A&H

Red card for a hiding sub

The Referee Store
Lack of clear definitions in the book to blame for this. I would've gone with the TO's on the team sheet to define the Technical Area (there could be unauthorized people in the TA for example, but we can't sanction them), but by not defining the terms properly, we have to guess. Even DE is winging it with an interpretation. It's not a 'fact' extracted from the book
 
Lack of clear definitions in the book to blame for this. I would've gone with the TO's on the team sheet to define the Technical Area (there could be unauthorized people in the TA for example, but we can't sanction them), but by not defining the terms properly, we have to guess. Even DE is winging it with an interpretation. It's not a 'fact' extracted from the book

I disagree here. Personally the approach that @socal lurker had stated had never crossed my mind. I'd considered it in the context of "if this incident had happened and the manager/physio was the only non playing member listed, who would get the card?"

Also, let's be sensible. In order for the situation to arise there are a number of very specific things that need to happen namely:

1) Manager has to be also named on teamsheet as physio
2) Offence needs to be committed in the technical area at the exact moment that that manager/physio is on the FOP dealing with an injury
3) Referee is unable to identify who committed the offence in the technical area and no one admits to it.

If the LOTG tried to cover every possible scenario, they would definitely miss something out and the LOTG would be about 500 pages long.

For me this is in the realms of the questions you sometimes see on the LOTG tests asking something like "attacker shoots and the ball is about to cross the line, when a dog belonging to the defending teams managers 7th cousin runs into the the FOP and bursts the ball, prior to it crossing the line for a goal. What course of action do you take?" 😉
 
Often we have to refer to the spirit or intent of the law to understand how to apply it. For me not making the the coach accountable for this because he is on the FOP at the time is taking the wording of the LOTG out of context. I agree that the law could have been written better (as usual). Here is the intent of the law. The card is intended for the "person responsible for the" offender. The fact that he is not in the TA at the time is inconsequential.

Screenshot_20200807-212450__01.jpg
 
I suppose this does kind of make sense in a way. We are responsible for the safety of the players in a match - that remains true even if we're not adjacent to or looking directly at a player.

Similarly, the senior nominated coach is responsible for the behaviour of his coaching staff and bench - just because he's not stood next to them at the time and actively "monitoring" their behaviour, it doesn't change that responsibility.
 
I suppose this does kind of make sense in a way. We are responsible for the safety of the players in a match - that remains true even if we're not adjacent to or looking directly at a player.

Similarly, the senior nominated coach is responsible for the behaviour of his coaching staff and bench - just because he's not stood next to them at the time and actively "monitoring" their behaviour, it doesn't change that responsibility.

Exactly and it also avoids a whole lot of different and confusing scenarios for example:

Offence occurs when manager/physio is on FOP dealing with an injured player

Offence occurs when manager is in the technical area just about to enter the FOP to deal with an injured player

Offence occurs when manager is stood with both feet out of the confines of the technical area.

It's simple - the nominated most senior person is responsible for the team and remains so until or unless they dismissed from the technical area by the referee or have to leave the ground for any other reason in which case the mantle passes to the next most senior person and remains so for the rest of the game
 
While I don’t think the language supports DE’s interpretation, we can certainly live with it. There are arguments either way on which would be better, and it’s probably not much more likely than that corner kick entering ones own goal. I would hazard it’s a possibility that never occurred to IFAB in their discussions, as it would never happen in a professional game.
 
Back
Top