Tolerance

[Danny]

Hi folks,

Just wanted to gather some opinion as to how much we like to make the game flow and pull up the game for certain things.

Yesterday I had an u13s game seemed to be no real issues, a well contested game between Red and Greens, but just wonder if I let too much flow.

One of the main talking points was when Red was attacking and keeper mistimed the challenge just outside at the corner of his box nothing malicious or reckless and the lad went down with a leg injury. With a genuine advantage I play on for about a minute and a couple of real good chances from Reds, but Greens kept looking back at the lad on floor then, ball goes out for a corner and when I look back at the lad and manager is on treating.. He apologises and said he fell like a sack of spuds. I didnt have a word with the GK, maybe should have? And the lad carried on playing. Heard some grumblings after the Ref! Ref! When one parent said but he's playing advantage.

Then the physicality of the arms and nudges in back with shoulders etc challenges that would be free kicks if connected, but could it be seen as attempted to trip. One even did attempt to trip and didn't make contact but I gave a free kick. Dunno if I was right. Red player, shouting never touched him ref, to which I pointed out he didn't have to as he attempted to trip through poor timing and no advantage was given.

Then the advantage around the box, one instance saw me let play go a little and the lad who was fouled outside the box carried on, but then fouled again in the box. So I brought it back for the Free Kick, after giving myself thinking time. Again mumbles from parents etc.

Not sure if all this is coming across clear, but for the niggles in back and legs in for tackles, not making contact or getting ball, do you let it play out.

I didn't have any complaints from the managers although one of the away Green team was walking away after game saying that Ref was stupid, unbeknown to him I was right at his side ha ha.

Opinions appreciated.

 

[zarathustra]

I've never reffed at this age group, did a couple of u16 and u18 games when I first qualified but didn't enjoy it.

In terms of letting the game flow it's hard to say how much is too much, or vice versa.

Generally the players will give you clues, sometimes they'll be obvious where they tell you that you're letting too much go. Other times you'll notice the tone of the game change.

Each game is different, sometimes you'll get two physical teams who play fairly and never over step the mark, sometimes you'll get one team who are much more physical than the other who try to bully opposition, and sometimes you'll get a team who whinge all the time, and think that every time an opposition player touches them it's a free kick.

I made the mistake in my games yesterday of not giving quite enough. Neither game got out of hand, and both games probably fitted two teams generally playing fairly.

But, on reflection if I'd tightened the reigns a bit earlier in both games then I'd had been happier with my overall performance.

To cut a long story short, experience will tell you when you can let things go, within the laws, and when you need to tighten things up a touch.

 

[OIREF!]

At 13s I think it is sensible to err on the side of the free kick unless it is a very clear advantage. At this age the pace, strength and thought process of the players might not be switched on enough to exploit the advantage. It also "educates" players that you are spotting and penalising foul play. Finally, (although some may disagree) I think you have to be a little more careful about safety and potential injuries with young players. In the first incident you describe the player was down for "about a minute" - this is actually quite a while if you sit and time it.

As Zarathustra has said, every game is different but experience is key.

 

[GraemeS]

Youth football is difficult for exactly the reason you describe. In adults football, you stop play for a head injury, anything less is up to the players to put the ball out. In youth football, you're expected to make a judgement call. At the end of the day, if the injured players teammates kept playing on, they're the ones to blame really, but unfortunately (and unfairly) there is an expectation on you as the referee at that age level.

Then the advantage around the box, one instance saw me let play go a little and the lad who was fouled outside the box carried on, but then fouled again in the box. So I brought it back for the Free Kick, after giving myself thinking time. Again mumbles from parents etc.

Technically, I think this one should have been a penalty (a penalty being a bigger advantage than a FK), and a penalty that resulted from a good advantage being played as well. But unless the in-box foul is incredibly obvious, it should be possible to sell it as a clean tackle and therefore you're coming back for the advantage. Confidence is key in this kind of decision.

 

[SLI39]

Funnily enough, this type of scenario happened in my U18s match on Saturday. A midfielder bursts forward and is pulled back just outside the area. His momentum maintains his balance and a fair challenge is then made by a defender just inside the area, but the attacking team accuse him of handling whilst sliding to make the tackle. My view was not great for the latter incident, so a penalty was out of the question, but I used the previous foul to try to minimise the controversy. As you say, it is a matter of selling the first foul and diverting attention away from the dubious one.

