A&H

Sin Bins - Dissent v delay of game

What is your decision?

  • Dissent = 10 mins in Sin Bin

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • Delay of game = Caution

    Votes: 11 91.7%

  • Total voters
    12

lincs22

Supply League Observer
Staff member
Observer/Tutor
With the introduction of sin bins at Step 7 and below for dissent next season, an interesting thought has crossed my mind.

Currently, it is the same sanction for dissent as delaying the game = caution. Under the rules changes, dissent = sin bin; delaying the game = caution.

Situation 1 - first half, player kicks the ball away after offending. Is this dissent or delay of the game?

What is your decision?

Situation 2 - exactly the same reaction, but 9 minutes to go?

Do you change, given that treating it as dissent = 1 player down for the rest of the game?


This is definitively one area which referees need to be consistent on!
 
The Referee Store
I don't think the time defines which offence it is, I think the manner in which it's done is. You can usually tell an angry kick apart from one just intended to get rid of the ball, so I'd always decide on a case-by-case basis.
 
Can i ask? Is this going country wide or will it be optional at county level?

The standard code of rules will be changed to make mandatory at Step 7 and below, so includes all Sunday and junior football.

There are no opt outs for different counties.

So @Cheshire Ref - it could be operational in your supply league. It will in the York League, which is a step 7 and supply league.
 
I don't think the time defines which offence it is, I think the manner in which it's done is. You can usually tell an angry kick apart from one just intended to get rid of the ball, so I'd always decide on a case-by-case basis.

I completely agree. Time wasting is when its done just to slow a restart. If a player kicks the ball away in anger thats dissent. Previously these have carried the same punishment though. It makes it a much harder sell now one is just a yellow whilst the other is a sin bin. Say you sin bin a player 30 mins in for kicking the ball away arguing your decision. The moment you then only caution an opposition player on the 75th minute because he didnt kick it with aggression will get questions raised.
 
For me it will depend on how much the player has annoyed me generally......also, if they’ve already had a caution, then it will always be delaying the restart, red, see ya later.

9 mins to go, first caution....will be dissent and sit out the rest of the game....

Basically I’ll go whichever way I think will have the greater inconvenience to the offending player/team........:devil:
 
Kicking the ball away is always delaying the restart. Its not always dissent. The OP is not clear if it is dissent lets consider both scenarios:

If you can determine it's only delaying (there was no dissent) then caution for delaying.

But if it is delaying as well as dissent then the "two offences at the same time" law comes into it and you need to assess which offence (delaying or dissent) to punish in terms of
  1. sanction
  2. restart
  3. physical severity
  4. and tactical impact
in that order. Well sanction is on top and the only one with a sanction is delaying (given that sin-bin dissent doesn't count as a caution) then yellow card it is for delaying.


So no matter how you look at this, its yellow for delaying.
 
Kicking the ball away is always delaying the restart. Its not always dissent. The OP is not clear if it is dissent lets consider both scenarios:

If you can determine it's only delaying (there was no dissent) then caution for delaying.

But if it is delaying as well as dissent then the "two offences at the same time" law comes into it and you need to assess which offence (delaying or dissent) to punish in terms of
  1. sanction
  2. restart
  3. physical severity
  4. and tactical impact
in that order. Well sanction is on top and the only one with a sanction is delaying (given that sin-bin dissent doesn't count as a caution) then yellow card it is for delaying.


So no matter how you look at this, its yellow for delaying.

I disagree with your argument surrounding dissent vs delaying the restart. The sanctions are different. That is a good system to be used for other infringements (red vs yellow offence, IDFK vs DFK, etc.) but to say 2 offences occur at the same time here isnt right. One offence occurs and its upto the referees interpretation whether it was delaying the restart or dissent. 2 offences would be say a handball as the player makes a reckless tackle. Seperate offences where one is clearly above the other.

Plus if you was to use your theory, would dissent caution with a 10 min sin bin not be the more serious offense carrying the greater punishment here? Would be interested in other peoples views.
 
Dissent for me would be where the ball being kicked away was accompanied by some form of displeasure at the decision. Anything outside of that is Delay of Game
 
I disagree with your argument surrounding dissent vs delaying the restart. The sanctions are different. That is a good system to be used for other infringements (red vs yellow offence, IDFK vs DFK, etc.) but to say 2 offences occur at the same time here isnt right. One offence occurs and its upto the referees interpretation whether it was delaying the restart or dissent. 2 offences would be say a handball as the player makes a reckless tackle. Seperate offences where one is clearly above the other.

