Referee Losing Match Control

[AmitM]

Hi All
Had my first open age match yesterday, and was on the line. It was a pre-season match with 2 step 5 teams and the ref who was meant to do it unfortunately got injured in the morning before the game, so we had a L6 in the middle as no replacement L4 could be found. His match control wasn't very good and the game was going downhill with the dissent, and the ref wasn't dealing with it properly (in my opinion!). So, I was wondering if there's anything we can do on the line to try and keep the match control as it was getting very very hard to sell decisions to the players by the end? (The players weren't too bad with me. though. The managers were lovely and knew it was my first OA game and that I'm 16, so made it very clear to the players to keep the abuse to a minimum with me)
Thanks all

 

[RustyRef]

Try being the important word there. I know senior referees chatter constantly. I don't know that it actually does much, aside from helping the referee feel effective.

It makes players think, even if it only works 10% or even 1% of the time it is still better than doing nothing. Prevention is better than the cure. Plus it gives the referee the upper hand if a card does end up coming out - "I told you not to foul him"

 

[socal lurker]

Try being the important word there. I know senior referees chatter constantly. I don't know that it actually does much, aside from helping the referee feel effective.

Some games you“re right that it doesn’t do diddly squat. Other games the reminder that the ref is there and sees things helps a fair bit. Shrug. Like many things we do.

I do agree with you that reading today’s game is the biggest part of game control. But I don’t think that makes the other parts irrelevant. Refs who look and sound like they are in control get more slack than those that sound clueless. But looking and sounding good can’t make up for the ref who really is clueless.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Some games you“re right that it doesn’t do diddly squat. Other games the reminder that the ref is there and sees things helps a fair bit. Shrug. Like many things we do.

I do agree with you that reading today’s game is the biggest part of game control. But I don’t think that makes the other parts irrelevant. Refs who look and sound like they are in control get more slack than those that sound clueless. But looking and sounding good can’t make up for the ref who really is clueless.

Observing last season in a Step 4 match, referee shouted "Don't foul him", defender beaten by winger, ball crossed, goal. Only goal, 1-0, coach of defending team went ballistic on basis of the referee's call. "We would have gone for the booking, not let the attacker go past"
Choose your words carefully

 

[Macca]

Observing last season in a Step 4 match, referee shouted "Don't foul him", defender beaten by winger, ball crossed, goal. Only goal, 1-0, coach of defending team went ballistic on basis of the referee's call. "We would have gone for the booking, not let the attacker go past"
Choose your words carefully

I done that last season myself - shouted at a kid who I knew was going to kick the legs from another player who just escaped him. I shouted "don't do it", and low and behold, a second later, he fouls him. Card.
I can see how a coach may have an issue with that, but the player is still free to commit the foul if they so choose. I'm interested however in the safety of the opponent, and I draw a lot from officiating in rugby with their proactive communication to defuse heated situations from escalating.

 

[one]

Observing last season in a Step 4 match, referee shouted "Don't foul him", defender beaten by winger, ball crossed, goal. Only goal, 1-0, coach of defending team went ballistic on basis of the referee's call. "We would have gone for the booking, not let the attacker go past"
Choose your words carefully

Allow me to use an example of the flip angle. Law enforcement agent vs the hacker who is about to 'post a hack' and have a handsome irreversible profit from it. Hacker is happy to take the profit and do the time. Law enforcement should still advise against it.

The card and free kick does not make the foul ok. It is still an unfair situation. "No foul" is encouraging fairness which is expected of the referee.

 

[JamesL]

Observing last season in a Step 4 match, referee shouted "Don't foul him", defender beaten by winger, ball crossed, goal. Only goal, 1-0, coach of defending team went ballistic on basis of the referee's call. "We would have gone for the booking, not let the attacker go past"
Choose your words carefully

Funny you should raise this as he this conversation recently.
In my opinion it coach wants a foul he needs to coach his team to foul, irrespective of what the referee says.
A lot is made of fairness in the precursor to the laws and it we as referee can affect the game to be played in a fair way, ie prevent unfair challenges then we absolutely should. If teams want to play unfairly, then we deal with it, but as referees trying to keep the game as fair as possible should be part to a match day approach.

Oh and angry coach is ignoring the fact that the referee may have prevented several unfair challenges against his own team, he is only miffed because his side conceded a goal, which ultimately is down to their own defence.

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Allow me to use an example of the flip angle. Law enforcement agent vs the hacker who is about to 'post a hack' and have a handsome irreversible profit from it. Hacker is happy to take the profit and do the time. Law enforcement should still advise against it.

