Sin Bins - 17/18 Season

[Sheffields Finest]

Think of it from another angle other than your own... Have you ever played or managed?!? Or have you always been a referee?

The best solutions to the problems are the simple ones, take GLT, the ref has to do zero until his wrist buzzes. simple, effective, brilliant,
The new VAR, so far looks like a dogs dinner, every decision on everything will be challenged like US Football, what a mess!
As others have said, when there are a few to monitor this its probably workable, on your own, its going to cost Jobs at the CFAs when the cash dries up and games will be ruined by confusion and doubt. Imagine the mess if you get your timings wrong in not letting Players A or B back on the pitch bang on 10.00,and if something happens in the meantime!!! Managers or someone bothered will be timing the 10.00 for sure

 

[Twinblade]

In my view we won't really know if it will be successful until it is trialled. I am still undecided if I think it is a good idea or not. In principle I believe it is and could work, but until I've seen it "in action" I don't know.

Interestingly I was speaking to the two managers from my game this weekend, one of them has a team that can at times be pretty vocal towards the referee if things aren't going their way. He suggested it was a good idea, because as he put it, sometimes players say something in the heat of the moment which they instantly regret and allowing them 10 minutes to cool off before returning is better than a caution and them probably still venting their anger or doing something worse on the field immediately after. His view was it would quickly reduce and red cards his team receive.

The other manager thought it would work but didn't want to be the referee who had to police it thinking it would get confusing if more than one player was in the bin, or if it reduced a team to less than 7. His other comment was that if it was left to the team managers to police the time no player would be missing 10-minutes.

Personally, if it gives players the time to cool off and then return to the game with a calm manner rather than potentially being cautioned and then doing something silly (although we can easily deal with this it could impact on match control etc) then I would welcome it. I'm pretty sure if you had a game mid winter (or summer for that matter) when it was hammering it down with rain and no cover with no-one on the sidelines a player isn't going to be too keen about being binned for 10-minutes so it might make them think twice.

I agree with earlier comments that it would be a good system at youth level if after a trial they decide not to implement it in OA football.

 

[Padfoot]

So a player loses his head, says something he shouldn't.....you, as the lone official, now has to explain to that player (still in head loss mode) that they have to leave the field for 10 mins to cool down, sit on the naughty step, have a time out or whatever else you want to call it.....and that's going to be easy?
The idea of players having a "cooling off" period isn't a bad one....but until they have "cooled off" the referee still has to manage them and get them off the pitch. What's wrong with a manager growing some testicles and taking responsibility for their players? Especially as more and more leagues are running return substitutions......or even where they don't, what would send a strong message to players? Gob off at the ref, get subbed. Soon find they watch their mouths then......but that would mean the managers might cop for some of the flack, oh dear, can't have that, that's what we have a referee for.

The solution to dissent is for clubs, managers and players to grow a pair, take responsibility for their own actions (or inaction) and deal with it from the top down, and the bottom up.
Start clamping down on it at the top with the Prem, and have zero tolerance from U13's upwards....eventually it should meet in the middle.

 

[Trip]

I think this idea is worth a go and I think it could reduce dissent. Here is why:

I've only recently stopped playing after 20+ years. No player wants to be the one to let the team down. Everyone would rather it was somebody else who scored the own goal, or gave away the penalty even though the effect on the team is the same regardless of who did it.

Getting a yellow for dissent is almost a badge of honour. You're putting pressure on the ref which might help the team. Sin bins for dissent put the whole team down to 10 men. It's not just the gobby player that's affected, it's the well behaved players too. I think in time this might have a positive effect.

 

[Trip]

The solution to dissent is for clubs, managers and players to grow a pair, take responsibility for their own actions

That's basically saying "The solution for dissent is for people to stop dissenting." Well, duh.

I agree that cautions for dissent should be issued much more often in the Premiership. But this idea might work. I think we should try it.

 

[Tino Best]

and have zero tolerance from U13's upwards.

This is probably the most important comment in this thread. Book for dissent at say 13 upwards and maybe they will learn the lesson. I don't think kids even know there is a fine for a yellow or a red. A week missing pocket money for gobbing at a ref might be a better lesson than 10 mins in a sin bin and might improve behaivour as they get older. Or it might not make the slightest bit of difference!

 

[Padfoot]

That's basically saying "The solution for dissent is for people to stop dissenting." Well, duh.

I agree that cautions for dissent should be issued much more often in the Premiership. But this idea might work. I think we should try it.

The point was that they mentioned people always blame the referee for dissent, whether it's their tolerance level, the decision was wrong, or the ref didn't give them anything all game.....it's never the players fault. Ever. And until that attitude changes you will never properly deal with dissent.
Now throw into the mix the fact that they will be a player down for 10 mins, because of the ref, and tell me how that is going to improve anything?

 

[Trip]

The point was that they mentioned people always blame the referee for dissent, whether it's their tolerance level, the decision was wrong, or the ref didn't give them anything all game.....it's never the players fault. Ever. And until that attitude changes you will never properly deal with dissent.
Now throw into the mix the fact that they will be a player down for 10 mins, because of the ref, and tell me how that is going to improve anything?

I don't agree with the premise. The player dissenting will blame the ref but other players quite often tell their team mates to shut up, especially once they are on a yellow because they know they'll be a man down if he gets another one.