 

[OIREF!]

At the end of the day, if the injured players teammates kept playing on, they're the ones to blame really, but unfortunately (and unfairly) there is an expectation on you as the referee at that age level.

Sorry, I cant really agree with this. It's our responsibility as referees to decide whether play continues.

 

[Padfoot]

Hi folks,

Just wanted to gather some opinion as to how much we like to make the game flow and pull up the game for certain things.

Yesterday I had an u13s game seemed to be no real issues, a well contested game between Red and Greens, but just wonder if I let too much flow.

One of the main talking points was when Red was attacking and keeper mistimed the challenge just outside at the corner of his box nothing malicious or reckless and the lad went down with a leg injury. With a genuine advantage I play on for about a minute and a couple of real good chances from Reds, but Greens kept looking back at the lad on floor then, ball goes out for a corner and when I look back at the lad and manager is on treating.. He apologises and said he fell like a sack of spuds. I didnt have a word with the GK, maybe should have? And the lad carried on playing. Heard some grumblings after the Ref! Ref! When one parent said but he's playing advantage.

Then the physicality of the arms and nudges in back with shoulders etc challenges that would be free kicks if connected, but could it be seen as attempted to trip. One even did attempt to trip and didn't make contact but I gave a free kick. Dunno if I was right. Red player, shouting never touched him ref, to which I pointed out he didn't have to as he attempted to trip through poor timing and no advantage was given.

Then the advantage around the box, one instance saw me let play go a little and the lad who was fouled outside the box carried on, but then fouled again in the box. So I brought it back for the Free Kick, after giving myself thinking time. Again mumbles from parents etc.

Not sure if all this is coming across clear, but for the niggles in back and legs in for tackles, not making contact or getting ball, do you let it play out.

I didn't have any complaints from the managers although one of the away Green team was walking away after game saying that Ref was stupid, unbeknown to him I was right at his side ha ha.

Opinions appreciated.

U13's play on a 11v11 pitch?

GK makes a foul challenge at a corner of the penalty area (presuming you don't mean the corner of the goal area?)......so, GK at a corner of the area.....play an advantage that continues for a minute, 60 seconds.....?

I am fascinated to see how an attacking advantage starting on the edge of the penalty area can last for a minute without either a goal being scored or play pulled back for the original offence.....in fact if a goal isn't scored within 5 seconds, I'm pulling it back..........actually, unless the attacker is about to put the ball into an empty net, or pass it to a team mate who will do the same, I'm pulling it back.

Same for the player who was fouled outside then inside the box......if you let the first one go then you're giving a penalty for the second one....anything else will rob you of any credibility......you'll never sell pulling it back for a FK outside the box. Either give the first foul, or if their is a proper advantage then you have to give the penalty for the second challenge.

 

[Cheshire Ref]

^^^^^^^^^^^^
This is excellent advice from Mr Foot. We are often to quick to apply advantage thinking it makes us look like great referee's, don't get me wrong there are instances where it can, but they are few and far between. In this scenario like @Padfoot said unless they are squaring to a player for a clear shot at goal then there is no real advantage. The advantage would come from a free kick that they can pop into the box 15 yards closer than a corner, now for an u13 player THAT is an advantage.

 

[GraemeS]

Sorry, I cant really agree with this. It's our responsibility as referees to decide whether play continues.

Are you medically trained? I'm not. So I'm not sure how valid my medical opinion is really when trying to judge the severity of a leg injury from a distance away.

Although the laws do allow us to stop play for any reason at any time, the convention in OA football is that the ref only intervenes for clearly bleeding injuries, head injuries, or anything that looks potentially more serious than that. At lower levels, convention does allow you to stop play for injuries (and restart with a drop ball), but how bad the injury has to be to cause a stoppage depends on the age, the league and all sorts of other complicated factors.

One of the reasons I don't do youth football so much any more is that this decision will always annoy one side or the other, wheras the distinction in adult football is clearer and puts less pressure on the referee to make a medical decision. Err on the side of caution, sure, but you've still got a match that needs playing and you will still run into smart players who will take advantage of you if you stop for everything.

