I’ve been hesitant to post this sort of opinion but with the new crackdown of dissent at the elite level I feel that the way officials are being asked to referee makes it very hard to be consistent and actually makes it more difficult for us at grassroots level as it isn’t representative of the way that we deal with dissent. Take the incident below with the Stoke player getting a yellow card for waving an imaginary card, should a yellow card be necessary or should the referee resort to an alternative way of dealing with this seemingly low level dissent? I appreciate that sin-bins are not an option and this may be a bit of Sunday league experience talking but what are other referee’s thoughts?
Crackdown of Dissent
- Thread starter lalec03
- Start date
I agree from watching the video that is completely against what the game expects. Completely caught me off guard, I was waiting for a more obvious wave of an imaginary card. Only caught it on my second watch.
Props to the ref though, it is in the LOTG verbatim. So he surely got some observe brownie points for that.
I think if it is normalised it will gradually help us all at grassroots. This coupled with Trent getting a dissent booking in the Liverpool game earlier is really teaching the public what is expected. Even listening to the commentators on the Liverpool game, they were massively bigging up the referee team, and when Trent caught his dissent caution, it was expected by all.
I've lost count of the amount of times I've read that the pro game is refereed different to grassroots (and it is) but at least it is setting a precedent. Like kicking the ball away. Hardly anyone is doing that in my games now, compared to the start of the season. The whole 'leave the ball well alone unless it is your ball' stance that has been taken, and is such a good stance that is being adhered to at all levels.
Any additional opportunities to flash a yellow in the face of a dissenting player, especially if I can back it up in law, and even better if it is expected massively helps my game control. Makes me look less of a 'jobsworth' or 'soft' and more someone doing their job correctly.
Props to the ref though, it is in the LOTG verbatim. So he surely got some observe brownie points for that.
I think if it is normalised it will gradually help us all at grassroots. This coupled with Trent getting a dissent booking in the Liverpool game earlier is really teaching the public what is expected. Even listening to the commentators on the Liverpool game, they were massively bigging up the referee team, and when Trent caught his dissent caution, it was expected by all.
I've lost count of the amount of times I've read that the pro game is refereed different to grassroots (and it is) but at least it is setting a precedent. Like kicking the ball away. Hardly anyone is doing that in my games now, compared to the start of the season. The whole 'leave the ball well alone unless it is your ball' stance that has been taken, and is such a good stance that is being adhered to at all levels.
Any additional opportunities to flash a yellow in the face of a dissenting player, especially if I can back it up in law, and even better if it is expected massively helps my game control. Makes me look less of a 'jobsworth' or 'soft' and more someone doing their job correctly.
I am liking the use of yellows for the sort of fake yellow card flashing, but what still isn't good enough in my opinion is clear verbal dissent going unpunished. Pro refs seem happy to take verbal barrages with no action, leaving that precedent for the grassroots to continue. The increased use of yellows for dissent will slowly change behaviours, both in the pro an grassroots games. But their limited use in the pro game now means they're hardly making a dent at the moment.
Pretty sure he got that for kicking the ball away (delaying the restart). He effectively got away with the dissent.
For me, theres no need for the referee to approach the player here. It’s a defensive fk, get up the park and move away.
He’s definitely questioning the player on something “what do you mean….” And “what?” Are all I can lip read but it almost seems to me like he’s boxed himself in here especially with the blue player approaching and potentially questioning the waving of the card
He’s definitely questioning the player on something “what do you mean….” And “what?” Are all I can lip read but it almost seems to me like he’s boxed himself in here especially with the blue player approaching and potentially questioning the waving of the card
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
No issues with me for players getting booked for this. The issue is the consistency. I think they initially instructed referees to caution for this around 2006, then it fell away, came back again, fell away and then came back again.
Someone got sent off last week in the championship for an almost identical offence, if I remember rightly. If a player is stupid enough to do it and try and get other players in trouble, then they deserve the booking. And if they're extra stupid and do it whilst already on a yellow, there is no helping them.
What I would say, is that I'm not 100% convinced he necessarily gets the caution for waving the imaginary card. I could well be wrong, but the referees body language doesn't suggest he's going to caution until he speaks to the player.
Someone got sent off last week in the championship for an almost identical offence, if I remember rightly. If a player is stupid enough to do it and try and get other players in trouble, then they deserve the booking. And if they're extra stupid and do it whilst already on a yellow, there is no helping them.
What I would say, is that I'm not 100% convinced he necessarily gets the caution for waving the imaginary card. I could well be wrong, but the referees body language doesn't suggest he's going to caution until he speaks to the player.
The Referee's 'Dismissal Process' is 'Outstanding' in the OP
Calm as you like. Determines for sure what happens, very concise explanation to the player and fantastic body language
Dismissal is the player's fault. Waving an imaginary card is either a Caution or it's not. No grey areas
Just keep it that way and don't let it slip as usually happens
Calm as you like. Determines for sure what happens, very concise explanation to the player and fantastic body language
Dismissal is the player's fault. Waving an imaginary card is either a Caution or it's not. No grey areas
Just keep it that way and don't let it slip as usually happens
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
This is indeed true across the whole of PGMOL. Whilst there will always be occasional instances where this is not punished (either because all four officials genuinely don't see it or because of human error) there should not be any deliberate 'turning of blind eyes', especially knowing that observers will penalise this (if they see it!)
The comments under the X post are people saying we won't see another one of these all season.
Well I personally hope we do.
