The Ref Stop

Junior/Youth U18 Cup Final

Stepped approach has to be used to diffuse this situation. Use the captains to either calm the dissenting player or warn them both that anymore from any of the players will be cautioned. It's not the referees fault that the player has lost his composure. Follow through with the cautions until they learn.
 
The Ref Stop
Padfoot said:
Absolute drivel I'm afraid......

If the player chooses not to get out of their 'dissent mode' after being told they are being cautioned for dissent......and decides to take the piss out of the referee when the card is shown......then the only person who hasn't handled the situation well is the player!
Click to expand...

I don't care about what you think, it's well established that we have two different visions of refereeing and I'm very happy with that.
Please continue to caution GK for handling offenses in their own area and let the ignorants do what they do.
 
If that was me, regardless of the occasion, he'd be walking.

If the player hasn't learned after already being cautioned, then he gets everything that he deserves. Russell, I can totally understand why you did it, though I don't agree.
 
Here we go again it's everyone's tolerance levels me personally I'd cautioned the keeper for his first offence And then cautioned him again for his second just because there told at level 4 to manage dissent more after the fact and especially when you've managed him more than enough times nope he Would be walking to showers and telling me how they felt
 
Regardless of the agreement and disagreement on here (I'm with the 'match temperature' comment above - if its been feisty as ****, red all day, if it's been calm, a stern word), I think we have a duty to help constructively.

For me, what I would have done is to have slowed the caution down, a la:

GK: 'Ner ner ner, Assistant, you smell.'
Ref: 'Shush now.'
GK: 'NAR, you're taste in clothing is regrettable and you hair makes you look like a member of Boyzone.'
Ref: 'GK, come here please. Skipper, can I borrow you, too?'
[Skipper wanders over.]
GK: But, ref...
Skipper: Oi, goaly, shush. This splendid fellow in black has something to say.
Ref: Right, GK, I gave you a warning and you carried on. Saying anyone looks like a member of Boyzone is just rude, not to mention ignorant. He clearly looks like a member of early Take That. Now, here's a yellow card, and watch your mouth for the rest of the game, please.
Skip: Shut it, alright. Or I'll remind you that you look like Ed Sheeran.
All [singing]: White skin, pale face. Breathing in. Snowflakes.

By slowing it down in this way, you give the GK the opportunity to calm down. You've taken 30 secondss, GK should now have left what @Yacinho has called 'dissent mode.' If he hasn't, and continues to clap, you have a perfectly good reason to card him a second time - he is actively choosing to continue dissenting, as opposed to still be pissed off, and perhaps not being fully in control.
 
Chizzy73 said:
Stepped approach has to be used to diffuse this situation. Use the captains to either calm the dissenting player or warn them both that anymore from any of the players will be cautioned. It's not the referees fault that the player has lost his composure. Follow through with the cautions until they learn.
Click to expand...
The stepped approach shouldn't be used for dissent. If ITOOTR it's dissent, then it's a caution. If the referee decides the player has not fully grasped the implication of his first caution, then that's a shortfall in the communication by the referee. Too many referees do not complete the procedure. They forget to ensure the player, particularly one who has committed dissent, has come back down and is ready to start the game. They should also ensure the player understands any further misconduct means they will be dismissed. Sell that if you need by cutting the grass. If the player then claps, you can shrug, issue the second caution and dismiss.
 
Last edited:
Brian, you're not trying to claim that dissent should either be ignored or result in a card? Nothing else?

The stepped approach should definitely be used for dissent. Heck, there's probably more justification in using it there than anywhere else.
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
Brian, you're not trying to claim that dissent should either be ignored or result in a card? Nothing else?

The stepped approach should definitely be used for dissent. Heck, there's probably more justification in using it there than anywhere else.
Click to expand...
I'm not claiming anything. It's either dissent or it's a protest. If it's dissent, caution. If it's not dissent, deal with the protester.
 
Brian Hamilton said:
I'm not claiming anything. It's either dissent or it's a protest. If it's dissent, caution. If it's not dissent, deal with the protester.
Click to expand...
Not sure I'm completely with you on your choice of language here Brian.

"Disagreement" is what I'd try to deal with through a stepped approach. An obvious "protest" is IMO, where disagreement tips over into dissent territory.

But where I totally agree with you (and therefore disagree with Bloodbeard) is that dissent (as properly defined) shouldn't be treated with the stepped approach. If it's categorically dissent, rather than just disagreement, then a card is the only option
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
Now there's an answer that while technically correct is utterly useless ;-)
Click to expand...
Thanks. I'm not going to define what spoken words constitute dissent as someone else has already pointed out, this isn't going to degenerate into a discussion about tolerance levels.

As for dissent by action, that is always easier to sell and is usually obvious to all.

Russell Jones said:
Not sure I'm completely with you on your choice of language here Brian.

"Disagreement" is what I'd try to deal with through a stepped approach. An obvious "protest" is IMO, where disagreement tips over into dissent territory.

But where I totally agree with you (and therefore disagree with Bloodbeard) is that dissent (as properly defined) shouldn't be treated with the stepped approach. If it's categorically dissent, rather than just disagreement, then a card is the only option
Click to expand...
See post above about defining verbal dissent.
 
There is a line where spontaneous protest becomes dissent.......prolonged protest is going to be dissent anyway....

The line is pretty obvious and clear cut......it only becomes blurred when referees believe they are there to popular or that they have to 'manage' dissent rather than dealing with it.
 
For me being a cup final , being the last game,having no obvious reserve keeper wouldn't have had no relevance in my decision to issue the GK his second yellow for dissent.If i had cautioned players all season for dissent for clapping at me why change my mind now?
Yes i would have warned him on his first yellow card what would happen if he gave me cause to caution him again in the match.....Job done
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top