 

[OIREF!]

Are you medically trained? I'm not. So I'm not sure how valid my medical opinion is really when trying to judge the severity of a leg injury from a distance away.

No, I'm not medically trained. My point is simply that, as referees, it is our responsibility to make such decisions based on how we see it. I'm not saying it's easy or an exact science and we (I) don't always get in right.

 

[santa sangria]

Are you medically trained? I'm not. So I'm not sure how valid my medical opinion is really when trying to judge the severity of a leg injury from a distance away.

Although the laws do allow us to stop play for any reason at any time, the convention in OA football is that the ref only intervenes for clearly bleeding injuries, head injuries, or anything that looks potentially more serious than that. At lower levels, convention does allow you to stop play for injuries (and restart with a drop ball), but how bad the injury has to be to cause a stoppage depends on the age, the league and all sorts of other complicated factors.

One of the reasons I don't do youth football so much any more is that this decision will always annoy one side or the other, wheras the distinction in adult football is clearer and puts less pressure on the referee to make a medical decision. Err on the side of caution, sure, but you've still got a match that needs playing and you will still run into smart players who will take advantage of you if you stop for everything.

I don't agree with you here GS. So far, touch wood, I have found that stopping play for injuries with 12-16 year olds is straightforward. I had a couple of stoppages for heavy falls (with tears) yesterday with 15 year olds (drop ball re-starts), and countless stops for possible head injuries, accidental collisions etc. over the last couple of years of doing this age group.

And I fundamentally disagree with the idea that with 13 year olds you can let an injured players' team mates decide if play should carry on. Yes, you have to make a judgement call but I am quite clear that with young players safety comes first. Granted I haven't had to put up with any feigning injury from 12-18s (other time wasting yes ).

It's not a medical decision. And it's not "stopping for everything". I think it's common sense to err on the side of caution and make sure young players get attention fast if they might be seriously hurt. If anything my feeling is that this gets a positive response from parents and coaches.

(I'm not done yet, sorry) but in this game, in the middle, you have got to be willing to make decisions that will "annoy one side or the other" (sorry again but that was an open goal! )

In the best possible taste PS to the OP, your post is hard to follow but it's obvious you have answered your question - you let far too much go. By not calling the niggly fouls you made it harder to make the big decisions. Easily said in retrospect of course. And EDIT: if you do have to call some niggly fouls early it is important to be consistent.

@Danny Did you warn the players about use of arms etc.? In my limited experience (and fresh from 4 games with U15s this weekend) the players responded well to being treated with respect with basic warnings (no holding, watch the elbows etc.)

 

[GraemeS]

I don't agree with you here GS. So far, touch wood, I have found that stopping play for injuries with 12-16 year olds is straightforward. I had a couple of stoppages for heavy falls (with tears) yesterday with 15 year olds (drop ball re-starts), and countless stops for possible head injuries, accidental collisions etc. over the last couple of years of doing this age group.

And I fundamentally disagree with the idea that with 13 year olds you can let an injured players' team mates decide if play should carry on. Yes, you have to make a judgement call but I am quite clear that with young players safety comes first. Granted I haven't had to put up with any feigning injury from 12-18s (other time wasting yes ).

It's not a medical decision. And it's not "stopping for everything". I think it's common sense to err on the side of caution and make sure young players get attention fast if they might be seriously hurt. If anything my feeling is that this gets a positive response from parents and coaches.

(I'm not done yet, sorry) but in this game, in the middle, you have got to be willing to make decisions that will "annoy one side or the other" (sorry again but that was an open goal! )

In the best possible taste PS to the OP, your post is hard to follow but it's obvious you have answered your question - you let far too much go. By not calling the niggly fouls you made it harder to make the big decisions. Easily said in retrospect of course. And EDIT: if you do have to call some niggly fouls early it is important to be consistent.

@Danny Did you warn the players about use of arms etc.? In my limited experience (and fresh from 4 games with U15s this weekend) the players responded well to being treated with respect with basic warnings (no holding, watch the elbows etc.)

That's all absolutely fair - as I said, I do very very little youth football at the moment thanks to the requirements for promotion, so I'm far from an authority on this subject.