Sin bins would put the team at a disadvantage after a single caution for dissent and it might therefore encourage well behaved players to pressure their gobby friends to keep their opinions to themselves.

If it doesn't work we can drop it, but it's definitely worth a go.

 

[xPositor]

Padfoot takes a couple of inexperienced (in his eyes) assistants out for a Sunday morning stroll. "Pah, don't want none of this modern stuff to get in the way of the game, and remember - I drove here in a black car 'cos there is no other colour available, same as my referee kit. Now, enuff of this nonsense of sin bins and video... video, what's video. Moving pictures you say, don't want none of that malarkey. Now, let's get this game going."

 

[RustyRef]

Lots of people, myself included, were very against repeated subs coming in, and came up with all kinds of doomsday scenarios that it could cause. They didn't happen, and I don't really see this as any different. Let a few leagues volunteer to be guinea pigs, and if they are sensible they will poll their referees for advice before signing up to it, one of mine already has done so.

At the end of the year trial, and that is all it is at present, those leagues can report on their experiences as to how it worked. Likewise so can the referees, many of which will be active on forums such as this one and others. I'd be interested to see what happens to dissent cautions, do they increase or more likely decrease, do referees feel player behaviour is better as a result, etc.

 

[RefCrow]

Let's not compare apples and oranges......Rugby has a totally different mindset when it comes to referees.

The presumption is that players and managers are going to be totally compliant over the whole thing.......
What about the player who necks a couple of cans of lager whilst sin binned? Or the one who puffs on a joint?

It's a ridiculous idea, and if referees have any sense they'll steer well clear of leagues using it.

Absolutely ridiculous what I am reading.... to say that this is unworkable is nothing less than shortsightedness! We need to move with the times and not be so rooted to "in my day". It works for lots of sports notibly Hockey, Rugby and Basketball so calling it an unfair comparison is ludicrous, if we want to improve the game we need to cut out decent - maybe from the top down and not the bottom up! But still a good move in my book.

 

[Padfoot]

Absolutely ridiculous what I am reading.... to say that this is unworkable is nothing less than shortsightedness! We need to move with the times and not be so rooted to "in my day". It works for lots of sports notibly Hockey, Rugby and Basketball so calling it an unfair comparison is ludicrous, if we want to improve the game we need to cut out decent - maybe from the top down and not the bottom up! But still a good move in my book.

That's the problem...a lack of common decency.....which won't be resolved by this pathetic idea. At least not at grassroots level.

 

[Ciley Myrus]

Easy to manage, simply carry a backpack full of Frankie and Benny type vibrate/flashing buzzer things that you give to a player when you are putting him off the park for dissent, when the thing starts to bleep with them all being set to 10 mins, the player can stand at the sideline waving it around his head and thus can return to the park.

 

[Paul March]

this should have been trialled and the issues ironed out where there is a 4th official.

A first year ref on a park game has enough to contend with without the added stress of multiple sin bins. Their focus needs to be on play not on their watch. Far too many drop out within the first year anyway, can't see this helping with retaining or recruiting new refs.

 

[Peter Grove]

He suggested it was a good idea, because as he put it, sometimes players say something in the heat of the moment which they instantly regret and allowing them 10 minutes to cool off before returning is better than a caution

If depends what you mean by a caution - the player is still shown the yellow card and gets a temporary dismissal and depending on how the national association implements this, can still be subject to further disciplinary sanctions due to an accumulation of temporary dismissals. Also, if the competition is using System A, all cautionable offences lead to a temporary dismissal and if a player gets two TD's he's out of the game just the same as if he had two cautions. In System B it's slightly different - some cautionable offences lead to a temporary dismissal, some do not and a player can get one of each and still keep playing.

 

[Peter Grove]

I'm not quite sure why this post about sin bins has become a debate about dissent. Temporary dismissals are (depending on the system) either for all cautionable or at least multiple different offences. One of the main reasons for them, that seems to be being ignored here is that a player who commits a single yellow card offence in a game is in essence not really suffering any significant effect in the game during which he committed the illegal behaviour, only the prospect of possible consequences to come somewhere later down the road.

TD's are intended to be "an instant punishment [that] can have a significant and immediate positive influence on the behaviour of the offending player and, potentially, the player’s team" since they provide a punishment that affects the player (and team) right there and then, in the game where the cautionable offence occurred.

I'm still not convinced that this is a good idea or that it will have the desired effect but it is about a whole lot more than simply curbing dissent.

 

[Paul March]

PG- in the U.K. the option they are trialling is B and only for dissent. Hence we all have focused on this element.

 

[Sheffields Finest]

Anyone hear Dean Saunders on Talksh1te this morning?

'What happens if 4 players surround the ref swearing at him?' (He was thinking of the spoiling the game as a spectacle numbers wise etc).

Very easy Dean, send the lot off, that's not dissent it's Offinabus!

 

[Cheshire Ref]

this should have been trialled and the issues ironed out where there is a 4th official.

A first year ref on a park game has enough to contend with without the added stress of multiple sin bins. Their focus needs to be on play not on their watch. Far too many drop out within the first year anyway, can't see this helping with retaining or recruiting new refs.

This is a great point!!!

 

[QuaverRef]

So is the 'sin bin' in addition to a caution, or instead of? So if a player was to return to the pitch and do it again, is that a sending off?