Question Number: 16039

Mechanics 7/15/2007

RE: Competitive

Doug of Toronto, Canada asks...

Hi. This occurred in a tournament, where there were four referees at the field during the course of the day to cover nine games (2 lines 1 middle per game on a rotational basis). Anyway, one team had the same middle for their first two games. That team's coach was being abusive towards the center for both games (ie. that's not a foul, that's not offside, whre's the foul, typical things coaches would say). It got to the point where the center issued a verbal warning to the coach. He was quiet the rest of the game.

Now, suppose he had the same ref for his team's third game (or a previous line acting as a middle for that game), does this middle have the right to warn the coach before the game that if there's any nonsense, he was going to be ejected based on his behaviour previously in the day?

Also, suppose the same thing occurs during the course of the regular season. Does the center have the right to issue a warning from the start of the game based on the coach's behaviour in previous games?

Now to a question regarding penalty kicks. I've noticed in many games (EPL and youth leagues) that many refs do not penalize teams who infringe the laws on a penalty kick. Is there any particular reason for this?

Now, onto free kicks. If I require a player to wait for the whistle because he requests ten yards, but takes the kick before I blow the whistle and does not score, what is the best thing to do? On one hand, I don't feel inclined to give him another shot, but on the other hand, the ball could go out for a corner or any other dangerous situation. What if it's a penalty kick?

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

At any level of play, the referees will see the same teams more than once. Not usually in the same day, like at your tournament, but over the course of the season you will see teams again. Sometimes embarrassingly often - I told one coach after a game that I didn't know if it was a benefit to his team that I had seen them so often that year, because I was beginning to learn what to look for what the girls were doing. Oh look, here comes #7 again, I bet she puts her arm out when she gets challenged by the opponent. Yep, she did. Now was that bad enough to call a pushing foul, or was it trifling?

It happens in the pro leagues. One year we had an MLS ref at our referee recert clinic. Unfortunately he was a terrible presenter, he seemed to be trying to impress us by all the pro players he knew. I recall him explaining match video by saying, "That's XX, the referee knows he always acts that way, and so ..."

The best a referee can do is remember that each game is a new game, and try to be as fair to teams that have a history.

As for the early kicks. If you tell a player to wait for your whistle and he doesn't, the kick needs to be retaken. He can also be cautioned. Perhaps if the retake is favorable to him, the caution should be more certain.

A PK taken before the referee's signal must be retaken. It is not an offense that falls under the special Law 14 restarts - those all are for things that happens after the referee signals. The player should be warned, and on repetition should be cautioned.

Sometimes if a player's early kick doesn't have a good result, referees are reluctant to call for a rekick. Sometimes they can justify by saying that even though the whistle wasn't blown, the referee must have given some signal that the kicker saw. Use this rationale at your own risk.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Ref Voshol gives the school book solution to coaches and referees who know each other. He says the referee must treat each match as a new match, even though he knows the coach is one to lose his cool, one who argues and one who attempts to influence the referee from the touchline.

One notices he doesn't mention the coach knows the referee, he knows the referee will, at some point, warn him about his behaviour in the technical area.

I'll take this one step further... Well you knew I would, didn't you. Imagine this: "Good Day coach Binatz, I trust you are well. We have seen each other before, haven't we? Aha, I remember, yes we have and on three occasions. Did you want your warning to behave now or did you want it on the first time you offer an opinion when you shouldn't. Right, I'll wait -- I just thought I would remind you that, as far as trying to work me, I haven't changed. Thank you sir, have you got that roster of players and substitutes yet? Have a good match!"

Now, that coach is going to open his frigging mouth at some point and that's when you lower the boom, first time, no nothing, no warning -- "Right coach, there it is, we knew you were going have a go at us, NO More, Sir" AND at the next occurrence, to the locker room sir. You have, in fact, warned him twice!!!

