A&H

What would you do??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cheshire Ref said:
I do, do my homework on each and every team I referee, recent results league positions, last time they played each other etc. But how on earth can you do your homework on each player?

I presume you are saying the player is in fact deaf? I would have to be in that particular situation and judge it at the time.
Click to expand...
Yes, the team is from the local Deaf College (we have such a team in the local Saturday OA league). That's a comment that wouldn't register on anyone's OFFINABUSometer but it's off the scale to them.
It's not easy but you can't brush it off because you the ref isn't offended. It's not a personal attack on anyone but some of the comments in this thread appear a bit insular and fixated on the ref. I'm sure we can all improve (me included) in this area.
 
The Referee Store
As ever, the requirement for OFFINABUS as per Law 12 is quite simple and straightforward, but people like to try and complicate it by applying the "what if" scenario. Some of the examples/mitigating circumstances given on this thread are just ridiculous.
It's not for referees to pander to the PC brigade any time something is said on a football field by seeing if they can get whatever was said to fall within the remit of OFFINABUS. If it feels like it should be a red in your guts then give it. If not, then it most definitely isn't. Start refereeing a football match and stop being a tabloid journalist. :rolleyes:
 
Kes said:
There you go again. Just be a football referee Dave. Stop trying to be a therapist. Give a red for obvious OFFINABUS. Don't spend time trying to get extraordinary things to fall within it's remit. :)
Click to expand...

I was being pedantic :) I know what you're saying.
 
Monotone Whistle said:
Im in the "never offended" camp, I hear all sorts in every single game and if I get out the big red one they'd be no players left.

However, I am FAR less tolerant in youth matches, and have sent off kids for saying the same thing that on a Sat open age game wouldn't even raise an eyelid. Now, where's my popcorn?....
Click to expand...
and here we go again....are you also in the "never insulted" and "never abused" camps as well!;)

RegalRef said:
Equally, please show me how you are supposed to know if somebody else is offended, insulted or abused?
Click to expand...

most us can work out when a remark is insulting, surely

Mod edit: have some fun and learn new skills! How about using the multi quote function! And best of all, its free to use!
 
Another perpetual, spiralling down into eternally entrenched positions style argument!

Yay. :rolleyes:
 
PinnerPaul said:
and here we go again....are you also in the "never insulted" and "never abused" camps as well!;)



most us can work out when a remark is insulting, surely

Mod edit: have some fun and learn new skills! How about using the multi quote function! And best of all, its free to use!
Click to expand...
You're talking to someone who still has a Nokia - I'm a lost cause I'm afraid!;)
 
Fair enough I guess. It's not like you couldn't say the comment was offensive in any context anyway

Oh, and Kes seems to be arguing that 'even though OFFINABUS is subjective/grey, you're all foolsif you want to discuss the subjective/grey element'

Probably should shut down the forum then, given there's no point discussing anything in the LOTG.
 
Last edited:
CapnBloodbeard said:
Fair enough I guess. It's not like you couldn't say the comment was offensive in any context anyway

Oh, and Kes seems to be arguing that 'even though OFFINABUS is subjective/grey, you're all foolsif you want to discuss the subjective/grey element'

Probably should shut down the forum then, given there's no point discussing anything in the LOTG.
Click to expand...

Mate, you'd argue with your own reflection you would. :rolleyes:

I've said nothing of the sort. The fact remains that pontificating on a internet forum for hours over a law issue that can throw up so many permutations as to what does or doesn't constitute OFFINABUS but yet requires a fairly instant decision in real life means that it is now fairly pointless on the thread. I also have no time for overly PC crap in football. That's all.

No need to fling those toys just yet fella. ;)
 
Good response Kes. Doing yourself proud. Especially given it's yourself that has the dissenting opinion here :rolleyes::rolleyes:

The fact that it throws up 'permutations' is precisely WHY it's worth discussing. It's highly subjective/grey. Which is why it needs discussion.
Simply 'you'll make a decision when it happens' is a terrible answer. It's absolutely meaningless, not at all helpful (so are comments about 'overly PC crap, IMO'. It's a lazy sort of statement that people can just throw at something to write it off without even considering what's being said. I'm sure any resident of mississippi is considers not calling black people n****** 'overly PC crap'. Football is cracking down on homophobic comments, but I'm sure there are plenty who would consider a red card for calling somebody a 'f****t' to be 'overly PC crap'. Debating whether or not using a mental illness or disability as derogatory isn't 'overly PC crap'. It certainly wasn't to the mentally disabled person at the game, was it? So clearly these comments have a real impact! Maybe that's something you should consider before you just write off any offence you don't personally share).

Similar to 'you can tell what's offensive' sort of comments. I know a referee who sent a player off for using the lord's name in vain. I'm sure not every referee has caught up to the fact that homophobic slurs should be a red card - and there are probably referees who would only caution a player for a sexist insult against a female AR. There are massive differences across interpretations - discussion like this are referees seeking to find a measure of consistently. Isn't that beneficial for all?

This forum is about refining the decision making process, how to reach that decision. And this thread has been about.people trying to nut out what's fair, what things should and shouldn't be considered, whether the LOTG is meant to consider or apply to this situation or that.

Pretty much the entire point of the forums really.

It's a forum - you get to choose what threads to participate in. If you think discussing OFFINABUS is pointless, then don't participate in the thread. It's win-win.
 
