Hi Shaun
Thanks for the question.

I find it strange that only one assistant referee was assigned to the game. I appreciate that there is a scarcity of officials yet in this part of the world if a second official cannot be sourced the referee will officiate as a lone official.
In those situations club assistants are appointed by the teams who assist with ball out of play only and in some leagues with offside.

My understanding of the one assistant games is that the one AR works mostly as normal, and the referee tries to absorbs most of the duties of the missing AR maybe perhaps with the help of a club assistant.
As it is not provided for in the Laws of the Game it is up to the referee to manage the situation in the best way possible as the referee sees fit.
Another option is that the AR on the technical sides tries to cover both halves from a mid way starting point for offside which is the key duty.

As a referee faced with such a situation I would endeavour to use the neutral official in a way that dealt with what was happening in the game in the best way possible.

There is a side of me that tells me to be consistent throughout and just have the official on the technical side with one control path whatever that may be. It then limits the possibility of this type of question being raised. For instance both attacks would have an AR monitoring offside in their attacking half as best one could. Being on the technical side would make substitutions an easier task.
In situations where say an AR gets injured or perhaps the referee with an AR having to assume refereeing duties the understood advice is for the junior referee to go to the technical side and to mirror the club assistant duties on the far side if that is possible. It is a fairly rare occurrence

Ultimately it is a decision for the referee on the day and it is up to the referee to makes ALL the decisions and to use the AR to help with decision making.
If you think about it, rarely are assistants the focus in most games as to use the phrase the buck stops with the referee.
The only person who knows about the reason for the changes was the referee which could be tactics, experimenting with positions if it is a regular occurrence, being close to certain action. Who knows.
I once had a referee use right backs positioning for ARs as he felt he would like to try that from the traditional left backs path as he was missing flags in his positioning. It made flag use altogether different with many left arm signals compared to the right hands ones that were almost automatic.

The key test of success or otherwise for me is whether there were any glaring errors in the game most likely on offside calls. As a match official I refereed countless single official games and offside was managed as best one could with teams having to accept that.
The referee is the key official and assistants when present are there to assist mainly on offside and ball out of play.
As it is not covered in the Laws of the Game advice and maybe only covered by local advice among referees.

Hi Shaun,

This is a very unusual situation and like you I do not understand why the AR was moved around. It would seem that the best option would be to have the AR on the technical side to assist with substitutions and problems that may develop in the technical area.

Also, I believe it would be better to have the AR on the same half of the field for both halves so because the referee would not have to adjust the coverage on the side of the field without an AR.

However, the referee may have had a reason for doing this. One factor may be the sun which sometimes affects the referee from fully seeing the AR signals. Another may be the condition of the field which may have rough spots resulting in the referee not being able to move around as he needs to. Also, the AR may have been having difficulty moving and being in the proper position.

I do think the referee should have provided you with an explanation as to why he positioned the AR the way he did.

Thank you for this very thoughtful question,

Hi Coach Brown,

Under FIFA rules which I believe govern Grassroots games, coaches should be in the technical area which is on the sideline where the team's bench is located. The technical area extends one meter from the end of each side of the team's bench.

Based on this rule, I believe you have the right to insist that all coaches and managers remain in the technical area. However, the Grassroots association you play in could allow coaching from outside the technical area.

I recommend you check with the person or group in charge of your tournament to verify the FIFA rules concerning coaching only from the technical area are the rules that coaches must follow. If they are, I then recommend you let the tournament director know of the team having coaches outside the technical area and ask the director to talk to that team's manager before the game in order to prevent a confrontation at the game.

Thank you for this question. I hope your team wins the semi-final and final games.

