Assessor says not to use verbal warnings for fouls?

[GraemeS]

Agreed.
I'm actually very communicative verbally with the players but only to further aid that communication process when necessary. For instance, in response to appeals for fouls (which I'm not giving) or say, for an appeal that the ball has gone out of play when there's no flag, and I don't believe that it has.
In these cases, shouting something like "No, that's okay - that's a good challenge" or "Keep going gentlemen - play on please" respectively, helps with the flow of the game and aids your match control. Consistantly warning players prior to tackles/challenges however as alluded to by @Lefelee is not something I'll indulge in. A player can play the "victim" card the minute you warn him. If he wants to make a stupid tackle that might cost him a card that's his business.

Couple that with the fact that I've had occasions where I've seen players going in for a tackle or a 50:50 and my whistle is half way to my lips already, then they somehow manage to make it a legal tackle. You'd look like an idiot if you "coached" them into not doing that tackle, they still did and then you had to admit that there was no foul in the end anyway.

 

[Mewcenary]

It's a judgement call. There are cases where a strong talking to for a careless-but-close-to-reckless challenge is appropriate. Other times, depending on the context and temperature of the match, you will switch to considering it reckless and issuing the caution.

The important thing is not to shirk away from a caution when the EXPECTATION is to caution.

 

[ref craig]

I find using steady and all that other things if I can bring my foul count down to say 15 instead of having 30 odd works and you end up with less cautions or even sending offs

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

Last weekend an assessor told the referee in a game I assisted in that you should not issue public verbal warnings for fouls by themselves, as there are only three types of fouls, careless, reckless and using excessive force. According to him, in about 80% of cases where referees issue such warnings the tackle is reckless and worthy of a caution, but the referee doesn't have the courage to caution the player. For last 20% no verbal warning is needed or at most a quick, quiet word with the offender is enough.

He went on to claim that verbal warnings are a very good thing to use for players getting close to a caution for persistent infringement or dissent, but that a tackle is either careless (no card or verbal warning needed, but that the referee could very well have a quiet word with the player) or reckless and worthy of a caution.

Actually, I very much agree with him, but this seems like a very controversial opinion, you see referees at all levels giving such dressing downs for fouls that more often than not merit a booking, and in my assessed games, both as R and AR, I or the referee have very often heard from assessors that we have given verbal warnings for caution-worthy fouls.

What is your view?

My view? I literally have no idea what that assessor is saying - and from your post, neither does he!!!

So, 'referees should never issue warnings for fouls except for about 20% of cases and when players are close to a caution and in that case you should warn the player but you definintely should not warn the player'

Either you've conveyed what he said poorly or he was assessing drunk.....

I feel like we're missing something here. Do you tend to shout out 'easy' or some such after most normal careless fouls? Or has he criticised you for using roadblocks?

I'm not a fan of talking to players too much before a foul - it can baulk a player, or sometimes it can warn a player that he's about to be challenged. If you can see he looks like he's about to do something daft or he looks heated then fair enough - or if they're getting a bit handsy then you can tell them hands down before it reaches the point where you need to blow the whistle.

 

[Peter Grove]

So what's that whole warning players about holding before a corner kick is taken malarky then - you see that quite often at all levels as well?
In fact didn't Howard Webb award a penalty in a World Cup match for holding (from a fk in this case I think) AFTER issuing a warning before the kick was taken?

That's following the law to the absolute letter. LotG 2015-16, page 120 (pdf edition) states:

Referees are reminded to make an early intervention and to deal firmly with holding offences especially inside the penalty area at corner kicks and free kicks.
To deal with these situations:
• the referee must warn any player holding an opponent before the ball is in play
• caution the player if the holding continues before the ball is in play
• award a direct free kick or penalty kick and caution the player if it happens once the ball is in play