Rescinding Cards

[Bobdazzle]

Keen to get feedback on this situation and what the right action should be post match.

At 70 min mark a goal was scored by the "blue" team making the score. The "red" team protested for offside. The referee then issued a red card to one player followed by a second yellow and red to a second. They both questioned the referee stating they were simply protesting the call. He then allowed them to stay on the field and finish the remainder of the game.

The red team then went on to win and the blue team protested. On the basis that the referee can't rescind cards.

Subsequently the referee filed 2 red card reports. Stating that he allowed the players to stay on because he felt pressured to do so. They were both marked down as direct red cards for descent. In his reports he states that he thought about the incident post match and felt he had made the wrong decision by letting them stay on. As a result of the card report the players were automatically stood down for 4 weeks.

Now the result of the game is being questioned. One of the options being suggested is that the result of the game stand as it was at 70min (which would mean the blue team would win) even though the rest of the game was completed.

Interested in thoughts on this bizarre situation and what should happen.

Cheers
Bob

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

Welcome to the forum

First off, were you the referee in question here? If so, I urge you to speak up now. Comments here may be unkind if it's perceived that it's about a referee not on here - otherwise if it's yourself, members will seek to assist and coach you. Your pride would be better served by speaking up if it is you, trust me There isn't a referee on here who hasn't done something they'd rather forget

For one, a referee can rescind a card, prior to the match restarting. Doesn't matter what colour. I've rescinded a red card once. So the protest is completely unjustifiable in law and should be thrown in the bin.

If the referee purely rescinded the cards because he buckled under pressure then he needs to seek out coaching and drop himself to an easier grade that he can handle.

But the facts are, as the players were allowed to stay on the field, they were not sent from the field. The referee's actions in keeping them on at least imply rescinding. So they were never sent.

Writing a report to say that you should have sent off a player when you didn't is very bizarre and I'd imagine it would normally be thrown in the bin. But I guess it's up to the football authority to decide whether the player's actions justify suspension in the absence of a red card (don't forget, professional leagues allow for a suspension without a red card in post-match review, so there is precedent, though this is a bit different).

IMO the result of the game should not be questioned as the referee has not erred in law by rescinding the red card. So let's change 'rescind' the red card to 'didn't issue' a red card. Then we simply need to look at whether THAT decision was correct in law or not. If an error in law, then an appeal may be possible. If it was a typical subjective red card (eg OFFINABUS), then there's no error in law either way, and no justification for an appeal. The only thing that could possibly be appealed is the suspension - but that could also stand.

 

[AlexF]

Also noting that a red card can never be for dissent. That's a cautionable offence...

 

[Bobdazzle]

Thanks

I should note that In this case I was not referring but was playing.

The question that seems to being asked is if the players plyed undue pressure on the referee.

From my vantage they asked questions like anyone would if sent for basic protesting (but I am biased).

The referees report says he felt pressured and let the players stay on. Which I read as rescinded (but again am biased).

Bob

 

[OIREF!]

Writing a report to say that you should have sent off a player when you didn't is very bizarre and I'd imagine it would normally be thrown in the bin.

It's certainly bizarre but I can't see it being thrown in the bin. Given the nature of the events I would expect such a report to attract some serious attention and questioning from both the local football league/association and referee's society. It's a big mess and unfortunately I can see the referee involved having a lot of explaining to do.

 

[Mewcenary]

What a mess!

Two possibilities here:

1. The referee changed his mind (for whatever reason), therefore the cards resulting in the dismissals never actually happened. In this case, although it doesn't look good, the result should stand as the referee has technically been correct in Law.

2. The referee didn't change his mind, but for whatever reason let the players stay on despite being sent off.... and then filed the dismissal reports after the game ?! In this case, it indicates a clear error in Law and one for the authorities to make a call on. There is nothing in Law regarding what constitutes a requirement for a gam to be re-played. That's down to the relevant governing bodies in the area in question.

As mentioned above, there is no red card offence for protesting a decision. Protesting would fall under dissent and be a cautionable offence if the referee deemed it as such. Of course, it could multiply into two yellows, or descend into abuse in which case it is a different story.

 

[Bobdazzle]

2. The referee didn't change his mind, but for whatever reason let the players stay on despite being sent off.... and then filed the dismissal reports after the game ?! In this case, it indicates a clear error in Law and one for the authorities to make a call on. There is nothing in Law regarding what constitutes a requirement for a gam to be re-played. That's down to the relevant governing bodies in the area in question.

Expanding on the second point. If the governing body decides that he didn't change his mind, but felt pressured to leave them on, I can see 3 possible options.
1) Game should be replayed.
2) The game results stands at the 70minute mark ie when the players should have left the field (ie the last 25 minutes don't count)
3) They let the result stand and say the ref should have better control.

In my experience, I can't see the third option being taken as the association tends to back the ref 99% of the time (which I think is very fair in most cases - maybe not this one, but fair). What do you think the better course of action would be, given I can't find any precedent around this.

Cheers

 

[xPositor]

@Bobdazzle - you say you were playing in this game - for which team? If you were on the team that ultimately lost, I can see why either a replay or call the result at the 70 minute mark would be beneficial

 

[happy whistler]

I think the referee involved will be in a pretty bad place mentally after what happened and will need plenty of support to be confident in dealing with future awkward situations. We can all state what should have happened at the time and I am sure he will already know that.
I do feel more coaching in man management and role playing difficult situations referees are likely to encounter should happen as part of the initial training with as much emphasis on this as on the actual LOTG.
I have spoken to 2 young refereess who are not re-registering for the coming season and one of them solely down to difficulties in handling aggressive behaviour and when having decisions challenged.

 

[Bobdazzle]

@Bobdazzle - you say you were playing in this game - for which team? If you were on the team that ultimately lost, I can see why either a replay or call the result at the 70 minute mark would be beneficial

I was playing for the team that won. Personally I don't feel as though any undue pressure was applied to the ref to change his mind (other than the standard level of questioning from someone who has got a card that really shouldn't have been) and that the result should stand.

But I have a hearing with all involved tonight and I can see them backing the ref 100% ie they will say there is intimidation etc and will probably look at leaving the result at 70min (which I think is a bizarre call and can't find any precedent for it when a game has carried on for the full 90min) or they will look at replaying. Was interested if anyone had ever see this thing happen before as I can't find any examples anywhere.

 

[OIREF!]

Bobdazzle - I'm sure we're all interested in hear this is resolved.

 

[Bobdazzle]

Still awaiting the outcome. Will let you know!

 

[Bobdazzle]

So the outcome (although subject to appeal). The team that won after 90 min Has been charged with unsportsmanlike conduct and as result forfeits the match. They deemed that the two players who were given red cards and protested put the ref under undue pressure and they should have left the field rather tHan question them. They said the questioning forced them being alloed to stay on. Therefore it is unsportsmanlike and game forfeited.

Thoughts as we are going to protest.