Free kicks, Again what Ref Voshol is as the Law requires. No problem there. Again, let's look to what really has happened... Oh, there's that?? Yup, the player taking a free kick or a penalty BEFORE your signal when he knows, absolutely, he needs to wait is doing so because he sees some advantage in doing it, he is cheating!!
Now he has ignored your demand he wait. He is unsporting, a given. He scores a goal from his cheating. No, No, Bubba; lets do this again and you'll wait for my signal this time because I'm going to caution you for unsporting behaviour and if you do it again I'll send your sorry arse off, do you understand this completely sir? May I have your name Sir? Up goes the card. Do again.

And now to the fun part, this isn't in the book BUT it is in the Spirit of the Game. At a free kick, when you have told a player to wait for the whistle [signal], or at a penalty when you MUST signal to begin Binatz takes it upon himself to have his kick and misses. I signaled, or he wouldn't have taken the kick, right... Play continues. Tough Sierra Bubba... The assessor will ask why you didn't bring the kick back and caution, lie through your teeth -- he must have seen the signal, didn't you??? Sorry, in future I'll be much more explicit with my signal, thanks for bringing that to my attention sir...

The Spirit of the Game is staisfied, right??

Yes, absolutely -- Regards,

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

In general, I don't like to tell coaches what I expect of them before a match regardless of how well I know them. They will soon find out what my tolerance level is if they misbehave. I'd caution you to do likewise as once you've drawn a line in the sand, you HAVE to follow through to retain your credability. Many referees do not punish infringements on penalty kicks because Law 5 gives us the power to not whistle any infraction we believe to be trifling. As to your questions as to what to do if a player requests the 10 yards or at a penalty kick does not wait for your signal. The Law says you have the kick retaken and you are free to caution him. My feeling is he broke the Spirit of the Law and cheated. Why would I give him a second chance? Since a signal was required and he took the shot then he MUST have seen my signal. remember a signal can be anything you like and is NOT synonomous with blowing the whistle.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi Doug,
Familiarity breeds contempt (They see it bad too often as we obviously are against them it is our fault!) or absence makes the heart grow fonder (Why can you not do all our games, it is still our fault even if we are not there!)
Learn from your mistakes or stick with what you know?
Experience creates wisdom by those who learn to unlearn as much as relearn.

Platitudes of generalities but certainly the relationship between referees and coaches must be for the good of the game and in the welfare of its players. Yes we can agree to disagree but as to who adapts to who ,we all need to to have a basic understanding of both the referee and coach's obligations. As we often point out, a referee is a match condition, just like the weather or pitch surface or part of the field!

We can be as inflexible as the goal posts and as stubborn as the crossbar, as warm as the sun or as miserable as a wind swept cold rainy day, as smooth as a grass field of perfect length or a hard all weather unforgiving surface. What we hope the one constant is in the character of integrity if not competence. The non application of errors learned over time is the wisdom of experience!

Consistency is a buzz word that is made up to satisfy the perceived rational that a good referee can be relied on to do the same thing for the same reasons and this magic transference should be the same for all referees at all games at all levels.

Often in tournaments or even certain leagues only a few qualified referees exist to do a match and while we can try to switch officials to avoide conflict or ease tensions in point of fact it is more to do (or at least it should be) with availability and experiance

If a coach is a pain because he dislikes the way we officiate at whatever perception he might have of us as neutral officials the referee has no business trying to dredge up past injustice BEFORE the match begins. A referee in my opinion is far better served to set the standard in the first game so the second game should be no surprises. To personalize the issue is not in the best interest of the game, if we simply think a coach is a Pita we still must acknowledge the widely held belief
"The game is for the players, it's for their enjoyment and benefit, and it's not being played for the referees."
How important is it to know cultural or tactical preferences if teams 'accept' a certain level of physicality, some level of encroachment, use industrial language or a right to complain about every call?
This adage: "It's the players' game." is almost always used to justify letting almost anything go, as long as the players are happy with it. A good referee will try to not be more or do more than necessary however, players and coaches bear some responsibility to what extent a referee becomes more than a 12th guy running around the pitch trying to stay out of the way.

