zarathustra
RefChat Addict
Sin bins are still reported as yellow cards
Sin Bins - are you finding they help?
- Thread starter markref
- Start date
- Status
afronaut81
Well-Known Member
Stats are stats and can always show different messages. The only important one is - are YOU seeing less dissent because of your use of it? Personally I think it'll take a season to bed in but if used well should see an improvement
I've had 8 in 11 games at Steps 5 and 6 this season!
one
RefChat Addict
If they calculated it that way would it be a report of close to 100% reduction? Only dissent from substitutes would be counted that way.
You still report a sin bin as misconduct after a game.
Justylove
RefChat Addict
Yeah but I heard that 4 of them you issued to your AR’s......I've had 8 in 11 games at Steps 5 and 6 this season!
That can't be right, you haven't ran my line yet this season
ChasObserverRefDeveloper
Regular Contributor
Temporary dismissals are working well in Hampshire (adult and youth) where all clubs and officials attended seminars on the subject at the start of the season. When I observe Supply League matches it is interesting to hear captains, senior players and managers all telling their player to "Shut up!" when dissent first surfaces, and the only law change highlighted in notices in dressing rooms is "Sin Bins"
My feeling is that referees are not acting upon Dissent
I Sin Binned a player this morning and most of the players didn't know he had to go off for 10 minutes. Unbelievable, I know
Because it's a harsher punishment (IMO), I think referees are setting a higher bar for using it, or putting the caution through as something else (e.g. AA)
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
I suspect that you will find that there is a subset of referees who are ignoring dissent, but they existed before the introduction of sin bins.
You will also get referees who believe that sin bins are too much of a faff, and will caution for generic USB etc, rather than dissent specifically.
You will also get referees who believe that sin bins are too much of a faff, and will caution for generic USB etc, rather than dissent specifically.
I agree, my impression is that many like to chat back and see it as part of the game, but it makes the job harder for everyone else.
I'm positive when I have matches with lots of dissent, it is usually coming from teams that got away with it the week ago.
I'm also positive some referees are not doing their job on the discipline front, because I get asked not to put them in and I feel that teams only ask if they have managed to convince referees to do this in the past.
In my experience, the problem rests;
a. with demoted Level 5's (I've encountered numerous who see it as an achievement not to require sin bins)
b. 7's who are not interested in promotion (lack of knowledge, limited training available etc.)
Of course this is a generalisation and accurate on an individual basis only
Last edited:
spuddy1878
RefChat Addict
Game last week North West Counties, referee tells both coaches before the game "we are not using sin bin"
I've seen the figures from the FA trials that stated 25% of cautions were for dissent now, after trials, there's a reduction of 38% which takes it down to approx 15/17% ish. However there's no mention of cautions overall i.e. increased or decreased. For example, in my experience, dissent is rarely a "one-off" - it tends to be several "pops" at the referee. In which case the dissent caution could easily be given for "Persistent Offences".
RobOda & BigCat sadly the ignorance or non-reporting will always happen. Its the referees that "believe" they can control games without doing the job properly - in other words - Cheating. I'm always happy to reach out to referees who may need some advice - but not these.
RobOda & BigCat sadly the ignorance or non-reporting will always happen. Its the referees that "believe" they can control games without doing the job properly - in other words - Cheating. I'm always happy to reach out to referees who may need some advice - but not these.
Has this experiment actually helped refereeeing, or caused extra administrative problems? If it’s dissent, ping em a yellow. If they commit another cautionable offence, dissent included, then off you pop fella. Not sure I’m buying the go have a sit down and a break aspect at the levels it’s operating at.
If handled properly I now think it's actually helping, at least for me. I work on a hard league in East Kent where discipline is an issue. I tend to get the same teams because they know I won't take their rubbish. I had the reigning premier division champions yesterday - their discipline is appalling but they are a pretty good team. The first time I had them I had two off (red) and two sin bins at the same time, so they were down to 7 on the pitch. I've now had them five times this season and each time it's got a bit better. The last time I had them in January I had one sin bin and three cautions for fouls. The sin binned player's team kept telling him to shut up but he wouldn't listen.
Yesterday they were well behaved and there were no cautions at all. It wasn't the hardest game because they won easily and their manager is out sick (he's the worst on the team and has serious small man syndrome) but in the past even when they've won they're still a handful. Hopefully they will see they can do it if they try!
Yesterday they were well behaved and there were no cautions at all. It wasn't the hardest game because they won easily and their manager is out sick (he's the worst on the team and has serious small man syndrome) but in the past even when they've won they're still a handful. Hopefully they will see they can do it if they try!
I agree. This is another case of trying to find a new solution when the right solution has always been there. In the documentary Kill the Referee, Michel Platini speaks to some of the officials at the Euro 2008 tournament and says (I'm paraphrasing) that referees have all of the tools they need to be respected; it is up to them to use them. He tells a story about two referees from his playing days, a Mr. Konrad and a Mr. Wurtz. Konrad, you could say whatever you wanted to for 90 minutes and he wouldn't do a thing; for Wurtz, the minute you questioned anything, even politely, it was a caution. Which of these officials, in your estimation, had fewer instances of dissent across their career?
It is about finding what you are comfortable putting up with and drawing the line there, firmly and consistently. Imo, most players don't mind the first dissent caution because they are under the impression that they will never be sent off for a second dissent caution, and that subsequent misconduct following that second caution will not be reported. As Platini said: we have the tools (and we always did) so use them or don't complain about dissent.
And did Mr Platini explain which of Konrad and Wurtz ended up getting to the national or international level?
Because from the way referees are told not to make themselves the centre of attention or ruin the spectacle, and from the other feedback that is most obvious to outsiders and most important to maintaining a career, it seems like any referee who gave a yellow for dissent on their decisions (let alone a red for abuse) will find themselves soon being moved down the grades, not up them.
It's easy for him to say one thing, it's another to push back when his administration and the commercial and political pressures are very clearly against it, LOTG and Respect be damned.
one
RefChat Addict
I'd analyse this a bit more. The problem has always been there, dissent. Long ago they gave us a solution by cautioning. I am sure this tool helps to some extent when used but it is not always used. We then had:
1. Still a partially solved problem dissent (some player don't care if they are cautioned) and
2. a new problem of the tool (cautioning for dissent) not being used.
They introduced a new solution. How does this stack up. I think it significantly improve problem 1. Overall a sin bin is a much bigger deterrent than a caution. But for 2. it is now even a bigger problem. Those who would not caution for dissent would not sin bin either but also a good % of those who used to caution will not sin bin because of its impact.
So how does the new solution stack up against the old one over all? We will never know. However if you ask football bodies they will come up with some skewed stats to support their own work.
But for those of us who use whatever tool that is available to us, from experience, the new tool (sin bin) works better than the old tool (caution).
- Status