Plus if you was to use your theory, would dissent caution with a 10 min sin bin not be the more serious offense carrying the greater punishment here? Would be interested in other peoples views.
I can understand why you consider 10 minutes in the bin a 'sanction'. I wouldn't (I don't think the law does). If it was accomponied by a caution that counts towards a double yellow red then it would definately be considered a more serious offence.

As for two offences at the same time, two different acts very very rarely happen at the same time. They happen in quick succession even if a fraction of a second apart. Offences at the same time are more common by far when the same act (at the same moment) can relate to two or more offences in the LOTG. Two examples here.

A player takes a correct throw in. He then handles the ball before anyone else touches it. This is two offences at the same time.

An injured player temporarily off the FOP sitting outside the touchline swings his leg at an opponent running just inside the FOP and recklessly trips him. These are two offences in quick succession.
 
I can understand why you consider 10 minutes in the bin a 'sanction'. I wouldn't (I don't think the law does). If it was accomponied by a caution that counts towards a double yellow red then it would definately be considered a more serious offence.

As for two offences at the same time, two different acts very very rarely happen at the same time. They happen in quick succession even if a fraction of a second apart. Offences at the same time are more common by far when the same act (at the same moment) can relate to two or more offences in the LOTG. Two examples here.

A player takes a correct throw in. He then handles the ball before anyone else touches it. This is two offences at the same time.

An injured player temporarily off the FOP sitting outside the touchline swings his leg at an opponent running just inside the FOP and recklessly trips him. These are two offences in quick succession.
I think you're way off on this to be honest. Firstly, your first example specifically says X happens, then Y - that cannot be simultaneous!

Secondly I think you're applying an irrelevant concept to the question anyway. For better or worse, when a player kicks the ball away after the whistle is blow, the FA's reporting system has always asked us to report why we felt the need to show a card. That reason can either be because we felt the player was trying to delay the restart or because he was displaying dissent by action. We have never had the option of "both of the above", so have always had to choose. The only new thing is that the sin bins require different outcomes, but the fact we're still expected to know for which of those two reasons we've shown the card isn't new.

I appreciate that perhaps rarely both can apply (a player making a deliberate show of dissent specifically in order to run down the clock), but that's the exception rather than the majority as you seem to imply. And even if that is the case, we're still expected to decide which reason caused us to show the card - the only way you have ever been able to say "both" is if you show a yellow for delay and a yellow for dissent, but I don't think may people would be able to sell that.
 
Firstly, your first example specifically says X happens, then Y - that cannot be simultaneous!
I'll clarify this. The rest I think I already have. If you think the offences were not simultaneous I don't think you understood the throw in example.
What offences do you think were commited in the example and which occured before the other?
 
I'll clarify this. The rest I think I already have. If you think the offences were not simultaneous I don't think you understood the throw in example.
What offences do you think were commited in the example and which occured before the other?
Where the player takes a throw in correctly and then handles it? Sounds like a sequence of events to me?
 
Where the player takes a throw in correctly and then handles it? Sounds like a sequence of events to me?
First event is not an offence and nothing to do with simultaneous offences. As santa pointed out there are clearly two different offences commited there by the exact same act and hence simultaneously. One IFK and the other DFK.
 
I think Graeme read that as “takes a throw incorrectly” rather than “takes a throw in correctly”!
 
I think Graeme read that as “takes a throw incorrectly” rather than “takes a throw in correctly”!
Ah yes, sorry, I misunderstood that. Still, I think it's an irrelevant comparison to make - we're required to state what reason the caution was given, the idea of them stacking is irrelevant.
 
Why are you trying to reinvent the wheel?

It’s very very simple.......

It’s whatever you decide it is. And the best bit is, you can pick whichever one suits your needs at the time.......
 
Where the player takes a throw in correctly and then handles it? Sounds like a sequence of events to me?
No. When he handles it he commits a dhb dfk offence AND a touching the ball a second time at by the 1 action. We punish the more serious offence lf handball.

Its like a DOGSO for a careless foul. Its two offences. A careless foul. And a denial of gso. We punish dogso as more serious offence
 
Back
Top