Hi Thomas
Thanks for the question
Anyone listed as technical staff and substitutes must be located in the technical area. It is up the referee to ensure that this requirement is met in a game.
The relevant law is quoted below
** The occupants of the technical area:
# are identified before the start of the match in accordance with the competition rules
# must behave in a responsible manner
# must remain within its confines except in special circumstances, e.g. a physiotherapist/doctor entering the field of play, with the referee’s permission, to assess an injured player**

Now I have refereed many Underage games and it can be difficult to maintain order in some games.
Indeed some pitches may not have technical areas.
I have seen teams only name a manager and assistant yet there may be others who *coach* yet not part of the official coaching staff and not under the control of match officials.
If the ground has a pitch sorround fence anyone not listed on the match card must be located outside the fence yet that may not pose any difficulties in conveying tactical instructions. Some may be parents and a referee will not be concerned about *coaching* by spectators.

While not in the Laws as a referee I would not allow persons close to the goal lines. In some matches I can recall dealing with complaints from goalkeepers about unsporting shouting from behind the goals. I always removed persons from those area in Underage games who moved there during the game and those behaving in an irresponsible manner.

Hi Craig
Thanks for the question.
As set out in the Laws of the Game it is a caution when team officials clearly / persistently do not respect the confines of their team’s technical area. The FA has set out guidelines for conduct through various initiatives.

For what it is worth I think that PL match officials including the 4th officials adopt a very generous approach to the movement instruction while managing technical areas.

Arteta is not alone in this and there are plenty of examples of mangers not respecting the confines of the areas. From what I perceive cards are only issued when the action is egregious rather than an excursion out of the area for whatever reasons.
So the focus is on conduct rather than movement alone. There are plenty of examples of cards for inappropriate conduct in the technical areas yet not so many for movement alone.
Obviously the thinking is not to adopt zero tolerance on movement and unless the conduct has match control consequences it is ignored with the manager probably responding to instructions by the 4th official.

HI Craig ,
it is really a matter of consequences and actions. Unless the managers are interfering with the 4th or AR duties and not spouting total rubbish at the CR we ignore them and concentrate on the game. My opinion is if it is an issue FINE the teams a $$$$ penalty for a wandering coach should be sufficient .plus there is a visual record! The yellow card or red card are for serious matters that pertain to the game. More for the non professional games to give a referee greater support at the grassroots when dealing with non televised behaviour of the team officials. At the elite level it is all about the money, ego and prestige
Cheers

Hi Gary
Thanks for the question.

There is nothing wrong in doing this and at the lower levels of the game it happens all the time.

Interestingly IFAB has spelt out the ways technical staff can receive a caution.
** The following offences should usually result in a warning repeated or blatant offences should result in a caution or sending-off:
# entering the field of play in a respectful / non-confrontational manner
# failing to cooperate with a match official e.g. ignoring an instruction / request from an assistant referee or the fourth official
# minor / low-level disagreement (by word or action) with a decision occasionally leaving the confines of the technical area without committing another offence

Caution offences include (but are not limited to):
# clearly/persistently not respecting the confines of their team’s technical area
# delaying the restart of play by their team
# deliberately entering the technical area of the opposing team (non-confrontational)
# dissent by word or action including: throwing / kicking drinks bottles or other objects
# action(s) which show(s) a clear lack of respect for the match official(s) e.g. sarcastic clapping
# entering the referee review area (RRA)
# excessively/persistently gesturing for a red or yellow card
# excessively showing the ‘TV signal’ for a VAR ‘review’
# acting in a provocative or inflammatory manner
# persistent unacceptable behaviour (including repeated warning offences)
# showing a lack of respect for the game

Referees know that ball retrieval is part of the game and a genuine action to help the game will not be sanctioned. I have seen technical staff go off on ball hunting exercises to retrieve match balls that went over fences etc. None of that requires sanction.
Here are some
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IDhK0M6MxmI&pp=ygUeU29jY2VyIG1hbmFnZXIgYmFsbCByZXRyaWV2YWwg
Now we all know that decisions are not always clear. A manager who has been warned about breaches of the technical area rules earlier in the game will not be afforded say any beneficence in ball hunting in the opponents technical area to get a quick restart.

