Question of the day - referees should be tougher
- Thread starter SM
- Start date
The lotg allow and expect referees to caution players for dissent (backchat) and they allow and expect referees to send players off for OFFINABUS. How much tougher do you want them to be?
Floggings for yellow, hangings for red, perhaps
Your premise is wrong, your headline is right, imho of course
Floggings for yellow, hangings for red, perhaps
Your premise is wrong, your headline is right, imho of course
HertsFinest
Next Weeks Ref
Agree with haywain. Again! Jesus wept, REALLY need to get down quacks!
I agree with the headline. But the laws are tough enough. I just wish there was less Last Weeks Ref going on and all referees stuck to their responsibility to dismiss players every time for OFFINABUS
It is also my opinion that the stepped approach for dissent is wrong. Players should know that dissent is a caution and shouldn't get 3 strikes before going in the book for it
also IMHO of course
I agree with the headline. But the laws are tough enough. I just wish there was less Last Weeks Ref going on and all referees stuck to their responsibility to dismiss players every time for OFFINABUS
It is also my opinion that the stepped approach for dissent is wrong. Players should know that dissent is a caution and shouldn't get 3 strikes before going in the book for it
also IMHO of course
HertsFinest
Next Weeks Ref
Not sure in what sense you mean this post...
I don't follow rugby at all. But I was wondering the other day how exactly they got to the point where the referees are so respected by the players. A friend of mine referees rugby and is stunned by the horror stories I tell about footballers.
I don't think there will ever get a point where the players shut up sadly. Also one thing I took from the weekend is this season I've made a massive effort to be stricter and enforce the lotg much more than I have in the past and feel a better referee for it. However the team I had at the weekend had so many moans players I let more slip than I would. There were two who normally would have got booked by my, however after the game I realised I'd let them slide as if they'd been booked I'd have had another 6 at least in the book from there team. Looking back it was wrong of me, but at the time it seemed it would make my life easier than giving myself a rod for my own back by giving out so many yellows.
I think 'last weeks ref' has a lot to do with this. There is massive inconsistency between different referees on what they find acceptable and not acceptable behaviour.
If all referees took the same line on dissent and OFFINABUS, within a small amount of time, the rates at which they occur would lessen. However the main problem with this, comes back to the fact that it is a personal opinion of each and every referee as to whether someone has overstepped the mark or not. What I find offensive, the next referee may not, for whatever reason.
Like a lot of things in life, they work in theory. However, how and if this could ever be implemented, I doubt it.
How many times have we been watching a game, mainly local parks etc, and heard a player say something towards the referee, that we say to ourselves ''He would have walked if he had spoken to me like that''? But yet the referee on that day doesn't even pull the player up on it.
I have no doubt that if there was some sort of trail, even in a local Sunday league (if any such league would be brave / daft enough, is a different matter), that if a player verbally abused a referee using offensive language he would be sent off. I'm sure that there would soon be a sharp decline in the number of such incidents. However, that scenario still leaves you with the problem we currently face of being told to decipher between what is frustration and what is dissent or OFFINABUS.
After that, I still have no answer. Just wasted three minutes typing.
If all referees took the same line on dissent and OFFINABUS, within a small amount of time, the rates at which they occur would lessen. However the main problem with this, comes back to the fact that it is a personal opinion of each and every referee as to whether someone has overstepped the mark or not. What I find offensive, the next referee may not, for whatever reason.
Like a lot of things in life, they work in theory. However, how and if this could ever be implemented, I doubt it.
How many times have we been watching a game, mainly local parks etc, and heard a player say something towards the referee, that we say to ourselves ''He would have walked if he had spoken to me like that''? But yet the referee on that day doesn't even pull the player up on it.
I have no doubt that if there was some sort of trail, even in a local Sunday league (if any such league would be brave / daft enough, is a different matter), that if a player verbally abused a referee using offensive language he would be sent off. I'm sure that there would soon be a sharp decline in the number of such incidents. However, that scenario still leaves you with the problem we currently face of being told to decipher between what is frustration and what is dissent or OFFINABUS.
After that, I still have no answer. Just wasted three minutes typing.
One of my good referee chums ,came to football from being a Rugby referee .......he started off dishing out hundreds of cards a season ......and still does ...lol very officious and strict , but there is no right or wrong way ,so long as you let the managers and captains know what you expect pre match , there shouldn't be a problem
Im more of a man management referee myself and do a lot of talking during the game but that's just what works for me.
Im more of a man management referee myself and do a lot of talking during the game but that's just what works for me.
HertsFinest
Next Weeks Ref
And this is exactly the point. The laws are the laws. Players shouldn't need spoonfeeding what each referee expects before each match... There should be consistency throughout and thus we should not have to run through players before games what we expect
I personally referee to the law (give or take genuine mistakes) and thus don't do any pre match talk with teams nor captains. I then ref to law and if cards come out, they only have themselves to blame. Captains just get "morning fella, morning fella, heads or tails away skipper? Which end then mate? Have a good game lads" ..... Blow whistle. Simples
Totally agree with you my prematch is to say my little personal bits like studs are for grip not to win the ball , if my assistants have to call me over ...card !! and advantage etc
Basics about dissent and foul and abusive there is no need ......
I have seen many referees on a sunday morning being ripped a new arsehole by players abusing them and they do nothing about it
Basics about dissent and foul and abusive there is no need ......
I have seen many referees on a sunday morning being ripped a new arsehole by players abusing them and they do nothing about it
SM
The avuncular one
Is the problem that the severity of the punishment for early or fairly minor dissent is too harsh? There is no middle ground punishment before pulling out the card. Would some other type of intermediate punishment help, like the rugby 10 yards for even a tiny bit of dissent?
Yes monkey there is a middle ground for minor dissent , next time the ball goes out call aver and public rebuke with captain !!!! after the first one though the captain should have told them ...... then they are all going in after that think they class it as a stepped approach .......which is....... Step in with a card in your hand ....