CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
Then I'd suggest reading it again.
Because what you're saying certainly isn't what's being discussed on this thread.
And whether you personally. consider jewellery to be dangerous is irrelevant.
Which caution code? (Jewellery)
- Thread starter Trip
- Start date
- Status
Because what you're saying certainly isn't what's being discussed on this thread.
And whether you personally. consider jewellery to be dangerous is irrelevant.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
The post seems to be about firstly what caution code to use. I cant pass comment on that as I dont use WSG
The reason for the caution appears to be due to a player wearing jewerelly, and then being asked to remove it.
Am questioning the validity of the caution and the circumstances for it arising.
As another member has said, if you are giving a caution for the belly button piercing not being removed then you are leaving yourself open to 21 other players potentially committing the same infringment and going unpunished
Which breaches the whole reason a referee is appointed to a match. To ensure fairness.
At the top levels, there are at least 3 videos of a player losing a finger with a ring on it when jumping onto the fencing behind the goal (for whatever reasons -- two celebrating a goal, the other stopping himself as he runs past the goalline).
I had one in my first year of officiating when I didn't know any better... women's game. Small stud earrings. Ball hits side of head. Earring backing gets lodged into neck.
I've heard tell of earrings getting torn out, necklaces choking people, etc.
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
What's there to question? The OP explained EXACTLY how it came about. I'm not sure what you're missing here?
and you haven't questioned the validity of the caution at all. You haven't said why you don't think the player should be cautioned.
The bit about '21 other players might have concealed jewellery too' is just a rubbish excuse. How does that justify ignoring a blatant breach that's been seen?
Guess we shouldn't penalise fouls then. After all, the next foul may occur behind our back and we'd hate to be inconsistent.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
I hear you. I digress but the ring was not the issue, the player jumping onto fencing was !! Just as much risk if not more, jumping onto fence and the fence collapses !
There is no doubting the LOTG and the safety aspect. And 0% risk would be utopia
The ratio of games to incidents though is, or must be, next to zero.
Even in your post, in my 2000 plus games, the ball has hit me once. Its all about perspective !!
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
I dont think football expects you to caution someone who has a belly button piercing !!
IF, and it's a huge IF, you spot said offending article pre match, based on what I read, as referee, you tell them to remove it or they cant play??
good luck with that.
as ever, if your thing is to caution, or prohibit someone from playing who has a belly button piercing, that's entirely ones prerogative
Am just stating that person wont be me. Which, I don't ask you to agree with but on a forum on which am a contributor, am allowed that stance !
two opponents in game, diff league teams, play for same international team. You have caution belly button offender and she then says "ok but blue 6 (her international team mate) has the same piercing as me ". Whats been the crime of the first offender? Wearing piercing? Or, showing it?
Your role as referee is to be fair and consistent across the board. You cant turn round and say "well your getting a caution because I saw yours even though there are 9 other players on the park wearing the same thing " !!!!!
whole can of worms that can be prevented and handled at source by, not being pedantic and simply get on with the task in hand
Last edited:
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
Sigh,
Okay. I'm going to address your 'what about the other person' bit first, because that's one of the worst excuses I've seen for anything on here.
As a ref you're going to miss things. If you send off Play A for an elbow, and they say 'what about player B who threw an elbow before?' are you going to then not send off Player A? Or are you not going to send them off in the first place because you might have missed an elbow before? Of course not. That's just stupid.
As for the rest of it, let me spell it out clearly.
The player was told to remove all jewellery. On the field, it became apparent that they didn't. Now, the OP would have been justified in cautioning here, but they didn't. Told the player to leave the field to remove the jewellery. After the player came back on, it was apparent they were still wearing jewellery.
So, the player has blatantly breached Law 4 - twice - and ignored the referee's instructions, twice. One of which in a highly public incident.
And you don't think that warrants a caution? You're seriously arguing that the correct process is to send the player to the sideline to do absolutely nothing again? Or are you advocating for not doing your job at all?
There's not really any wiggle room on a caution...
A player who refuses to comply or wears the item again must be cautioned - page 55
Right under the bit about all jewellery being prohibited.
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
Good point:
If a player is wearing or using unauthorised/
dangerous equipment or jewellery the referee must order the player to:
• remove the item
• leave the field of play at the next stoppage if the player is unable or unwilling
to comply
A player who refuses to comply or wears the item again must be cautioned.
No leeway there. Although given the blatant defiance and repeated infringement, I can't imagine why you'd be looking to avoid a caution even IF you had discretion.
If a player is wearing or using unauthorised/
dangerous equipment or jewellery the referee must order the player to:
• remove the item
• leave the field of play at the next stoppage if the player is unable or unwilling
to comply
A player who refuses to comply or wears the item again must be cautioned.
No leeway there. Although given the blatant defiance and repeated infringement, I can't imagine why you'd be looking to avoid a caution even IF you had discretion.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Right here is a true story, from around the time the undergarments law was introduced to us.
