At Adult game on Saturday I booked a player C1 for wearing his wedding ring. Pre kick off I had undertaken my boot check and I informed all players to remove all their jewellery. I checked this was undertaken and the game commenced. Some 10 minutes into the game I saw an away team player with his wedding ring. At next stoppage in play proceeded to book him. He claimed he never heard my instructions etc but this held little sway. I am now going to email both teams ahead of the game reminding them that ALL jewellery must be removed ahead of KO. No further issues in the game with very little dissent too so sent out clear message.
Yellow Card Wearing Wedding Ring
- Thread starter Peter I
- Start date
First up, your caution was incorrect.
Not only did you not inspect this player properly (because otherwise you would have seen the ring they wore, and already told them to take it off without any doubt that they heard you) but you didn't "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"
Now, for the future, very few people are actually going to read that email, and of those who do, what do you think their reaction is more likely to be,
- this referee appears to know the laws very well, is proactive about their expectations and is making a reasonable statement
- great, another micromanaging power-tripper who's going to fixate on trivial crap instead of refereeing the match
Don't waste your time and theirs. Do a proper inspection before the match, give the player the orders to remove it or leave the field of play, and only when they've been availed of every opportunity that the laws say they must get, do you give the airtight caution.
one
RefChat Addict
Where in law does it say you should do that?
I feel that you were heavy handed with your caution and while it may have worked for this game, more often than not, it leads to loss of match control.
He should have done it after being ordered, and doing so would make the caution unjustifiable.
I think it’s harsh to suggest that the inspection wasn’t done correctly when you weren’t there and the OP states that the check was carried out. We must have all missed pieces of jewellery, I know I’m guilty for that. When you’ve got to check 16 players for ear rings, nose studs, bracelets, rings etc it’s easy to miss one.
However, the booking isn’t correct if you spot something you’ve missed during the game
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
As others have said the caution was incorrect.
However, in the OPs defence, I have inspected a player, told him to take of a ring, watch him take it off and put it away, only to have to make him take it off again later in the match.
However, in the OPs defence, I have inspected a player, told him to take of a ring, watch him take it off and put it away, only to have to make him take it off again later in the match.
Out of interest, what caution offence did you think this booking came under?
At which point he's disobeyed an instruction and you then have a case for a dissent caution.....which I suppose now comes with a 10 minutes sit-down!
one
RefChat Addict
He said C1.
The law says: "A player who refuses to comply or wears the item again must be cautioned." but is moot on the type of caution. Depending on the nature of the incident I may choose for USB. Dissent is also a good option.
Classic half-thought-through IFAB law change. Previously it didn't matter - show the card, sort out what code it comes under post-match, so it didn't really matter how it was described in the law. Now where different types of caution have a different in-match effect, this needed to be clarified - but they haven't done so, so we introduce inconsistency between how different referees view it.
one
RefChat Addict
It shouldn't cause inconsistency if we all interpret dissent consistently (which is independent of the case of OP). Dissent is an act of protest and is generally done to undermine the referee's authority. Sometimes players refuse to comply for personal reasons or other reasons unrelated to protesting the decision.
RefJef
RefChat Addict
This won't help, trust me.
I give both teams a piece of paper before the match alongside the teamsheet. That paper states I will not be allowing undershirts/shorts of different colours to the kits and that all jewellery must be removed and cannot be taped up.
I still have to order players back into the changing room pre-match in order to take these things off.
Last Saturday I had the manager state they had read the paper thoroughly and completely agree with it. Their leftback still had his flipping wedding ring on though.
I bet there are many laws and sub laws that deep down County FA would really prefer that we had a supplementary set for the Ar6e end of football. if only someone like @Peter Grove could help out and end this pettiness of universal laws!
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
Absolutely nothing wrong with universal laws.
Problems enforcing them only arise because some referees take it on themselves to decide which laws they want to enforce.
If everyone just does their jobs and enforced the laws they are paid to there'd much much less drama with "last week's ref" and players would soon learn to take their jewelry off etc.
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
No way I'm sin-binning for re-wearing a ring. Save the hassle and go for C1 - other.