Question Number: 24367

Law 5 - The Referee 11/22/2010

RE: Competitive Boys Under 17

Derek of Vacaville, CA USA asks...

When confronted with the potential of a mass confrontation, tips on how to prevent it. I apologize in advance for length of my query. Here is how I handled it, in retrospect what else could I have done. Id like your input as to other preventative and defusing measures.

Situation; whilst refereeing a U16 Competitive Boys game during inclement weather (for Northern Calif.) a mass confrontation started to occur.

Background " (A) Both A/Rs were teenage boys (Junior or Seniors in HS) and above average A/Rs for that age.
(B) keeper of team A was loud the entire game and mildly obnoxious with his tone, yet (IMO) nothing worth discussing with him to quiet him down.
(C) Both teams; typical U16 boys, aggressive, hot headed, trying to be tough, etc. Id had conversations with several players from either team throughout the game to settle them down. Trash talking had been occurring, a large percentage of it away from me hearing it. Still I saw nothing whatsoever to be brewing for what was about to occur.
(D) Score was 3-1 in favor of team A. Team B (home team) was down to 10 players (no subs and a player out with leg cramps). Team A was, slightly, dominating the attack. Neither team had conceded
(E) 10 minutes left in 2nd half. Lightening in the far distance, teams had been warned if lightening got closer game would be called. Late afternoon, darkness looming.
Details - The keeper of team A had just made a save, made his now typical loud verbal exchange and apparently player from Team B didnt appreciate it; words were exchanged, tensions were mounting. Both teams getting tense? I sent team B player away from area towards midfield, majority of both teams headed that way. I had a chat with keeper to calm him down. At this time the incident seemed minimal; under estimated that one!!! During my talk with keeper my back was to midfield (Yup, big mistake). I next turned to midfield and things had escalated, multiple player were posturing as only teenage boys can, no contact as of yet. I sprinted to midfield with whistle blowing to prevent players from going at it. Separately a player from team B, who was relatively far away from any team A player, had his jersey off and was prancing around like a stupid peacock. Next I notice the keeper Id just talked too had snuck around and was now on the other side of the field prowling towards team B. A coach (a huge thanks to him) from team A had entered field and was shepherding his players towards team A sideline. Coach from team B saw what team A coach was doing so he did the same. Now a fan decided he needed to be a part of things. He shouted "nobody messes with my brother" and started onto field. I yelled at him to get off field, he complied. Tensions were still very high though both teams were at opposite touch lines now. So now Im wondering, how did this escalate so quickly and how am I gonna get them defused and back on pitch. No cards had been given out as of yet. I was still pondering who, if any, needed one. Player w/o shirt for sure was gonna get a caution. Next, crack, boom " lightening. Aha, brilliant ? a solution: Game over due to lightening. Explained my call to end game, separately, to each coach. Both were very grateful and willingly accepted my decision.
Thanks!!

Answer provided by Referee Jason Wright

Hi Derek. Good question, and one that's certainly applicable at any age. When refereeing boys around this age we need to keep in mind the hormonal nature of these players and how quickly any of these players can snap, as well as how important the image of toughness is.

Don't worry about offering a lengthy question - my answer will probably be longer! I urge you to take the time to read the answer as there is quite a bit I've tried to cover here.

I tend to be pretty firm on players around this age - for some things (such as dissent, aggression and deliberate, unsporting acts) I'm stricter on these players than on older players - at this age there's simply no need for any of it.

Many games have what's called a 'Moment of Truth'. A single moment that defines the rest of the game - and it's the moment that's crucial for the referee to get right. Often it can be something as blatant as a particularly bad tackle, a show of aggression by a player, or a nasty comment made from a player to yourself. Handle it well and the game goes smoothly, handle it inappropriately and the game blows up.

Often though, it isn't that simple. is the MoT the nasty tackle in the 70th minute, or was it the unpunished tackle in the 14th minute from the victim of the later tackle that lead to the other player getting his revenge?

Think about the obvious incidents, then think about events before it that may have contributed to a gradual build up.

