Question Number: 16554

Character, Attitude and Control 9/5/2007

RE: Competitive Under 15

Dave of Portland, OR USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 16462

Suppose that I use Ref Voshol's suggestion [16462] 'I don't think I heard that..' or Ref Maloney's suggestion 'Don't step in it...' instead of carding the player.

Then, you make another call (or fail to make a call that the player wants) and a player from the *other* team yells something similar. Would you again try to say something to diffuse the situation? On the one hand when it happens the second time it seems you might need to take a stronger approach (and card the player). OTOH, since the one player was let off the hook, shouldn't the opponent get a "freebie" as well?

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

That is always the question when players start stretching the limits - how far does it stretch before it breaks?

We're talking match management techniques here. What may work for some referees will fail miserably for others. It is all dependent on the strength of the referee's personality and her management skills.

First, we agreed that if the offensive and insulting words were said too loud to ignore, we would have to do something about it. Think about the 3 P's - Public, Persistent, Provocative. What we are trying to do by managing the match and the players, rather than issuing cards, is to get rid of at least 2 of the 3 P's.

A freebie for the opponent? It depends again on the game situation. If both sides heard your response to the first comment, but this second player chose to ignore that warning, maybe he's stretched the limit too much now. Or maybe you can reinforce your suggestion that the language has to stop, without resorting to a card. It's how you read the game, and the only way to learn to read games is to ref a lot of them.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Begin Rant

Dave when the referee lets himself go the "man management" route he does so with the blessings of US Soccer. This is how referees have been asked to deal with many things for the last 15 or so years. Many referees out there, especially at the highest levels of Soccer in America are man managers. They have been taught to use a quiet word to "manage" things.

Of course when "man management" fails to offer an equitable solution, in the mind of a player who has just been harmed, he'll deal with things at his level. The referee soon finds out he no longer has the blessings of US Soccer.

This is especially true when a foul playing side draws a fair side and a referee that "doesn't call fouls". The fair side gets the crap beat out of them and feel hard done when the referee uses the "crutch of triviality" as his reason for not enforcing the Laws of the Game. Many of saw this coming on a match involving Chivas and Galaxy 30th Aug 2007. The referee "man managed" himself into two sendings-off when the players took calling fouls into their own hands after the referee felt what was happening was trivial to them. Not only that but one player of significant note may not be able to finish the season because of it.

Man managers look fantastic when all is going well and the match ends without incident. Conversely when things go to hell-in-a-hand-basket it is the referee who bites the big one instead to the system advancing him to a level from which he can no longer be promoted.

Coaches and players and pundits look at a referee who launches a foul player or foul mouthed player to the showers as card happy and officious. They never seem to notice after that player departs the area the match is usually the better for his departure.

I firmly believe The Game is more important than any one point of view and a referee must be trusted to call the match to which he has been appointed as he and his experience require. He should have the option to manage things as circumstances require, not as required by owners, sponsors, coaches and players deem appropriate.

Rant ends.. Regards,

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Perhaps you will recall an ad on TV where the football referee announces to all,
"I totally blew that call and stopped play for no good reason. But do not worry I will make up some excuse to stop play for no good reason in the second half against the other team to even things up!"

Did you by chance watch the Italy USA WC match? There were many that believed in the WC the 1st red card for the USA player was a result of the Italian player being booked first and it was an even up call. Of course those same people felt the 2nd red card for two cautions later was not justified either!

Perception is what it is, right or wrong as an opinion it can sway the thinking into believing the thoughts we have ARE correct rather than might be correct or heaven forbid totally wrong!!

Giving a player a break is not why many referees don a selective hearing hat! It is for the benefit of the match, those playing it and those watching it! Sending players off or being pushed into an option where a caution must be considered and a yellow card shown does not make for a happy referee. It simply is something that is required for the match to continue in the opinion of the referee of that match at that moment!

Enormous pressure is brought to bear in the WC for a referee to perform well but no less than a grassroots town rivalry can those playing or watching suddenly place their foot at his neck!

Man management has, as our colleague Ref Fleischer points out the potential to do as much harm as good if the referee fails to enforce the law and adjusts the spirit of why those laws are to be in effect by seeking the undercurrent of the match or the emotional state of the players as an excuse to flex the laws

In the recent Gold Cup the USA player tackled the Canadian player in what was a horrendous tackle that only received a caution. As a fan watching no doubt my reaction is Canadian orientated but the referee in me is wise enough to understand the emotive part of my reaction. So I try to place myself as the referee and look at it from the game view. You know what, he still messed up, that was RED card stuff all the way baby and I defy any referee out there watching to explain it as only as a caution!

It was a call either designed to keep 11 USA players on the field when in reality there should have been 10 or the referee, ARs and 4th had something in their eye at that moment preventing them from seeing it for what it was.

Beckham was kicked from behind in the stomache or groin area with no playable ball in the area (except his own pair). Whether we say this was retaliatory or tactical it was a red card event. So does the referee cut slack because Beckham had fouled this same player a bit earlier and he was not called? Look at the resulting controversy? Was that a single incident or a collection of unanswered events cumulating in a Donny brook?

We all recognize the emotional and passionate disconnect that can occur when a call goes against you or you are injured in some manner. Reasonable people can abide a reasonable effort to calm down but no one is immune from saying or ranting in frustration.
As my colleague Ref Voshol mentions we use the three Ps public (everyone can hear it) persistent (it continues usually AFTER we ask it to stop) and personal (our honor and integrity are now in question).
It is in the persistent asking to stop phase that you seem to think is where we could equally apply a get out of a caution free card?.
We apply the trivial points of law say a keeper punt out a bit over or very close to the PA boundary. Perhaps a ball out of play in the defending area but unsure who last touched it so we award the throw in or goal kick to the defense.
When a player or coach disagrees with a call or is hurt and wants to rant the ENOUGH is ENOUGH portion of our intervention will try and keep the player or coach from going beyond the acceptable limit. I personally do not keep track of such occurrences because they do not continue long enough or loud enough to cause me grief! I will try to put a sock in most rants before the cardable conduct becomes evident as matter of policy
We can understand why they react but they are committed in law to respond reasonably Do not go there! Stow it! Enough! Care to repeat that so I can clearly hear it? These are warning signs! If the player is too dense to yield we caution show yellow and if he runs the stop sign then we send off and show red.
I have grave misgivings of any referee who looks for an excuse to even things up. A doubtful call is not excused because he finds a PK at the opposing end . A referee with integrity sees what he sees! .As a policy all referees could cut short any mounting rant to stave off a possible need to show a card by a timely word or look that says no more! But if certain words or phrases are brought into play that were banned earlier expect little sympathy if reused later!
Cheers