Question Number: 30238

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 4/4/2016

RE: EDP Competitive League Under 17

John Hess of Guilford, CT USA asks...

Our U16 Boys were involved in a league game officiated by one center ref and one AR. The center ref was performing double-duty as the other AR failed to show for the game.

The game was called tightly with a number of yellow cards issued in the first half of play between the two teams. The game remained 0-0 going into the second half and the teams were again playing with vigor and additional yellow cards were issued. Until that point, no player received two yellows or a red card.

After a yellow was issued, the referee stopped play and called captains over and let them know that the NEXT offense would be a straight red-card. Within two minutes the referee is blowing his whistle on a minor offense. The player is issued a red card and ejected from the game.

My question: Does this ruling/behavior by the referee seem arbitrary to you? I cannot think how this ruling fits within the referee's authority within the Laws of the Game.

Thanks,

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi John
A foul has to be considered reckless / tactical / unsporting for a caution to be issued and for a straight ejection from the game a player would have to use excessive force endangering the safety of an opponent in a challenge and for the player to be sent sent off with a red card.
Now in a game context I would fail to understand how a captain could convey instructions to team mates about foul conduct. Soccer does not afford captains the opportunity to speak to players as a group so how a referee would expect his instruction to be shared with all 22 players is questionable.
If a player fouls a player in a careless manner he would not expect to be cautioned let alone dismissed. He could be cautioned for persistent infringement or if the referee felt that the foul was tactical. For it to be elevated to a straight red card the player would need to commit a foul that endangered the safety of an opponent which U.S. serious foul play.
I would also make the point is that there are understood norms in the game as to what constitutes a caution and a sending off offence. Fouls are part of the game, they do happen and if a player just carelessly fouls an opponent he would not expected to be ejected just because the referee has decided that he has drawn a line in the sand with the next foul meriting a sending off. That sending off certainly could be appealed and it would be interesting as to how such an event is described in an ejection report. While a referee may want to curb robust and vigorous challenges he just cannot arbitrarily punish a player who just so happens to be the first player to foul after his so called advice of next offence is a red card to the captains. A referee could be justified in cautioning more readily on the basis that his interpretation of reckless or tactical offence has been lowered due to match discipline being threatened by poor behaviour. A player on a caution runs the risk of a second caution on any offence, including minor ones he commits thereafter which can include delaying the restart, persistent infringement etc.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

Hi John,
we are generally loath to critique a referee performance we have not seen but I will offer you an opinion based on the information you have provided!

Based on the information you provided and the explicit use of your word 'VIGOR' I assume we have a diligent CR who was working hard to maintain a game flow that was safe within the structure of the LOTG for the sake of 22 players on the pitch to enjoy a game of football. It appears the PLAYERS were working against this design given the numbers of cards that were required!

I can UNDERSTAND exactly why the referee did as he did!
Once a referee lays down the gauntlet of ultimatum he is forced to do exactly as he stated he would or appear ineffectual!

I prefer as a policy, to avoid such ultimatums, it gives no wiggle room for alternate solutions. I can respect that EVERY referee has the line in the sand where he or she had said enough is enough and it ends here. As to HOW the match got to that point is always up for debate be the finger of blame swivels dramatically on who tells the story! I have seen fouls of a cardable nature go completely unpunished be it yellow and even red, yellows shown to benign tackles of a low standard where a free kick or a talking too would be appropriate or yellows shown when in my opinion the offence screamed for a red card! This is on the shoulders of the referee and his situational awareness & foul recognition.

Then there is the teams' reluctance to respect the efforts of what the referee is trying to maintain. When I coached, I tried to prepare my players to treat a referee as a match condition like the pitch surface or the weather, you adapt to what he is prepared to offer or allow. Yet players are RESPONSIBLE for their choice of actions and cannot fault a referee for trying to ensure they are safe and playing according the LOTG. If he is intervening OFTEN especially showing cards calling lots of fouls players have to recognize THIS referee is having issues with what they are doing.

Professional or the truly experienced recreational referees THRIVE on pressure, as they could not do the matches they do time after time without a degree of understanding what is at stake! It is not they are mistake free, just not pressured into one dimensional solutions! A referee should always react to what the players want and the LOTG demand. Your CR tried using cautions showing the yellow card to set a bar of acceptable behavior that apparently was being ignored. He was obviously frustrated his use of the hammer tool: - a yellow card caution was not having the desired effect of calming or reassuring the players he was in control and concerned with their safety so he went for the BIG sledgehammer! A red card/send off reduce them by a player, to drive the nail home:--but used it on an event that was possibly a gentle rubber mallet tap of a tack incident where even a trifling or doubtful or at best a free kick and or a quiet word if that could have sufficed. This is simply a poor decision.

A referee has to write a match report that explains the reasoning for cards being shown. In the case of this CR a more manageable explanation could be to have shown a yellow card for the catch all of USB or perhaps as Persistent Infringement if the player he was intent on sending off to set the example and standard bar was already on a caution, thus 2 yellow cards = red card!

If this player being sent off has NOT yet been carded but is shown a direct red card simply because the referee was upset at handing out a lot of yellows previously, that is NOT in my opinion the best solution. ESPECIALLY if the severity of this foul is well below the bar previously set! There are 7 send off offences, the referee being upset is not one recognized under the LOTG. I find it difficult to support the normal action of of regulation play upgraded to SFP status never mind classifying it as VC. A review committe might take exception to such a reasoning. A Player should be disciplined according to the nature of the offence committed. It is ok to call a match TIGHT, to slow things or calm things but harsh to explode into finality punishing nothing, given all the somethings that had proceeded it!

This match sounded like that talk the referee had with the captains might have been better served at the end of the 1st half before restarting the 2nd by talking to the coaches and teams together . To ref the 2nd half he could call the match tight, every trifling foul, every exchange with a hint of a foul, blown, until they (players) GET IT! If the foul IS tactical, if it IS reckless, if it IS excessive, then cards are required but if it is a continuous parade of careless fouls with no effort to challenge fairly, then persistent infringement is easily utilized to put a stop to the continuous unnecessary fouls as this cautionable misconduct can result in double cautions which results in a red card/send off!


Out of curiosity once the red card came out was there further cards? Did IT work? Or as we say, Was this one headed for the crapper?

Cheers

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 30243