Team implodes right at the end

[OnlyUseMeWhistle]

Based on the other threads it seems this weekend has them all out in force!

County Cup game between two reserve sides, CARs in play and both teams play in different county leagues (one near the border) so no clue how it will go. However, the away side is the team who had a player banned and fined after using discriminatory language towards me last season.

A few key moments from the game leading up to this:

- Home side, arguably unfancied based on the first 20, take a two goal lead. The second is from an excellent advantage I played from a foul in the box on a player who cut the ball back, it fell to a player 2 yards out - goal. Home side however are questioning a lot and I apply stepped approach and we head into half time 2-2 and with a last warning issued to home 6 (and by extension the whole side as I spoke to the captain at the same time, who I overheard pass it on at half time).
- A penalty was given in the first half for a home defender pulling back an away attacker who was chasing the ball as it was leaving the box from a corner, baffling choice from the home player but I had to give it because the impact on the attacker was clear
- Second half at 70 mins I allow a two footed, but not reckless or excessive force imo, challenge go. He wins the ball clearly, both feet on the ground and was at low intensity. Player tackled gets right back up. Home 6 gets in my face, I warn him and he says something again so in the bin he goes.

When home 6 returns on about 82nd minute (ball just wouldn't go out of play), he and his team are much calmer and quieter. Until...

Home 17 attacked near the edge of the box is fouled but the ball goes on to a home winger in the box with one man to beat, so I pause about 2 seconds before giving the foul, he loses the ball. No advantage. Foul given. Home 17 immediately gets in my face, using strong language to punctuate even when I explain I paused to check advantage as they had a man through but had given the foul. He doesn't stop, so yellow card sin bin. As he walks away he tells me to **** off, loud enough for the benches to hear it, so red card OFFINABUS.

I've then got a couple of home players asking what for when Home 6 pipes up again to say that I don't know the "rules" *Shudder* or what I am doing. He's all out of warnings but I offer him a chance to stop talking or he will be off, he repeats it so off he goes for a second dissent yellow. Then to cap it all off the home captain, already on a yellow for a tackle in the second half early on, runs 20 yards to shout and point in my face. Three reds in about 30 seconds.

Chairman of the CFA and a couple of board members just happen to be watching and come over at FT to offer protection, said I had a great game and they just imploded for no reason. With an attacking FK on the edge of the box at 4-3 down too...

 

[cooperd5]

Wow, quite a blow up! Sounds like you did all the right things though but 3 reds in 30s must be a record!

 

[FirsFox40]

Distil it to the relevant facts: OFFINABUS Red, dissent and s7, dissent and s7.

 

[Bombedcoma]

a bit late to the party…

Thing I would offer here is:

Consider how many ‘warnings’ you give.

You’ve mentioned stepped approach in addition to giving these warnings and n a couple of occasions. Be carefult to all her manage. Some players will not listen. If you give a warning it’s before stepped approach. earn too many times and it loses its impact.

 

[santa sangria]

Good point. Think about the dynamics. If you give many low level warnings they lose effect and trap you, preventing you from carding others. If you give ultimatums or final warnings, these are hard traps to break.

When you say “questioning a lot” can you rewind? Sounds a lot like low level dissent early in the game. What could you have done differently? Was there a chance to very publicly ceremonially warn someone earlier? Did you too much low level warning with ball in play? Was there an early dissent card you could have conjured? What about the new “captain only” directive, could have used this?

 

[OnlyUseMeWhistle]

Good point. Think about the dynamics. If you give many low level warnings they lose effect and trap you, preventing you from carding others. If you give ultimatums or final warnings, these are hard traps to break.

When you say “questioning a lot” can you rewind? Sounds a lot like low level dissent early in the game. What could you have done differently? Was there a chance to very publicly ceremonially warn someone earlier? Did you too much low level warning with ball in play? Was there an early dissent card you could have conjured? What about the new “captain only” directive, could have used this?

So occasionally I meet teams where no one knows the laws, and this inevitably leads to questions because they don't understand. The questions started how I wanted, politely on the point of law and then going away. By about minute 15 I had my first one that went beyond this and gave my first warning. I believe the captain only directive doesn't apply to grassroots currently?

Warnings were stepped, so the next person got a ceremonial, one after that was the final warning with both captains called over. Honestly the sin bin bought me maybe 5 minutes before it started up again, some teams are just determined to blow up

 

[Runner Ref]

Plenty of good advice on here!

I’d add that sometimes engaging with players can be as negative as it can be a positive. Some teams/players will question everything. Whether this is because they genuinely don’t know, or they’re trying to get into your head, who knows. But sometimes the best course of action is to ignore them. Especially if they’re asking ‘why isn’t it our throw in’ etc. That shouldn’t really need an explanation

If something that is maybe a bit more niche, then by all means explain. But don’t explain too much.