The IFAB/LOTG can be frustrating, as it seems some of the laws are open to 'pick and choose'.
You can hardly blame refs when some of the laws are out of touch with the game.
Take the GK 6 second rule. Keeper receives the ball, does the dramatic Pickford slow fall to the ground with the ball. No referee in their right mind would be penalising on the 7th second.
I usually shout, "keeper, that's you had 6 seconds!" and that usually gets an instant distribution.
If it was changed to 10 seconds or 15 seconds and the referee was expected to penalise when the keeper goes one second over. That would solve that.
Similar to keeper on their line for penalties. It is expected they'll be a yard or two out.
Well I personally hope we do.
The IFAB/LOTG can be frustrating, as it seems some of the laws are open to 'pick and choose'.
You can hardly blame refs when some of the laws are out of touch with the game.
Take the GK 6 second rule. Keeper receives the ball, does the dramatic Pickford slow fall to the ground with the ball. No referee in their right mind would be penalising on the 7th second.
I usually shout, "keeper, that's you had 6 seconds!" and that usually gets an instant distribution.
If it was changed to 10 seconds or 15 seconds and the referee was expected to penalise when the keeper goes one second over. That would solve that.
Similar to keeper on their line for penalties. It is expected they'll be a yard or two out.
Yes, my issue is being consistent with the strictness, which looks as if is really difficult to be, a few weeks ago when United played Liverpool, Dalot was sent off for two dissent by actions towards the referee, Nuñez got away with doing similar to the assistant, but I assume the assistant wanting to be of no hindrance to Michael Oliver didn’t say anything.
There’s also the problem of whether or not the referee see’s it, how exactly he interprets each incident of dissent, how he deals with players surrounding him - Simon Hooper with the Man City players comes to mind.
I personally feel that there are more effective ways of dealing with dissent and controlling the game than going straight to the pocket that tests the referee’s ability more.
R
Runner-Ref
Guest
I do partially agree with the last bit, but the problem is that England has always been hesistant with issuing cautions for dissent. We've always seemed to want to be seen as 'managing' it. But with the way player behaviour has gone at grassroots and pro levels, it isn't working (think of why sin bins came in)
Last edited by a moderator:
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
huh? It WAS accepted, but now VAR rules on that to the inch. (Proof that things can change if there is a desire to change them.)
PGMOL have visited every club and told the players and coaches in no uncertain terms that if they are seen waving an imaginary card they will be cautioned. Yet they are still doing it which shows how utterly stupid they are, and to do it when already on a caution is about as ridiculous as you can get.
I have absolutely zero sympathy, and if I was their manager far from criticising the referee they'd be getting fine two week's wages and made to train with the kids until their suspension was over.
I have absolutely zero sympathy, and if I was their manager far from criticising the referee they'd be getting fine two week's wages and made to train with the kids until their suspension was over.
I think that's a fair comment. I believe that if sin-bins were brought in and implemented in a way that didn't see them used as an immediate reaction to low level dissent, but as a threat and a deterrent, it would aid the referee in their match control.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
Even now, new referees (in England) continue to be taught the stepped approach as a way of managing low level disagreement from players (amongst other things). So, effectively, the recommendation is exactly what you suggest ... the threat of a sin bin arising from a dissent caution is available as a powerful additional tool for referees to use.
At the risk of being (hopefully helpfully!) pedantic, I think it's really helpful to completely avoid using the word 'dissent' for any manageable player disagreement that isn't obvious or prolonged enough to result in a card. Once any disagreement reaches the / your threshold for dissent, by definition it's no longer 'manageable' and needs to simply be sanctioned. In other words, in the same way as a Reckless tackle can't be managed, neither can actual Dissent.
Gabriel
Well-Known Member
I had an U12's cup match a while back, and one player had consistently been showing signs of low level disagreement right from the start, leading others to do the same. As soon as I threatened one with a sin bin, every single one of them, bar the first one, stopped so it really is effective in my experience. The first one did get the sin bin because he didn't stop, and I have never had trouble with him since, having refereed that team at least 3 times since that match.
For me the sin bin requires experience from the referee.
At first you raise the card, typically the dissent will rise as you are issuing the card. Players will be agitated and everything will hit a boiling point.
You might be tempted to produce a second yellow and throw cautious out in every direction (and in most cases you'll be within your rights to do so and I have done this), but I've found my favourite approach is to issue the card and disengage, let the process do its thing.
The team after 2/3 mins will realise the game is harder with less bodies and then come the 6/7 minute the player will be itching to get back on the pitch.
They typically get back on the pitch after a much longer time than they anticipated due to their own team time waste.
Then when they get back in, you'll usually hear players telling them to wind their neck in and to run their socks off.
I'm a fan of the process, it just works better if you treat it like a red, issue it and disengage.
At first you raise the card, typically the dissent will rise as you are issuing the card. Players will be agitated and everything will hit a boiling point.
You might be tempted to produce a second yellow and throw cautious out in every direction (and in most cases you'll be within your rights to do so and I have done this), but I've found my favourite approach is to issue the card and disengage, let the process do its thing.
The team after 2/3 mins will realise the game is harder with less bodies and then come the 6/7 minute the player will be itching to get back on the pitch.
They typically get back on the pitch after a much longer time than they anticipated due to their own team time waste.
Then when they get back in, you'll usually hear players telling them to wind their neck in and to run their socks off.
I'm a fan of the process, it just works better if you treat it like a red, issue it and disengage.