From what I gather, this was a game with a slow and gradual build-up of tension, and they're really difficult to deal with. As a referee you often sense the increasing tension, but as nothing seems to stand out you struggle to find ways of releiving the tension.

So could you have prevented the game from building up in the first place? You mention the keeper had a big mouth - while he may not have said anything particularly bad, we like to consider the '3 P's when dealing with dissent. If it's Public, Persistent and/or Personal, then there's a problem and it needs to be dealt with. Minor, but persistent dissent is sufficient for a card.

If a player is a nuisance early in the match, I guarantee you he will cause you grief for the entire game. Shut him up early. If he continues, book him. Don't give him more than 1 warning. The keeper may have been a continuous negative influence in the game, and if you had stopped him the entre match may have changed.

If the players are being aggressive, I like to take a firm control of the match - tighten up the game until I can be sure that the players are going to player the game. Be stricter with fouls, take a little bit longer to get free kicks set up (slow down the pace of the game). Play less advantage, and be quicker with the card for obvious signs of aggressions. Sometimes in older games you may want to take the opposite approach, but this is how I approach these games with younger players. Let them know you're in control, you can see the aggression and they're not going to get away with it.

Retaliation after a tackle (standing up and squaring off against a player) is something I take a very, very dim view of and I usually card for that. It shows everybody that aggression is unacceptable.

If the game has gotten to the point where you've spoken to a few players and it hasn't had any real effect on the match, then the game is probably screaming out for a card. Next time somebody makes a bad, malicious or deliberately aggressive tackle, book him. As long as it's a tackle that stands out as one of the worst that has occured in that match, you'll get away with it - and suddenly you'll make it a lot easier for yourself to card further aggression without looking inconsistent.

That's one of the tough parts of a slowly escalating match - knowing when to pull out the card without being inconsistent. As long as it's one of the worse tackles, and you can feel the match heating up and your words aren't doing much, then you shouldn't have too much of a problem with looking inconsistent as everybody there will know that the match needs a card.

One other thing you need to be aware of is the effect that weather can have on players - the feeling of a storm in the air can have a peculiar effect on people and can really hype some people up. This may also have impacted upon your match.

The trash talking is difficult to deal with if you miss most of it, but what you do hear is certainly cardable. At this age, the players typically aren't mature enough to deal with trash talking as part of the game and it's likely that somebody will take it too far, so this is also something I take a dim view of.

In games like this you also need to be aware of the potential for off-the-ball incidents. You may need to move a bit wider to keep more of the field in view, or you may need to remain looking at the player who's just released the ball for an extra half a second to monitor late challenges, rather than looking up the field immediately (though then you risk missing the push before the ball gets to the player). You'll also need to run more as you want to remain closer to play - but make sure you have enough left for the final intense minutes.

By the time it all blew up, you say the keeper's verbal exchange was typical. It shouldn't be typical. If it is, then it should've been dealt with.

When you're talking to a player, try to have your back to one of the boundary lines and get him to approach you there; this way you can keep the field in view. Also, your assistants should be constantly scanning the field for potential issues. When chatting to the keeper, try to pull him across slightly so you can stand in the penalty area, with your back to the goal line and watching play. This also puts his entire focus upon you, whereas if he's looking back into play then he's reminded that 21 young men are watching his next move - and he has to remind them how tough he is, right? It just may affect how the keeper responds to you.

However, if the ball was in play then you don't want a lengthy chat - a simple 'no more keeper! Play the game!' is about all the time you want to spend. If it requires anything longer, or stopping play for, then it probably required a card (thus an IFK to the attack). If you choose the quick 'that's enough!', then that will allow you to run back up field instead of hanging around the keeper. In doing so, try to find yourself near the attacker who the keeper mouthed off at and try to work with him - perhaps quickly say something like 'don't get caught up in his rubbish - you just play your game and let me worry about him'. What you're trying to do here is minimise retaliation but asking the 'victim' to trust that you'll deal with the incidents. If the players believe that you'll deal with these incidents, then they're less inclined to take matters into their own hands which will create far fewer problems.

As for the final incident, normally I'd want to identify the players who are making things worese. Perhaps the players who started it, or the players who seem to be escalating it, or the players who have run in from nowhere to get involved. Sometimes no one player seems to stand out, and it sounds like that was the case here.