There’s also times where you need to almost throw the stepped approach out of the window, or at least skip certain steps of it. Learning how and when to do this is something that comes with experience. The stepped approach is a tool for you to use. But a bit like a builder will need to change their tool when on a job, you may need to change your tool e.g. bin the stepped approach and try something different

 

[OldNavyRef]

Home side however are questioning a lot and I apply stepped approach

a last warning issued to home 6

as I spoke to the captain at the same time, who I overheard pass it on at half time

Home 6 gets in my face, I warn him and he says something again so in the bin he goes

even when I explain I paused to check advantage as

He doesn't stop, so yellow card sin bin. As he walks away he tells me to **** off, loud enough for the benches to hear it, so red card OFFINABUS

couple of home players asking what for when Home 6 pipes up again

He's all out of warnings but I offer him a chance to stop talking or he will be off, he repeats it

Now I wasn't there and this is 100% a you had to be there. So if I am wrong, I am wrong. I just see a theme.

Rarely is anyone going to agree with you. Especially after a decision against them. Some people understand the rules, and will think you have objectively got it wrong. Sometimes they will be right, and you won't even know it.

It sounds like you discuss with players too much and talk them into bookings "I offer him a chance to stop talking", don't offer, demand and move on. Lots of ego going on (not necessarily from you, but more questioning theirs in some instances). If you allow a conversation to go on too long. Players will talk themselves into the bin.

If you sin bin someone, they are going to grumble and moan their way off the pitch making out you are making the game all about yourself and you can't get a decision right. You can eavesdrop in, or you can make distance and let the sin bin run its course. They are at their most heated when you point them to the side. Let them cool down.

My read from what you have written is you are far to open to conversation when maybe discussion isn't appropriate.

I've only thrown my hat in on this one, as this is exactly my side of the game I have been cutting out the tail end of last season as I 100% did the above. But I changed my style and I think I am better for it.

Also, I know others have picked up on it, but it sounds like home 6 got two final warnings

Hopefully this comes across as constructive!

 

[Martiju]

Now I wasn't there and this is 100% a you had to be there. So if I am wrong, I am wrong. I just see a theme.

Rarely is anyone going to agree with you. Especially after a decision against them. Some people understand the rules, and will think you have objectively got it wrong. Sometimes they will be right, and you won't even know it.

It sounds like you discuss with players too much and talk them into bookings "I offer him a chance to stop talking", don't offer, demand and move on. Lots of ego going on (not necessarily from you, but more questioning theirs in some instances). If you allow a conversation to go on too long. Players will talk themselves into the bin.

If you sin bin someone, they are going to grumble and moan their way off the pitch making out you are making the game all about yourself and you can't get a decision right. You can eavesdrop in, or you can make distance and let the sin bin run its course. They are at their most heated when you point them to the side. Let them cool down.

My read from what you have written is you are far to open to conversation when maybe discussion isn't appropriate.

I've only thrown my hat in on this one, as this is exactly my side of the game I have been cutting out the tail end of last season as I 100% did the above. But I changed my style and I think I am better for it.

Also, I know others have picked up on it, but it sounds like home 6 got two final warnings

Hopefully this comes across as constructive!

I think this is an excellent observation - and a situation I recognise. Those of us with a friendlier disposition want to have games where everyone plays by the rules () and realises that you're just trying to do your best in difficult circumstances. I used to try and explain everything on the grounds that it was helping them learn and, once they'd understood my view, all would be well. I exaggerate of course, but not enormously!

My realisation came when I found I was cautioning for dissent more than for reckless tackles. Thinking about it, there were times I needed to say my piece (if at all) then run to a new position because neither they, nor I, could afford to stand down. Now I still talk to players, but as soon as it becomes a discussion I leave, or get the play restarted. If they want to follow me and complain then I have the tools, but I certainly don't want to get into a position where it becomes all about ego.

That may or may not be the case here, but worth bearing in mind.

 

[DJIC]

I picked up a valuable tool, when you have a an irate player, firstly repeat back to them their issue, "I get it you think that should have been a penalty but my view was ...... etc", "but I do need you to calm down".

It is unlikely, a player will calm down just by you repeating "Calm down, calm down" as their point has not been acknowledged.

 

[Runner Ref]

I picked up a valuable tool, when you have a an irate player, firstly repeat back to them their issue, "I get it you think that should have been a penalty but my view was ...... etc", "but I do need you to calm down".

It is unlikely, a player will calm down just by you repeating "Calm down, calm down" as their point has not been acknowledged.

Less of the scouse stereotyping

 

[Martiju]

Less of the scouse stereotyping

Probably works even better if accompanied by the hand gestures

 

[Runner Ref]

Probably works even better if accompanied by the hand gestures

View attachment 7730

David Coote, is that you?