Question Number: 30748

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 9/11/2016

RE: Rec Adult

Russell of Sydney, Australia asks...

I am slightly puzzled by a yellow card caution in the Thailand v Japan WC qualifier played last week.

The following link picks up the action as the ball is played to a Japanese player.

https://youtu.be/DUvpYDqtwyg?t=284

The player appears to make some comment about the ball (as does a teammate). He is not being challenged for the ball. The Japanese are leading 1-0 at the time and the match is only 27 mins played.

His comments appear to lead to the Ref stopping play and inspecting the ball, after which he (presumably) declares the ball ok, and then issues a yellow to the Japanese player.

Am thinking for Unsporting behaviour (time wasting), or, is it for some matter that would fall into the 'commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which play is stopped to caution or send off a player. If the later, technically play is not stopped to caution the player - the play is stopped to inspect the ball.

Up to that point, I would not have said the Japanese were time wasting, and infant, they were very much on the attack of the majority of the 27 mins played. The Japanese captain and the player himself, don't seem to overly protest the card (so either he accepts his actions are un called for, or, he simply 'moves on' to get on with the game).

Unfortunately, I do not speak there language of the commentary team, so I have no idea what is being said (not that what a commentary team says is always right anyway), however, I wonder what the caution would have been for if not time wasting.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Russell
It is not unusual for players to complain about the ball. Over the years I have had teams complain about the ball and perhaps its weight ( too light / heavy). If a player persists to challenge the referees decision on the suitability of the ball that it is dissent. What this looks like is that the player gestures that there is something wrong with the ball and when inspected it is plain that the ball is not deflated nor damaged in any way. The referee took exception to this request by the player who stop playing due to what he thought was a defective ball. I personally think that if it was the first complaint about the ball that it was harsh. I also think that as play was already stopped the restart should be a dropped ball. Perhaps there was *baggage* about the ball from earlier from the same player and the referee got annoyed about the request to stop which could be dissent towards a ball change request earlier?
Interestingly in Europe the ball is by Adidas while in Asia it is a Nike ball.

Answer provided by Referee Peter Grove

Hi Russell,

I can only assume that the referee saw this as either unsporting behaviour or dissent. Of the two, I would guess probably USB but as ref McHugh says, had there been some previous claims by the players about the ball being defective and had the referee already waved them away, then he could have seen the player's actions as a form of dissent.

The commentators don't seem to know what's going on either - they can be heard asking why the player got a yellow card and although they mention the fact that the referee has checked the ball and found nothing wrong with it and also suggest that it could have been for time-wasting, in the end they seem as mystified by it as anyone else.

I do agree that since play was stopped to check the ball rather than to caution the player, the restart should have been a dropped ball.