I really like that, I was gonna say I am going to use that now except for I don't have hearing aids, but I wears glasses which will just cause them to insult me further
worthy of a red?
- Thread starter Kent Ref
- Start date
The first part might be true as well at times, but still not right on the pitch
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Use contact lenses if you can. IMHO you are in the middle of a contact sport with athletes (potentially) and glasses don’t present well. Of course, you may have a valid reason… but if you can, get some contacts
My eyesight is strange I won't get in specifics but I don't wear glasses on the pitch only wear then when reading stuff from far away like a sign, Player numbers on a football pitch and tackles can see. However I might invest in contact have to contact eye doctor (optometrist) or that might be for teeth can't remember.Use contact lenses if you can. IMHO you are in the middle of a contact sport with athletes (potentially) and glasses don’t present well. Of course, you may have a valid reason… but if you can, get some contacts
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
If I could get contacts for my teeth I would
'Ref, that was f.ck..ng ****' remains yellow for me. It is disagreement with a decision with f... as punctuation.
'ref, YOU are ****' is more likely red as it is an insult and abusive.
Shut up, you know what I meanIf I could get contacts for my teeth I would
Yeh I’m the same. I’ve started wearing glasses for a lot of my ordinary life, but I never wear them on the pitch. I can still see fine, my problem is exact same as yours.
Hmm, rare why?
Dissent isn't language based. I'm very much one to punish visual dissent, which I think is just as important.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
I wear contacts when I ref. I need reading glasses with contacts, so I pretty much only wear them to ref, playing sports, and maybe going out to the theater. It has worked great with one exception. I was closing in on a potential collision with a GK and the clearance got shanked straight into the side of my face, knocking out the contact in my right eye. Fortunately I barely need them in the first place, so I was fine. But even thought thocontact gpa me out, better than having the glasses comp,Evelyn mangled.
You need to pay more for you contact lenses, or consider thumb realignment surgery next
My stock answer on this forum - I've always worn glasses, never been able to wear contacts partly due to other medical conditions. We're meant to be inclusive these days and all kinds of people have challenges that are more or less noticable. Besides, I've never had any serious stick for it and it's not stopped me officiating in relatively senior games given my level.Use contact lenses if you can. IMHO you are in the middle of a contact sport with athletes (potentially) and glasses don’t present well. Of course, you may have a valid reason… but if you can, get some contacts
If players comment on it I tend to respond with 'I'm worse if I take them off' and I just keep count of the numbers of times spectators comment about the need for windscreen wipers (only 5 season - and two in the same game from the best comedian).
I once watched my cousin playing a game and the ref had sunglasses on the whole game. With the ref being one of those classics who refuses to leave the centre circle, you can imagine some of the comments made towards the ref. “Maybe you’ll see better if you take those stupid glasses off” and “get off your holidays” were creative insults hurled towards the ref by a bunch of 11 year olds
I have to be honest here, Rusty, and say that I don't like the "gut check" criteria for this. Surely there are considerations which make a more objective job of determining whether to go caution or sending off.
I would perhaps agree with you when the offence was foul & abusive language, that was much less subject to interpretation, but hasn't been in the laws for decades now. Now it definitely needs some sort of gut feeling as words alone don't make it red or yellow.
As an example, if someone calls an opponent or team mate a f***ing far t*** and he laughs it off or gives banter back there's now way on earth I am sending off as it is clear he isn't offended, isulted or abused. Going red here would just make you look officious and face accusations of not understanding the game. Whereas if he reacts angrily or violently then clearly a red is more likely to be the right outcome.
But you're still applying objective criteria and using the reaction if the player as evidence of the degree of offinabus.
I take it @RyantheRef is urging caution against allowing emotions affect decisions because the decision could be less affected by the temperature of the match and more by our mental state on any given day.
Bingo! The severity of the language, gestures, or action is a criteria and consideration and the response to that is, obviously, going to be helpful in determining that.
Anubis
RefChat Addict
Its very awkward. Whilst am 100% in agreement with what you type, in todays society, its a problem when say the coach, or at kids, a parent, starts with, " he cant call him that" etc, in cases they are very aware you simply must have heard the comments. It puts the referee in a very precorious position.
It is one of the trickier things to deal with I think - but we can (and often do) deal with this kind of thing through words and actions as well as sanctions, of course. Whether others agree with how we've handled it is another matter of course, but that's pretty much the case for every single decision or non-decision we take!
Anubis
RefChat Addict
Absolutely, the fear though with something obviously said is we are faced with denying we heard it, or, potentially being asked by a committe-superior why we consider something calling a ( insert whatever) to be acceptable.
If we see or dont see a foul,we can judge the severity etc but when faced in black and white with, " my number 3 was called xxxx xxxx xxx and the referee simply could not have not heard it" is awkward