Kilmarnock v Rangers, SPL reserves, one Tues afternoon.....
Killie in blue/white, Rangers in red, with v neck strip. This is the important part....a red top with a v neck...
Now, eagle eyed ref spots THREE Rangers players have black undergarment showing in that inch? wide gap at the neck....
being the most proficient,conscientious and thorough official, as afterall, the LOTG state under garments worn must be the same colour as the strip, he told them to go off the pitch and remove them..
i will leave the governing bodies response as a private matter for fear of embarrassing a match official who was afterall only following the LOTG to the letter....
Kilmarnock v Rangers, SPL reserves, one Tues afternoon.....
Killie in blue/white, Rangers in red, with v neck strip. This is the important part....a red top with a v neck...
Now, eagle eyed ref spots THREE Rangers players have black undergarment showing in that inch? wide gap at the neck....
being the most proficient,conscientious and thorough official, as afterall, the LOTG state under garments worn must be the same colour as the strip, he told them to go off the pitch and remove them..
i will leave the governing bodies response as a private matter for fear of embarrassing a match official who was afterall only following the LOTG to the letter....
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
So now you have cautioned player for still wearing it (they are back on the field of play now), you are then removing them from the pitch until the belly button piercing is removed, how are you going to check to see if they have complied !!! (this will be a good reply!)
You are now asking a female player, possibly a minor, not that that makes a huge difference here, to lift up their shirt for your observations!!
Afterall, you cant let them on until its been removed now surely? Absolutely farcical and as another poster says, borderline criminal and breaching child protection guidelines at very least.
What a situation that would be to be in , feel free to trial this situation out and report back how well it went for you... prevention is the better cure....
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
You are indeed allowed that stance. It's just that you adopting it simply makes the lives of those referees who subsequently referee those players / teams much much harder. You become the epitome of 'last week's ref'.
Jewelry (of any sort) has been deemed to be dangerous and not allowed on the FOP. If we don't see it we can't deal with it. If we do see it, we do deal with it ... not sure where any further complexity comes from ....
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
This weeks ref will complete his game without a shroud of controversy over a belly button piercing I can tell you that !
I might well miss an offside and a handball as much or less as next weeks ref but sending players away to remove belly button piecrings and then somehow investigating to see if they have indeed been removed (at risk of a double yellow?) will certainly not be happening, to the determent of next weeks referee or not !
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
You're trolling here, surely? You're not normally this bereft of common sense.
obviously you can't ask her to be lifting up her shirt. So you're stuck taking her work for it.
Which is perfectly fine. If it became evident that she was lying, then she cops another caution. Nothing wrong with having to make the assumption that she's removed it.
come on, you're better than this. It's just getting silly now. May as well get everyone to strip naked, squat and cough by the posts you're making.
We've established it was a mandatory caution. I'm sure I'm not the only person on here who doesn't have the foggiest idea what you'r'e on about or even what argument you're trying to make.
What other mandatory laws do you ignore, out of interest?
If you don't allow ear piercings, how are you justifying ignoring a belly button piercing that you've seen?
What if somebody, upon seeing that you've seen it, then complains? How are you going to justify your position then?
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
my point is, if we are going as far as to send players into the dressing room to remove a belly button piercing, then I feel we would be obligated to use that as the bench mark for our tolerance re jewellery, 1> on my park I will not notice such a heinous crime, regardless of the LOTG, and 2> if I did I will not be taking action re it and 3> i really hope my detection of fouls and offsides and KMI is as good as my detection of a females belly button piercing !
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
This is getting more bizarre.
Ref can I come on?
no, not until you go back to the dressing room (again) and bring me the offending article !!
Its like a Two Ronnies sketch, (but nowhere near as amusing)
CapnBloodbeard
RefChat Addict
And here I was thinking that refusing to do the job we're paid to do is bizarre. Apparently doing our job is a strange concept.
It's really not the slightest bit complicated, despite you're trolling attempts to make it sound incredibly complex.
It's really not the slightest bit complicated, despite you're trolling attempts to make it sound incredibly complex.
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Well if money is your motive for refereeing then i think we have found the crux of your concerns...
I see refereeing as a privilege and a hobby, which by definition is "A hobby is a regular activity that is done for enjoyment, typically during one's leisure time. "
If your enjoyment is causing a fuss over a belly button piercing then I hope it fulfils your every ambition.....
Never once have I seen a player go back to the changing room to remove offebding equipment, except for say undershorts.
We both know this will be removed pitch side and handed to the manager.
Why ask players to take ear rings out, or change undershorts, or enforce any of law 4 of we are just going to ignore a belly button piercing.
Okay, there are some things that we cannot check before the game for obvious safeguarding reasons but if we do spot something we cannot just ignore it.
OP got it spot on here, in law there is no disputing. But it comes back to my earlier point that we have in lotg a mandatory caution, that at least as far as FA are concerned no caution code..
- Status