HI Gary,
happens all the time in the recreational venues . If he retrieved it and sought to delay the other team, we might have an issue! lol
Cheers

HI Ray,
you are most welcome from all of us here!
It looks like you are doing your best to garner understanding and experience so good on you,
I suppose if the association decides to say its ok and make it the law of their land that this verbal conundrum is ok then it cannot be unknown by defenders who should rush all attempts. The other opposing coaches should be aware and a shout out, he kicked it, it's in play should jog the memories. Seems odd but USA along with the rest of this planet, is in a pretty odd place at the moment, all things considered! Lots of unnecessary changes and many bad ones are currently being formed!

The fact the ball no longer has to leave the PA to be in play on goal kicks has certainly created a few oops, but you are aware, then as referee your decision, your match, your reputation is now being cultivated!
Cheers

Hi Raymond
If a player or coach shouted LEAVE IT would it attract howls of illegality? We know that not all shouts such as that are illegal and it is up the referee to decide based on the circumstances
If the shout is to distract an opponent away from a ball that is in play is that not the same by suggesting through a shout that the ball cannot be played as it is not in play. Is it not akin to a play on words to leave it. Just because a name is used or that it appears as tactical instruction changes nothing in the corner kick ruse.

As to the goal kick one of the challenges facing referees can be to decide if the ball is kicked into play or not under the new amended law
Have a look at this video
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6HuqeqmQ0Po
Was the kick taken? Certainly the referee thought so and as the double touch denied a goal scoring opportunity a red card was issued. I would agree that it looks like the GK kicked the ball to the defender who seemed to not want it. So I would agree that the referee was correct in his interpretation at this level of play.

At U11 I would be going with a retake

Hi Robert
The referee Anthony Taylor certainly had his work cut out for him in that game.

On the Havertz tackle it looked like the Spurs defender got a toe poke on the ball. AT certainly motions that the ball was played. I have looked at it a few times and different angles show me different things. It looked like there was slight contact on the ball and the way the defender's leg was extended it was a genuine attempt to play the ball. To me on balance it was a foul from what I seen on video yet in real time I could see why it was not given. To get to the ball there is contact on Havertz which makes it a foul for me. Anyway even if it was a foul it was not enough reason to cost Chelsea a goal. They even got the ball back yet failed to clear their penalty area,
I also think that from looking at the way the game is being officiated in the PL that more contact is being allowed and these are in every game with some given and some not.

On the the offside is not clear enough for me. Mendy has clear line of sight to the ball at the moment of the shot, Richarlison is not close to him and the goalkeeper almost gets to the ball inside the post. So he sees the ball throughout the play. Throw in a Chelsea defender in front of the ball who is in front of Richarlison and its not offside for me ss I don't believe Richarlison prevented Mendy from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision. He is within inches of saving it.

On the hair pull incident clearly it could only be dealt with under VAR if it was seen as violent conduct or a goal was scored. Then it becomes a DFK and a card. If it is not VC then VAR does not have the power to deal with it as a caution or a foul on its own (unless a goal was scored). It will be interesting to see if anything further comes of it. The key question is pulling a player down by his arm or whatever part of the body violent conduct? The hair part makes it look particularly nasty and perhaps it was seen as USB rather than VC so if AT did not deal with it in real time VAR could not go back for the caution after review. We know that violent conduct is when a player uses excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball. Was the hair pull excessive force? Or did the player partly lose his balance as part of the shenanigans. If the player grabbed him by the neck, shoulder and pulled him down in a similar manner would it be any different? Certainly a caution yet is it dismissal.? Rumblings are that if AT had gone to the monitor it would have been red so I suspect there is going to be questions asked as to why VAR did not ask for that to happen. FWIW my opinion was it should have been a red card and a DFK to Chelsea.