The card and free kick does not make the foul ok. It is still an unfair situation. "No foul" is encouraging fairness which is expected of the referee.

I agree, but would suggest "Steady, blue" or "Careful, blue" or similar - if they decide to foul, you deal with it and those nearby know you warned the player.
A local (senior and experienced) player used to be in trouble with match officials regularly. I talked to him during the warm up at a game and said "If I call to you 'Red mist, Mark' it means 'Careful in this tackle'
He liked the idea, played sensibly (and was then sent off the one time in the match he ignored my shout)!

 

[Kent Ref]

Where's the line betweeen coaching and reffing?

Seems very blurred to me.

 

[Kes]

Where's the line betweeen coaching and reffing?

Seems very blurred to me.

That's "the line" right there mate.

Whether we choose to "coach" in that way or just referee is up to us. Whatever happens, rest assured that it'll be our fault.

I'm thick-skinned, loud and have an on field presence that the players are aware of from minute 1. What they do with that and to each other is up to them.
I have neither the mental energy nor the inclination to act as anything other than a football referee applying my judgement in accordance with the LOTG.

 

[RustyRef]

When I dropped down from level 3 I went back to refereeing on Sunday mornings but I kept talking to the players the same as I did to step 3 and 4 players. I went something like 15 games without a single card, including with a couple of notorious teams that always got cards. Some of it was luck, some of it is they knew I'd just dropped from senior levels so trusted me, but I'm convinced a lot of it was down to my constant talking meaning the players thought before they did anything silly.

The players often asked me after the game why I was constantly talking to them, answer was always "did you get any cards this week?". Also had a lot of players say they liked it and thought it was a really good idea, conversely had a few tell me to shut up as I was doing their head in.

 

[Kes]

conversely had a few tell me to shut up as I was doing their head in.

Made me laugh out loud.

Very honest of you.

 

[Townie]

And insulting, and abusive.
Plenty of other possible scenarios to where a red card for offinabus could be justified without the need for swear words or gestures.

trying to work my head around OFFINABUS against myself. Generally I'm thick skinned and in the street wouldn't take offence to much - but I understand in a game scenario it's about respect.
On saturday I got asked "What I was smoking" because I was giving offside every time the CAR raised his flag, the players were keen to remind me I could overrule if I wanted to but I explained the CAR had a better angle and I was going with that.

Was the comment insinuating I was high enough to warrant OFFINABUS? I didn't hear him right at first, said "sorry?" and he repeated it! This was U15 so I actually had to suppress a smile.
Upon reflection after the game I identified as possibly a form of dissent, but what's the different between dissent and OFFINABUS - whether or not I find it offensive, insulting or abusive?

 

[one]

I guess when you stop whatever it is you are smoking it would be a lot easier to get your head around it

On a serious note, it all depends on context, with the context you have provided you should have probably sin binned for dissent. In some contexts or with a different referee this can be defused with a witty comment that allows the referee 'win this battle' without having to use sin bin and not lose any respect either, in fact the opposite, gain more respect by managing it the way s/he did.

 

[GraemeS]

trying to work my head around OFFINABUS against myself. Generally I'm thick skinned and in the street wouldn't take offence to much - but I understand in a game scenario it's about respect.
On saturday I got asked "What I was smoking" because I was giving offside every time the CAR raised his flag, the players were keen to remind me I could overrule if I wanted to but I explained the CAR had a better angle and I was going with that.

Was the comment insinuating I was high enough to warrant OFFINABUS? I didn't hear him right at first, said "sorry?" and he repeated it! This was U15 so I actually had to suppress a smile.
Upon reflection after the game I identified as possibly a form of dissent, but what's the different between dissent and OFFINABUS - whether or not I find it offensive, insulting or abusive?

I've had that distinction explained by the "3 P's":

* Personal: Are they disputing the decision or directing their comments at/about you?
* Public: Is it said for just you to hear or is their feedback loud/visually obvious enough that everyone involved in the match knows about it?
* Provocative: Are they simply disputing a decision in the heat of the moment or are they trying to engage you in that dispute by approaching you and insisting on a response?

If your answer to all 3 P's is the former then you can usually manage it via the stepped approach unless the game is already getting pretty spicy. If your answer to all 3 is the latter then you'd usually be justified in going straight for the red. And if it's a little of column A, little of column B then dissent and the sin bin is likely to be the right answer.

For example, in a game last week, I had a player ask "Are you f***ing serious?" after giving a foul against him. It was in response to the decision and I didn't take it particularly personally, but the fact it was at full volume and echoed around the stadium that meant he ended up sitting down for 10 minutes after.