When I do these matches, I tend to find that one team will take any hesitation or delay in stopping play as an opportunity to criticise you for stopping the game too slowly, while the other will always imagine a promising attack that you've stopped by halting play unnecessarily. This has been pretty universal in my experience, wheras it's a non-issue in adult football as the guidelines are 100% clear for you to work within and everyone know what you're going to do. I have no problem annoying one side or the other, but where the law expects me to carry on and leave it up to players for anything less than a head injury, I don't see it as mandatory to step outside that bracket. Any discretion in this issue is exactly that: discretionary.

And while I agree that you can't necessarily expect the players to make the decision themselves, they will tend to listen to a manager on the side if they tell them to kick it out at this age. It also helps build good habits and sportsmanship for when they go up the ages...

 

[santa sangria]

That's all absolutely fair - as I said, I do very very little youth football at the moment thanks to the requirements for promotion, so I'm far from an authority on this subject.

When I do these matches, I tend to find that one team will take any hesitation or delay in stopping play as an opportunity to criticise you for stopping the game too slowly, while the other will always imagine a promising attack that you've stopped by halting play unnecessarily. This has been pretty universal in my experience, wheras it's a non-issue in adult football as the guidelines are 100% clear for you to work within and everyone know what you're going to do. I have no problem annoying one side or the other, but where the law expects me to carry on and leave it up to players for anything less than a head injury, I don't see it as mandatory to step outside that bracket. Any discretion in this issue is exactly that: discretionary.

And while I agree that you can't necessarily expect the players to make the decision themselves, they will tend to listen to a manager on the side if they tell them to kick it out at this age. It also helps build good habits and sportsmanship for when they go up the ages...

I am in a different country so I might be benefitting from cultural difference. I would love to go "home" and do a month in Sussex and see the difference from up here.

 

[Danny]

Thanks Guys.

To avoid any confusion, the collision was on corner of the 18 yrd box, but these lads don't play full size 11 a side pitches.

The timing of a minute may have been far less, Tbh I wasn't keeping an eye on time, buy I learnt enough from the game prior to the incident that the lad who got the ball was able to use the advantage to get a shot away. Then rebounds around and eventually breaks free.

Maybe judging by the responses here, it might pay to be a little stricter wishbone whistle. I got the impression from management of both teams that it was well reffereed and I could tell it was at a steady Temperature for a game.

Just curious if people pull up all the niggles etc.

Thanks for the feed back though

 

[Mintyref]

Back to referee basics here. Start each half applying the laws strictly. Don't let the nigglers and the petty pushers get away with it. You'll probably find they stop doing it. Once you have control, say 15/20 minutes in, then you can let some of the lesser stuff go in the interests of the flow of the game.

 

[Paul March]

i tend to give both teams the benefit of the doubt for the first 15 minutes or so, some teams want to play quickly and will always want the game to flow so will put up with a few nudges and niggles. If it becomes clear that the heat is rising I will clamp down.

The important thing I do is to tell the managers, the captains and assistants what I am doing. Therefore there are no surprises when things change or I am not on the whistle every 5 seconds.

if the first tackle is a shocker then mr nice guy disappears, I am not averse to cautioning in the opening minutes.

And on the other part- never take a chance with an injury on a youth game, no matter how insignificant it might appear to you. Stop the game, get a trainer on, get it sorted, get started again. The consequences of getting it wrong are not worth thinking about!

 

[Mooseybaby]

Am I missing something here? Is the age at which players play 5/7/9/11-a-side not set in stone by the FA or are local FA's/clubs allowed flexibility in what age players make the step up? Down here in Dorset/Hampshire/Bournemouth Leagues, under 11/12s play 9v9 on scaled down pitches (13 yard box,smaller goals) then from under 13 and above is 11v11 although I have seen a few u13/14s sides use 9v9 pitches for an 11-a-side, makes for a very congested game (are they officially allowed to do this?)

In my 7 seasons of refereeing, I have done predominantly youth football. I try to let games flow as much as possible, occasionally I have been told I am too lenient and let too much go (probably do), although in my last u14s match I was told by the away team linesman that he and the other parents were in agreement that 3 fouls in 35 minutes (2 of which were for high feet) "was being too fussy!"....