You got off easy with the lightning, but what would you have done if you didn't have that way out? If the game continued, you'd probably want to consider gettin rid of the spectator who came onto the field. That, and the final minutes would be refereed very, very strictly.

So think about the whole match - think about which players may have been a little more aggressive, and which players influence the behaviour of the others (every team has a couple of leaders and followers - can you identify the leaders? Sometimes modifying the behaviour of a single player, either through cards or by developing a rapport with him, can influence the entire team). Who seemed to be the most interested in showing off to the other team? Who was the most aggressive, and who didn't shut up? Finally, how much could the keeper have influenced the psychology of the entire match?

It may well be that the MoT in your game was the first time the keeper opened his mouth - if you had a stern word with him at the next stoppage, then it shows you're not going to put up with it. Then you can do the same to the first incident or two of trash talking, and not instead of the players believing they're going to spend the rest of the match intimidating each other, you've shown the players you're in control - and you've also made it easy to pull out the plastic for anybody who continues.

The next time you get a game like this you'll probably identify the troublesome players and know how to deal with them earlier. My biggest lessons have come from the games which have blown out - but look on the bright side; your game could've gone far, far worse. There were no particularly brutal tackles, and no punches were thrown in the confrontation. Furthermore, both coaches seemed to want the players to calm down, which helps.

The player who removed his jersey definitely deserved the caution though.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Derek
The best analogy I can make is that match control is like blowing up a balloon. Each incident will add 'air' to the balloon and it is up to the referee to let 'air' out through his handling of match situations. Too much 'air' and the balloon bursts! From your post I note that you did not caution any players in 80 minutes. Over many years of experience I have found that sometimes the lack of cautions has can have a bearing when the underlying tone is not well. Cautions lets air out of the balloon as does red cards
Young players form an opinion pretty quickly of the type of referee that they believe is officiating on that day. If they believe that the referee may not take stern action with incidents or that unsatisfactory behaviour has not been cautioned, they might take action themselves perhaps in the knowledge that nothing might happen or at worst just a caution.
From reading your post and many thanks for sharing this experience I would suspect that the goalkeeper had a large bearing on this situation. The fact that his loudness and slightly obnoxious tone was unchallenged IMO gave a signal to the other players that it was mildly acceptable and that poor behaviour and similar by others might go unchecked. I would certainly deal with any loudness or trash talking instantly with a stern warning or a caution. Repeat performance either way is a caution and a caution for any another player that engages in the behaviour after that. That sets the tone along with the referee's stern demeanour.
Also trying to talk to some players can be futile. Many only understand a caution and then they may be warned by their coach or team mates to desist from this behaviour. The trick is to understand which players are getting the message without the need to caution.
Had the lightening not happened I would have cautioned Team B player w/o shirt, Team A goalkeeper for leaving his area to get involved and any other aggressive player that I believed had already came to my attention previously and whom I had warned about future conduct. The last 10 minutes would have been refereed with zero tolerance although in these situations control can be like trying to get the toothpaste back into the tube.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

If you can see lightning even at a distance suspend the match, giving hot heads time to cool and player safety is your prime directive.

It seems to me the keeper was the catalyst behind all the trouble. Had he been dealt with by you early on, perhaps no escalation would have occured

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

Ref McHugh's balloon analogy is excellent, and there is a great deal of wisdom to be taken from his answer and Ref Wright's on how to deal with such incidents in games. When dealing with youth players, especially upper age players, trying to get through a game without cautions can bite the referee - and put way too much air in that balloon.

They aren't at all interested in what you SAY; but they are very interested in what you DO or conversely, DON'T do. Allowing the keeper to behave in an obnoxious fashion without early repercussions should not have happened. It may not bother YOU - but it isn't the referee we are concerned with in these circumstances. It is the players.

And dealing with lightning requires courage on the part of the referee. The ref's job is the safety of the players, and lightning - even in the distance is very dangerous. Trying to finish the game if someone gets hurt or even killed seems kind of foolish when looking back. They'll get over it, and live to play another day.