On the technical area bust up I think that under the letter of the law Tuchel could have got a 2nd caution for his antics after the 2nd goal. It is listed as a caution for deliberately entering the technical area of the opposing team (non-confrontational). Looking at it in real time Tuchel seems to be react to someone on the FOP perhaps the referee who may have warned him? I doubt many referees will red card for that. Rumblings that the officials saw it as a celebration rather than inflammatory. There was certainly no apparent goading of the Spurs staff by Tuchel either going down the line or coming back.
On the first contact there is not enough in there between the coaches other than cautions. Conte goes towards the Chelsea technical area and while there is contact between them there is not enough to warrant a red card for VC. The 4th official plus staff are there to separate them. In my opinion the 4 cautions were correct.
As to the incident at the end I think the RCs decision was more for the cameras than anything else plus it is something that does not need to be seen after a game at the highest level. I personally would not have red carded for this incident. The game was over and there was no VC involved just some cheap theatrics between two coaches. The incident was over immediately and I could not see any violent acts between anyone.

I think the only really gripe that Chelsea had was the hair pull incident. Both goals that were conceded were poor defending. On the first one the ball should have been cleared rather than being lost in the penalty area and on the 2nd one there were three Spurs players contesting for the ball in the goal area. Either the GK should have come and fisted it away or there should have been defenders goal side making aerial challenges on the Spurs attackers.

Hi Robert,

1) This was a tough one. Getting the ball first doesn't necessarily mean no foul, but it can (and I'm pretty sure he got a touch on the ball first). The referee needs to judge incidental contact with the player afterwards, versus an actual careless tackle. For instance, sliding through the legs after the touch on the ball would be a foul - so would a large follow through that results in a tiny touch on the ball but a heavy touch on the player. This one? Looks like he took all reasonable steps to minimise contact on the player and force was minimal. I'm happy with this one, but it was a close call and could have gone either way. It's possible I haven't seen all the angles of it.

2) I've only seen one angle of this, but from that angle, it looks like the ball is always on the GK side of the striker and that he's never directly between the GK and the ball. However, I can see he steps back slightly - if he has to step out of the way of the ball then that would be offside. However, I also wonder if the defender closest to the AR might be keeping him on. The onlyfootage I've seen is at a strong angle so hard to tell

3) This is clear VC for me. Pulling somebody by the hair is much worse than pulling somebody by the jersey, arm, leg or any other body part. For one, there's the sudden jerking of the head. Two, it's a lot more painful than anything else. Three, I would argue this action is inherently violent, and is so far removed from any normal contest or foul that it must be met with a RC - I can't see any possible argument otherwise, so for me, VAR absolutely should have intervened. Of course, this also falls onto the referee. We all know that when you're focused on players further along in your field of view, you can miss something that's completely in front of you - this just highlights the important of situational awareness and of trying to avoid tunnel vision.

4)According to Law 12, It's a RC for an official if for:

"physical or aggressive behaviour (including spitting or biting) towards an opposing player, substitute, team official, match official, spectator or any other person (e.g. ball boy/girl, security or competition official etc.)"

While you wouldn't RC a player for chest-bumping another player, the laws place a higher standard of behaviour on team officials. Looks to me like this was a straightforward, and mandatory, red card - but for me, both managers stepped forward to each other so you'd be sending both off (and really, if you've had 2 managers come out of their TA to scream and chest bump each other, what possible reason do you have for wanting them to stay around?)

Hi Dom
Management of the technical area in the higher level games is the responsibility of the 4th official with instructions from the referee. If the 4th official needs to take disciplinary action it is done through the referee. Instructions / warnings are done by the 4th official who may ask the referee to warn as well.

How that is managed is a matter for that 4th official and it depends on the 4th officials approach to the task. Some adopt a zero tolerance level towards technical staff behaviours while others adopt the view that unless the conduct is having a negative effect of the game then they may be more lenient towards conduct such as minor excursions outside the technical area boundaries.

In this game the referee was Craig Pawson while the 4th official here was David Coote who is a relatively new official to the Premier League referee roster having been added to the list in 2018. He was awarded a FIFA badge in 2020.