All you can do is referee what is in front of you. Some games you will be blowing frequently if gets niggly, whilst others will fly by with barely a hint of a foul. As we all know, refereeing is one of the jobs where sometimes everyone loves to hate you regardless what you do!

As for injuries, concur what has been said already, don't leave it to the players. You're the referee, stop the game and get the player's coach/1st aider on ASAP and let them assess their player. Nothing more annoying than seeing a player get up unharmed as you call on his coach, but I would rather have that than delay and then find out the player has a serious injury! Again some people might express their annoyance at you stopping the game, but would rather that than having an irritate coach/parent giving you both barrels because you failed to stop the game quick enough. Granted you can't see 360 deg at all times, but as soon as you become aware of player being down with a potential injury especially at youth level, this should be your priority!

 

[mikedn]

Youth football is difficult for exactly the reason you describe. In adults football, you stop play for a head injury, anything less is up to the players to put the ball out. In youth football, you're expected to make a judgement call. At the end of the day, if the injured players teammates kept playing on, they're the ones to blame really, but unfortunately (and unfairly) there is an expectation on you as the referee at that age level.


Technically, I think this one should have been a penalty (a penalty being a bigger advantage than a FK), and a penalty that resulted from a good advantage being played as well. But unless the in-box foul is incredibly obvious, it should be possible to sell it as a clean tackle and therefore you're coming back for the advantage. Confidence is key in this kind of decision.

Foul outside the box and he kept going..... i would have given him the advantage.... fouled then again inside the box for me most definately a penalty..... would not have brought it back for first foul.....

 

[mikedn]

Hi folks,

Just wanted to gather some opinion as to how much we like to make the game flow and pull up the game for certain things.

Yesterday I had an u13s game seemed to be no real issues, a well contested game between Red and Greens, but just wonder if I let too much flow.

One of the main talking points was when Red was attacking and keeper mistimed the challenge just outside at the corner of his box nothing malicious or reckless and the lad went down with a leg injury. With a genuine advantage I play on for about a minute and a couple of real good chances from Reds, but Greens kept looking back at the lad on floor then, ball goes out for a corner and when I look back at the lad and manager is on treating.. He apologises and said he fell like a sack of spuds. I didnt have a word with the GK, maybe should have? And the lad carried on playing. Heard some grumblings after the Ref! Ref! When one parent said but he's playing advantage.

Then the physicality of the arms and nudges in back with shoulders etc challenges that would be free kicks if connected, but could it be seen as attempted to trip. One even did attempt to trip and didn't make contact but I gave a free kick. Dunno if I was right. Red player, shouting never touched him ref, to which I pointed out he didn't have to as he attempted to trip through poor timing and no advantage was given.

Then the advantage around the box, one instance saw me let play go a little and the lad who was fouled outside the box carried on, but then fouled again in the box. So I brought it back for the Free Kick, after giving myself thinking time. Again mumbles from parents etc.

Not sure if all this is coming across clear, but for the niggles in back and legs in for tackles, not making contact or getting ball, do you let it play out.

I didn't have any complaints from the managers although one of the away Green team was walking away after game saying that Ref was stupid, unbeknown to him I was right at his side ha ha.

Opinions appreciated.

IMO at U12 age group players should and mostly do know what is or isn't a foul, if not that is down to their manager, so i would be no more lenient than OA football. Last season at a tournament an U9 player was fouled then stood up and went to thump player in face missing him by millimetres, now it would have been a full blown smack on the chin had he have connected, and he went back for seconds when he missed. I quickly stepped in, and did show him the red card and he played no further part in the tournament. The only complaint was from mummy about "its not real football its a tournament! and... "he didn't actually hit him" That player now knows he will not get away with violent behaviour no matter what age or what level of football (hopefully, but not holding my breath)

 

[Tino Best]

I ref a lot of youth football and i am quite strict on fouls,Barges are always a moaning point. A player can send another player flying to the ground and then claim it was only a shoulder ref, normally followed from a parent "theres nothing wrong with Toby keep on doing it". I would have no hesitation to get my cards out at 9v9 upwards. For younger age groups only for violence like what was just mentioned or very bad language I would use cautions. Bad fouls I would manage at 7v7 and ask for the player to be removed.