Last edited:
CapnBloodbeard said:
It's absolutely meaningless, not at all helpful (so are comments about 'overly PC crap, IMO'. It's a lazy sort of statement that people can just throw at something to write it off without even considering what's being said. I'm sure any resident of mississippi is considers not calling black people n****** 'overly PC crap'. Football is cracking down on homophobic comments, but I'm sure there are plenty who would consider a red card for calling somebody a 'f****t' to be 'overly PC crap'. Debating whether or not using a mental illness or disability as derogatory isn't 'overly PC crap'. It certainly wasn't to the mentally disabled person at the game, was it? So clearly these comments have a real impact! Maybe that's something you should consider before you just write off any offence you don't personally share).

Similar to 'you can tell what's offensive' sort of comments. I know a referee who sent a player off for using the lord's name in vain. I'm sure not every referee has caught up to the fact that homophobic slurs should be a red card - and there are probably referees who would only caution a player for a sexist insult against a female AR. There are massive differences across interpretations - discussion like this are referees seeking to find a measure of consistently. Isn't that beneficial for all?
Click to expand...

Thats the trouble with bringing politics into sport. Because by using your examples that's all your doing. Political correctness is just another farcical element of modern-day society which seems to have miraculously appeared at around about the same time as an army of lawyers and litigation experts invaded the UK. Good manners is good manners. PC is more about thought-control. Philosophical rant over. Besides, I know that you and others on here won't agree with it so there's no point in going off on a tangent.
Suffice to say, the very nature of OFFINABUS is personal to each individual and therefore needs to be kept simple and to a very basic level for referees. We have no right to visit/enforce our own personal views (or PC agenda) on any (unsuspecting or otherwise) footballer for uttering something which may or may not have been OFFINABUS to somebody one week and not the next. I do hope the player whom your idiot associate sent of for "using the Lord's name in vain" appealed his card, won his appeal and that the referee in question was suitably reprimanded for being a complete spoonhead!! :eek:

The rest of your post I actually agree with. It wasn't for me to just dismiss the notion of debating the subject on here so you were right - the debate is beneficial to all. I'll try and wind my neck in a bit sooner next time. ;) :D
 
Kes said:
Thats the trouble with bringing politics into sport. Because by using your examples that's all your doing. Political correctness is just another farcical element of modern-day society which seems to have miraculously appeared at around about the same time as an army of lawyers and litigation experts invaded the UK. Good manners is good manners. PC is more about thought-control. Philosophical rant over. Besides, I know that you and others on here won't agree with it so there's no point in going off on a tangent.
Suffice to say, the very nature of OFFINABUS is personal to each individual and therefore needs to be kept simple and to a very basic level for referees. We have no right to visit/enforce our own personal views (or PC agenda) on any (unsuspecting or otherwise) footballer for uttering something which may or may not have been OFFINABUS to somebody one week and not the next. I do hope the player whom your idiot associate sent of for "using the Lord's name in vain" appealed his card, won his appeal and that the referee in question was suitably reprimanded for being a complete spoonhead!! :eek:

The rest of your post I actually agree with. It wasn't for me to just dismiss the notion of debating the subject on here so you were right - the debate is beneficial to all. I'll try and wind my neck in a bit sooner next time. ;) :D
Click to expand...

So, what you're saying is that OFFINABUS shouldn't be enforced when it may not be offensive to somebody the following week?

Sorry, @Kes, but that's something I wholeheartedly disagree with. To take your point on "using the Lord's name in vain", I'm making the assumption that the referee found it offensive enough to constitute OFFINABUS. If so, he was well within his rights to dismiss for that. There's an age old legal principle known as the "egg shell skull" rule, which basically means that you take your victim as you find him. You cannot assume that nobody will be offended, if it is offensive to you as the referee, you dismiss, regardless of whether next weeks ref/player finds it offensive or not.

To take your view would be overly simplistic in my opinion, purely because OFFINABUS is so subjective.
 
It's at times like these that I like to reflect on the need for good old Victorian politeness on forums. Rather than just breaking out the pitch forks and drawing battle lines every few days over whatever topic is currently being micro argued.

But then perhaps I am just old fashioned

Discussion and debate = healthy. Bitter entrenched argument = unhealthy

:ninja:
 
  • Like
Reactions: DB
Matthew said:
So, what you're saying is that OFFINABUS shouldn't be enforced when it may not be offensive to somebody the following week?

No, I'm not saying that at all Matthew. I'm simply saying that it shouldn't be a lottery from one game to the next based on the multitudinous possibilities that somebody within earshot on that day might just find it to be OFFINABUS.

Sorry, @Kes, but that's something I wholeheartedly disagree with. To take your point on "using the Lord's name in vain", I'm making the assumption that the referee found it offensive enough to constitute OFFINABUS. If so, he was well within his rights to dismiss for that.
Click to expand...

For that particular referee to impose his own personal religious belief on that particular player was (IMO) an absolute disgrace. Nothing less. He had no more right to abuse that use of his power than the player did to expect to be sent off for it. What about the players rights?

How many times have you seen/heard a team captain turn and bollock one of his players publically (not necessarily using any obscenities) on the pitch for a misdemeanour/error. Would you send him off for that? Maybe like most, you'd just consider that to be a normal part of the game? Hows about if the player found it offensive? What if he found it insulting and offensive to be humiliated in front of everybody like that? What would you do? Ask him? "Erm excuse me No 4 but are you in any way offended or insulted by those comments from your team mate?". :rolleyes: He might laugh at you eh? How about if he comes up to you and says "Hey, ref, are you going to let him get away with insulting me/my ability like that? My family are watching me today". What then?
The whole premise of it is a complete minefield if you try and view it subjectively which is why I stand by the base of what I said earlier.

Far too many people these days try to draw attention to themselves by claiming to be "offended". Let them, that's their right, but don't be trying to do it on their behalf as a referee. It's about the football, not the politics. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top