Now it would appear to me that PGMOL the PL referee body maybe somewhat laxed about enforcing some of the technical area law. In the recent Arsenal V Watford game Arteta left the technical area to retrieve a ball which resulted in a quick throw in leading to the 3rd goal. It was interesting that the same referee was Craig Pawson. If it was frowned upon in that game by PGMOL sure the referee would have been made aware of that and asked to ensure the conduct is corrected?

Now generally when these events happen it is reviewed afterwards and I suspect when no action was taken that it is somewhat seen as *trifling* or nothing to get concerned about. Former referee Keith Hackett was highly critical of no action being taken by the referee in the Watford game so one would be fairly sure that his criticism would have been picked up by PGMOL the referee body.

As a referee who has been a 4th official in important games and assessed by senior observers I know only too well that even minor breaches can get picked up in an assessment. I was once asked in a semi final game by a member of a technical staff if he could stand to the side of the TA due to difficulty in sitting for long periods which I agreed to and he stood back in the same spot for the 90 minutes just at the side of the covered seated area in line with the seats. It got highlighted in the match assessment and I got marked down for allowing it even though the person never moved or even interfered in any way. I was not happy yet it highlights that if the system does not want something to happen it can ensure that it doesn't. I would be politely saying to the next person/s in any future games that asked to stand that they need to move away and go behind the barrier away from the TA,

In 2014 the League Managers Association commissioned a report into conduct in technical areas. That report highlighted that the most common offence is verbal abuse of match officials while it also stated that a number of match officials are unsure of the rules dictating what is/ is not deemed responsible behaviour in technical areas.
Since then the Laws have been amended to provide guidelines to officials at to what should be warned and what should be cautioned so the uncertainty should have been removed.
The current advice in the Laws state that if a member of the technical staff occasionally leaves the confines of the technical area without committing another offence that should result in a warning. On the other hand technical staff who clearly/persistently do not respect the confines of their team’s technical area or who deliberately enter the technical area of the opposing team even in a non-confrontational manner should be cautioned.

So for what it is worth my guess is that match officials are only sanctioning technical staff who act in an obtuse irresponsible manner rather than those who simply fail to stay within the confines of their area. That could be the accepted approach which is at odds with the Laws. Your guess is as good as mine and we are not a party to that so we just observe the same as everyone else and try to interpret what has happened.

Hi Dom,
As my colleague ref McHugh points out, it's actually the job of the 4th official to monitor the technical area and inform the referee of any irresponsible behaviour by the technical area occupants. So one has to suppose that the 4th official in this game did not find the behaviour you describe as sufficiently irresponsible to warrant informing the referee.

Now, as ref McHugh also mentions, the law does say that a team official who occasionally leaves the confines of the technical area without committing another offence, should be warned and that if they do so clearly and persistently they should be cautioned. So if a manager was out of his technical area as consistently as you describe, then it is a little of a mystery why he was not at least warned.

About the only conclusion I can come to is to once again agree with my esteemed colleague that the PGMOL referees are turning a bit of a blind eye to such behaviour, for whatever reason.

I would also have to say that it's not the only part of the law that they seem to apply in a somewhat lax manner, dissent and delaying the restart of play being a couple of the others.

Hi Eunan,
Personally I think in stadiums filled with screaming fans we are rarely going to id who said what unless the 'who' decided to make sure we did!
You certainly do not want horrific blatant garbage get a free pass but unless what is being done/said is truly match affecting or so grotesque it MUST be dealt with (personal attack against officials race baiting or chanting etc...or is spitefullest, literally a hush goes over the crowd before they commence screaming their own versions. WE should selectively ignore useless input. The LOTG do make it clear you can sanction the Coach but try to work with the coach first if possible to quell garbage rather than seek to blame! Your tolerance and attitude reflect your character. Your match Your decision Your reputation !
Cheers

