually, you are strong enough to do that, you might just find that your confidence has grown a bit, because you've taken stock of yourself, realised you are strong enough to deal with and next time around you find it easier to make that decision.

Yes, there is always a chance, someone might reflect and decide they aren't strong enough to handle those situation and quit......but is that not better than quitting after 5, 10, 20 games that they muddled through not enjoying their experience because they were too intimidated to give big decisions?

Blah blah blah. All of which is entirely irrelevant because he showed a red card in his first match! How can you read that fact and then talk about him not having the mental fortitude? Followed that up by making a mistake, but then came on here to ask about that mistake. Another good sign. And was only unsure because he'd had two replies that hadn't built a consensus - with more replies, he got to the right conclusion.

The FA requires you to have 6 matches under your belt to move from Level 9 to 7, and at least a further 20 to move from there to 6. I'm not going to put a number on it, but I think that proves that the FA believes that experience changes you and is key to making you a better referee. I certainly wouldn't want anyone going out there once and deciding to quit after a single difficult match, because everyone who does it will get better and handle those situations better with more experience.

And finally - I'm not going to argue it wasn't a personal attack. A young beginner referee came on here for help after encountering a very difficult situation in his first ever match and someone who claims to be an observer and/or mentor told them that they should reconsider refereeing. I'm not going to pretend that I don't find that shocking. No wonder referee retention is poor if that's the attitude of our observers and mentors. You (and yes, I mean personally, specifically YOU) should be ashamed. I think the fact you're refusing to back down from that comment is a disgrace.

 

[Padfoot]

Blah blah blah. All of which is entirely irrelevant because he showed a red card in his first match! How can you read that fact and then talk about him not having the mental fortitude? Followed that up by making a mistake, but then came on here to ask about that mistake. Another good sign. And was only unsure because he'd had two replies that hadn't built a consensus - with more replies, he got to the right conclusion.

The FA requires you to have 6 matches under your belt to move from Level 9 to 7, and at least a further 20 to move from there to 6. I'm not going to put a number on it, but I think that proves that the FA believes that experience changes you and is key to making you a better referee. I certainly wouldn't want anyone going out there once and deciding to quit after a single difficult match, because everyone who does it will get better and handle those situations better with more experience.

And finally - I'm not going to argue it wasn't a personal attack. A young beginner referee came on here for help after encountering a very difficult situation in his first ever match and someone who claims to be an observer and/or mentor told them that they should reconsider refereeing. I'm not going to pretend that I don't find that shocking. No wonder referee retention is poor if that's the attitude of our observers and mentors. You (and yes, I mean personally, specifically YOU) should be ashamed. I think the fact you're refusing to back down from that comment is a disgrace.

Ah, but he didn't send a player off did he? His gut reaction was red card, but then he allowed himself to be talked out of it by player/manager pressure...which is totally relevant to my point about having the inner strength to make those decisions and stand by them.

It's a fact of life that some people are not suited, emotionally, to refereeing. They just don;t have that strength of character required to deal with the crap that comes with dealing with 22 neanderthals on a Sunday morning. Better that is realised and dealt with early on, rather than them putting themselves through weeks, months or years of doing something they don't enjoy, often coming away feeling abused and intimidated, simply because no one has told them that's it perfectly ok to admit that it isn't for them.

Not sure why you find it a disgrace that, having talked about referees needing to have the strength to make a decision and stand by it, I refuse to back down from a position that I have taken?

 

[GraemeS]

Ah, but he didn't send a player off did he? His gut reaction was red card, but then he allowed himself to be talked out of it by player/manager pressure...which is totally relevant to my point about having the inner strength to make those decisions and stand by them.

It's a fact of life that some people are not suited, emotionally, to refereeing. They just don;t have that strength of character required to deal with the crap that comes with dealing with 22 neanderthals on a Sunday morning. Better that is realised and dealt with early on, rather than them putting themselves through weeks, months or years of doing something they don't enjoy, often coming away feeling abused and intimidated, simply because no one has told them that's it perfectly ok to admit that it isn't for them.

Not sure why you find it a disgrace that, having talked about referees needing to have the strength to make a decision and stand by it, I refuse to back down from a position that I have taken?