IN developing an understanding of the level of T and A Tolerance and Acceptance (not a sexy reference lol!) of what passes for fair play and still within the boundaries of the laws is known as law 18 the bend ability of the laws to accommodate the wishes of the players and the needs of the game within the spirit of the laws.

In matches that we do, we try to uphold the laws, maintain the safety of the players, find the tolerance level of acceptable fair play and consider the needs of the match. So what consistency is there but in the application of the laws themselves? If we set an example of OUR understanding of laws and the application of it, can not a team or a coach learn not to expect much different if we stay true to that philosophy?

Take a free kick.
In the officiating world *free* means the player taking the FREE KICK is unencumbered by defenders lurking delaying or anywhere within 10 yards of the spot. We could hold up ten fingers and bark 10 yards now vamoose! Dix, Zen or whatever ten is in the language of those playing. We could generally do this once or twice if at all in a match to hasten or reinforce to the reluctant opponents they best move quickly. We COULD caution for this far more often than other referees. We COULD tell the captains at the intro the optimal word in free kicks is free do you understand?
Ceremonial restarts are performed FAR to often because the game has been compromised by the willingness not to show a needed card to set a standard that can be applied game in and game out as an easy fix to the two minute or more delay debacles that happen after a foul has been awarded. We all get how to point to a whistle and manage a wall what we err maybe** I** do not get is, why do we do it so often?

In a match between the two semi-finalists in a tournament the one coach who knew me can we consider he had an advantage over the other coach who had not because that coach's team did not receive a caution for delay of the restart or failure to respect ten yards where as the opponents received two cautions?. Was it FAIR? Well that coach who knew me, his team had three cards from past encroachments so, Was I consistent? Did he adapt?

Each match is a new beginning but only a fool discards past knowledge to prepare. The trick is not to expect trouble but be aware that the possibility lurks. The coach is OBLIGATED to act responsibly. Past, present or future if a coach is abusive he may not be on the field for long. Emotional, dissenting, passionate we might cut him some slack and warnings could be initiated before we exile but make NO mistake If a coach is abusive he is GONE ASAP.

As for trying to set a standard expect the ten to be at least 8 not 1 to 7. The "I do not know that looks like 10)stuff just does not fly in the face of boundary lines and centre circles set at ten yard radius in the middle of the field.

Pk encroachment and off the line by keepers is at times painfully obvious. Now as to how trivial a keeper off his line is on a PK seems to depend on whether the referee or AR has the testicular fortitude to see it as the ball into the keeper or the keeper into the ball. The Pk is a great scoring opportunity and for an over zealous PK taker to jump either he or she is a bonehead and or they are inexperienced or think it is ok because the referee has not set the standard with due diligence.

On a Pk for ANYONE to take it before the signal is really sad! If we retake for a miss we are likely to caution show a yellow card as well. If we take it out of the net perhaps a warning. To use the idea that if ther pk kicker jumps the gun, a miss occurs or keeper saves, too bad so sad play on, has some justification in spirit if not law!

ALWAYS a whistle loud and clear! We look and get eye contact talk to that kicker and point to the whistle, turn and look at all players and point to the pk kicker that NO ONE moves the pk kicker KICKS the ball. The Pk kicker either only moves when we blow the whistle or is either completely obtuse, deaf and blind something we failed to notice. Which could seem appropriate because as referees we are often thought to be blind and deaf? ;o) Or at least of questionable eyesight with selective hearing LOL!
Cheers

Answer provided by Referee Steve Montanino

Perhaps it would be best if the referee went to the assign asked to be re assigned to a different game to avoid this situation in the first place. Certainly, it's not the referee's nor the team's fault that this has happened but it shouldn't have nonetheless. Another plausible solution would be for the referee rotation to shift during the day even if that means somebody does two medals in a row, I think that's better than refereeing the same team in the middle three times in one day.