Hi Eunan
Thanks for the question
It is left to individual referees to decide how best to handle such situations.
I personally feel that *justice* is best delivered in a way where the offender is identified by the referee rather than being 'offered up' by the team or the manager taking the rap.
As Referee Grove points out the team can have an ulterior motive in naming an offender and also if it goes to discipline the manager will say that he did not say anything which very well may be the case.
I have seen some clubs position *spectators* beside / behind the technical area to berate the match official so that the words do not come from within the technical area yet very much orchestrated by the team. Hard to prove and also does the manager take a card for spectator shouting?
Sometimes we have to have a stepped approach to this which is to first place the responsibility on the manager of managing the technical area by telling him that he is in charge of the bench personnel and if the problem persists that action will be taken including against him should the referee have to return. Sometimes in these situations the *offender* will continue with words in the presence of the referee which very well may identify the culprit who used the words.
Also by paying a bit more attention to the technical area the *offender* can be quite animated by movement, gestures etc and he can be identified. Other times we may just have to accept some level of verbals which when it is seen to not having any affect on the referee or the game can just be *noise* with limited consequences for the game.

Hi Eunan,
The law simply says that:

''Where an offence is committed and the offender cannot be identified, the senior team coach present in the technical area will receive the sanction.''

There is no specific guidance on how the offender is to be identified, so that leaves the mechanics up to the referee. For me, this would be a referee's judgement call as to whether to accept information from those in the technical area as to who the offender was. You should bear in mind that the team officials might have an ulterior motive in designating a specific individual - they might be trying to shield the actual culprit, for instance if that person had previously been sanctioned (either in this game or a previous one) and where a repeat offence might lead to a more severe sanction.

Hi Henry,
One of the biggest tips I can give to a 4th official is that if you're bored, you're doing it wrong. Yes, TA management is perhaps the priority - but like players, you can build a rapport with the benches as well. If you need to get a manager back into the TA, just a smile and 'could you just step back into the area for me? thanks' - no need to be too quick on the draw with this. Don't get sucked into the 'did you think that was a foul?' discussions - but no different to being an AR there.

You'll want to try to manage the replacement ball at halfway and if that gets used try to keep an eye on if a ball is coming back your way.

Communicate the expectations with the subs to the benches and you'll manage those in conjunction with the AR - your ref should outline how this is to be communicated- at grassroots games, we've usually just had the 4th call out to the near AR and they signal, then the AR runs up to halfway as normal (though some refs don't want the AR to run up...especially if they're 50 yards away!).

The ref needs to include the 4th official in their scan (because as a ref, you need to frequently check both ARs). We had an approach that the 4th official standing at the field at halfway was communicating something, so the ref would make eye contact and the 4th may use a discrete hand signal to call the ref over.

Usually the 4th is the replacement referee. So, you need to be constantly and actively scanning play. Don't watch the ball - watch the players all over the field. If the attacker and keeper have tangled up in a physical contest but the ball goes out and is breaking fast up the other end, then the referee is chasing the ball, the 2 AR's are keeping up with the sprinting 2nd last defenders - who is watching the keeper and the attacker? If you're the 4th, you need to. And you need to balance this with your TA management duties - so don't turn your back to the game.

I'm often amazed when off-the-ball VC is missed in games with 4th officials - because both the far AR and the 4th need to constantly scan off-the-ball incidents.

On the topic of actively watching play - as the 4th you need to know what players are causing trouble, which pairs of players have a grievance, who has been warned, which players are influencing the mood of the match - same as you do if you're the referee. Because if you have to step in, it needs to be seamless - and players already on their 'final warning' don't get more grace just because that referee has left. When you take your match notes (eg at a goal), make sure the AR's and ref have all stopped - you can take yours at any time.

If there's a mass confrontation, you'll probably be the one trying to keep the benches off the field - but don't put yourself at risk, of course.

We would also use very discrete signals to help out with ball in/out of play. Sometimes if the ball is out near us and we see the referee make eye contact before signalling, just a very slight tilt of the head and a look in the relevant direction is enough to communicate whose throw. Whether the referee wants that is up to them - but helping out with violent conduct and other off-the-ball incidents missed by the referee is definitely under the purview of the 4th official.