Having two managers come up and tell you they've agreed to do something different to the LOTG is a difficult situation without the experience behind you to know it's not a good idea. It's also distinct from bottling out of showing the red card in the first place, which isn't what happened and would have been concerning - but still wouldn't justify assuming that character won't get built over time.

I'm actually not arguing with your second paragraph point. But I think 1 game is far too soon to make that judgement call. What matters more than anything is learning from your mistakes - and you can't tell after a single match if Josh has done that or not! I can't think of any justifiable reason for feeling a need to make that call after one match. And I certainly don't think it's appropriate from someone who claims to be in a position of authority such as mentor or observer. That's what you need to be apologising for.

 

[zarathustra]

Padfoot didn't decide whether the OP was cut out to be a referee. He invited the OP to consider whether, in light of the decision that he'd made, and saying that (at the time) he wasn't sure what to do if it happened again, to consider whether refereeing was right for him.

If you are honestly not sure what you would do in an identical circumstance, even after admitting to yourself you were utterly incorrect in law, then maybe the whistle isn't for you?

See, Padfoot hasn't made a judgement on the OPs suitability one way or the other.

You're right, one game is probably too soon for someone to decide whether refereeing is for them, however, only the OP would be able to answer this as it is entirely subjective to the individual, and, seeing as his second game is coming up soon, I think it is fair to say that he believes that refereeing is for him, and is now 100% certain of the correct procedure should something like this crop up again. This is a positive outcome, and he will be a better referee for it.

 

[josh91]

Ah, but he didn't send a player off did he? His gut reaction was red card, but then he allowed himself to be talked out of it by player/manager pressure...which is totally relevant to my point about having the inner strength to make those decisions and stand by them.

It's a fact of life that some people are not suited, emotionally, to refereeing. They just don;t have that strength of character required to deal with the crap that comes with dealing with 22 neanderthals on a Sunday morning. Better that is realised and dealt with early on, rather than them putting themselves through weeks, months or years of doing something they don't enjoy, often coming away feeling abused and intimidated, simply because no one has told them that's it perfectly ok to admit that it isn't for them.

Not sure why you find it a disgrace that, having talked about referees needing to have the strength to make a decision and stand by it, I refuse to back down from a position that I have taken?

I don't think this is about not having the courage to stand by decisions. I got the RC out and the player left the FOP. I can honestly say that had it not been a friendly, I wouldn't have considered in a million years allowing another player to join the match.

The problem was that I had the wrong idea about the flexibility of friendlies. I thought it was ok to be flexible with the LOTG based on my perception of what I've seen referees do when I have been a player. Clearly I have now learned from the benefit of people on here that isn't the case.

I say again, I have realised it was not the right thing to do.

Padfoot didn't decide whether the OP was cut out to be a referee. He invited the OP to consider whether, in light of the decision that he'd made, and saying that (at the time) he wasn't sure what to do if it happened again, to consider whether refereeing was right for him.



See, Padfoot hasn't made a judgement on the OPs suitability one way or the other.

You're right, one game is probably too soon for someone to decide whether refereeing is for them, however, only the OP would be able to answer this as it is entirely subjective to the individual, and, seeing as his second game is coming up soon, I think it is fair to say that he believes that refereeing is for him, and is now 100% certain of the correct procedure should something like this crop up again. This is a positive outcome, and he will be a better referee for it.

I ageee with you zara, especially the last paragraph. However, the reason I asked the question was because I didn't know - so i found it very unfair when the messages above were referring to the fact I still didn't know, after two differing replies.

I knew I was wrong in law, of course I did. What I didn't know was if it was acceptable to bend that law in a friendly. I made a decision based on what I thought was best. I will be a better referee in the future for asking more experienced refs on here for their opinion on that decision, and understanding that it was very badly wrong.

As I keep saying, I have learned. Which is what I came on the forum to do. I will ask more questions in the future as I come up against other challenges, because I want to learn and I want to get better.

A whole argument has blown up here because I was misinterpreted when I said I want sure what I would do - that was obviously not what I wanted this thread to be about. However, I have got the answer (in no uncertain terms...!) to my question. So thanks.