A&H

Substitute incident

R

Redref34

Active Member
Level 5 Referee
Hi all

Wanted your thoughts..

Men’s county game.

Foul happens right in front of technical areas and tangle of legs.

Substitute enters field of play in an aggressive manor and confronts opposition player. You Fing idiot, words to that effect. I had to ask him to leave multiple times.

At this point I’m immediately thinking he is going RC for entering field of play and/or OFFINBUS.

After the game when I chatted to my assistants it suddenly occurred to me that the law does not necessarily say RC for a substitute entering the field of play in this manor. Am I correct? What would others have done?

I told the manager at the end of the game that he was RC for that incident for entering the pitch and confronting the player but I had to put it down as using OFFINBUS language as that’s the only thing that I could fit it for, Is this wrong?

Thanks
 
The Referee Store
He's probably committed two cautionable offences, entering the FoP without permission and adopting and aggressive attitude.

2 yellows and a red seem justifiable here
 
es1 said:
He's probably committed two cautionable offences, entering the FoP without permission and adopting and aggressive attitude.

2 yellows and a red seem justifiable here
Click to expand...

Yes I have do doubt he should have been sent off. I went straight red. Perhaps I should have gone two yellows. It kicked off between the benches as well which he was then involved in (same incident) so he could have had three yellows. I just felt a straight red card for his behaviour was needed at the time
 
Because he came on the pitch to confront and be aggressive towards a player.. I just immediately thought straight red and so that’s what I did. Thinking about it, perhaps two yellows may have been better or as you describe yellow and straight red
wazztie16 said:
Straight yellow for EFOP without permission, then straight red for OFFINABUS?
Click to expand...
 
As above, if you've gone straight red it would have to be OFFINABUS.
Personally if he's just called an opposition player a f*cking idiot in an aggressive manor I would say that wouldn't meet my threshold for a straight red for OFFINABUS (I would ask myself if he was an active player and not a sub I probably wouldn't be sending him off for that, just a yellow for adopting an aggressive attitude so the fact he is a substitute wouldn't affect that part of it), but it's certainly worthy of a caution for entering FOP and a caution for AA.

With that said, it certainly could be deemed as OFFINABUS in itself if your threshold would warrant that!
 
Last edited:
RefereeX said:
As above, if you've gone straight red it would have to be OFFINABUS.
Personally if he's just called an opposition play a f*cking idiot in an aggressive manor I would say that wouldn't meet my threshold for a straight red for OFFINABUS (I would ask myself if he was an active player and not a sub I probably wouldn't be sending him off for that, just a yellow for adopting an aggressive attitude so the fact he is a substitute wouldn't affect that part of it), but it's certainly worthy of a caution for entering FOP and a caution for AA.

With that said, it certainly could be deemed as OFFINABUS in itself if your threshold would warrant that!
Click to expand...

This is my problem.. it wouldn’t usually meet my threshold and actually, there were other incidents throughout the game that the team could argue I didn’t deal with in a fair and similar way.

I think I wrongly assumed that a substitute entering the field of play and confronting someone would much be dealt with in the way of a coach entering and using physical or aggressive behaviour and so in my head I immediately went red. It was only after that I thought actually that is not the case. I justified to the manager after by basically saying that he entered the field of play and became confrontational and or abusive to another player and that’s the reason for the red. They accepted. Live and learn!
 
‘Leaving the technical area to act in a provocative or inflammatory manner’

If you’re having to tell him to leave the FOP multiple times I would say it falls into this category. That or ‘entering the field of play to interfere with play, an opposing player or a match official’. I guess not technically interfering but I’ve put one through as that before for a similar situation and no questions were asked
 
QuaverRef said:
‘Leaving the technical area to act in a provocative or inflammatory manner’

If you’re having to tell him to leave the FOP multiple times I would say it falls into this category. That or ‘entering the field of play to interfere with play, an opposing player or a match official’. I guess not technically interfering but I’ve put one through as that before for a similar situation and no questions were asked
Click to expand...

Does that just apply to team officials though and not substitutes?
 
QuaverRef said:
‘Leaving the technical area to act in a provocative or inflammatory manner’

If you’re having to tell him to leave the FOP multiple times I would say it falls into this category. That or ‘entering the field of play to interfere with play, an opposing player or a match official’. I guess not technically interfering but I’ve put one through as that before for a similar situation and no questions were asked
Click to expand...
This only applies to team officials. Substitutes should be treat as players.
 
This isn't the same as a player adopting and aggressive attitude. The fact he has entered the field of play illegitimately adds something which I think could pull it into the abusive actions sphere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top