For fouls (if the referee wants help there), perhaps a slight nod (or shake of the head) may be sufficient if the referee is looking for help.

I quite enjoy being a 4th official - and they really can help the game go smoothly and make things easier for the rest of the refereeing team.

Hi Henry
Best wishes with the step up.
Now 4th official roles vary depending on the competition, whose is carrying out the role and what is the norm that is expected or that the referee wants carried out.
At the outset it is another extra pair of eyes to help with controlling the game plus an official that can be given many duties including all the roster admin, team kits, substitutions, control of technical staff and substitutes, spare ball management.
Now some referees can extend the role to include other duties particularly if they are miked up and in direct communication with the referee.
These extra duties can include in no particular order
Advice on thrown in direction if there is doubt
Offences in front of the technical area.
Identification of player/s guilty of misconduct
Keeping track of cards
Keeping track of time lost on substitutions, injuries to help confirm the referee's assessment of time lost.
Now some 4th officials may not want extra duties or be up to extra tasks or indeed some of the tasks are not relevant. Case in point is the spare ball management. In our Leagues both teams provide two balls each so that task is left to the teams.
In higher levels of the game the 4th official is the designated replacement referee whereas at lower levels it may be an assist who is replaced by the 4th.

Hi Henry,
First off good on you in stepping up.
PREGAME
discuss your concerns, ask your questions, explain your ideas, but understand, you are there to assist the referee, so take direction! The amount of interaction may depend on the communication system. Will you have radio? Or buzzers? While most CRs want a 4th dedicated to maintaining peace and harmony along the touch lines as a neutral official your view of a situation may well be very important. Zidane, the best player in the world was sent off for an incident that only the 4th official witnessed at a World cup. So yes you want to be aware but follow the directions of the CR, you can suggest, but take no offence if he says I prefer this to that. The LOTG do give a brief synopsis of your specific duties . Do not over extend your input by doing too much and thus forgetting what you need to be aware of . Managing the touchlines can be difficult if you have over zealous coaches or managers abandoning their responsibilities. To be the calming influence in a passionate game is a chore I assure you! Work as a team, ensure you follow directives and communicate effectively!
Cheers

Hi Jamie
That is all about to change. IFAB ran pilot projects in a number of locations including the UK on this and from next season on coaches and technical staff will be shown red and yellow cards the same as players, substitutes and substituted players.
This is what IFAB has to say on the matter and I qute.
** A team official guilty of misconduct will be shown a Yellow Card (caution) or Red Card (sending off)*;
if the offender cannot be identified, the senior coach who is in the technical area at the time will receive the YC/RC
* Law 12 will have a list of YC/RC offences
Explanation
The experiment with YC/RC for misconduct by team officials has been successful and
has revealed many benefits at all levels, including for young referees dealing with
difficult adult coaches. If the offender cannot be identified, the senior team official
(usually the main coach) in the technical area will receive the YC/RC (as the person
responsible for the other team officials). **

HI Jamie , actually the LOTG are now engaging this action as part of the soccer culture given it was being done in youth and school leagues albeit illegally as an adaptation of ROC protocols to help encourage and support young referees against the adult coaches screaming fits and tirades along the touchlines or technical areas. .The merit of such action as showing cards to team members players subs coaches and trainers has been acknowledged and will now be part of the game. Just like the sin bins and timeouts prior. The game is evolving with regards to fair play and what constitutes reasonable behavior.
Cheers

Hi Jamie,
At the current point in time, it depends which league or competition we are talking about. Various competitions in different countries have already been authorised by the IFAB to issue cards to team officials. For instance in England, starting in 2018, red and yellow cards are being issued to team officials for misconduct in the technical area in the following competitions: FA Cup, Football League, EFL Cup, EFL Trophy and National League.

However in the Premier League, team officials still are only receiving verbal cautions for 'irresponsible behaviour' in the 2018-19 campaign.

As my colleagues have stated, from next season cards can be issued to team officials in all competitions world-wide, if they are guilty of misconduct.