A&H

Substitutions and Technical Area Participant Offences

G

george.g

Active Member
Level 5 Referee
Based on an incident I very poorly managed earlier this season -

If a substitute enters the FOP, having left their technical area to do so, to remonstrate against your decision, what do you dismiss them for? (Given it’s not OFFINABUS).

Is is 2 cautionable offences, entering FoP w/o permission, then dissent?

Is it a straight red based on Team Official Offences as per Law 12? In my head these can’t apply in this instance.
 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
george.g said:
Based on an incident I very poorly managed earlier this season -

If a substitute enters the FOP, having left their technical area to do so, to remonstrate against your decision, what do you dismiss them for? (Given it’s not OFFINABUS).

Is is 2 cautionable offences, entering FoP w/o permission, then dissent?

Is it a straight red based on Team Official Offences as per Law 12? In my
head these can’t apply in this instance.
Click to expand...
I don’t honk you can give a straight red.

potentially you could give two cautions, one for entering the field and one for dissent. And potentially you manage with a single caution, depending on how extreme.
 
Would definitely be getting 2 yellows from me, followed by my swift moving away from the area waiting for the others to join in, as usual
 
socal lurker said:
Sounds like a sub asking to be sent off…
Click to expand...
It does, doesn't it. And for some reason I didn't.

I disallowed a 'goal, as it hit the side netting so hard it ripped it and went into the back of the net. I awarded a goal kick, after verifying and showing the damage to the goal to the attacking team. By this point, the sub (player/manager) had marched over to the goal area to remonstrate with me.

For whatever reason, I sent him away, but didn't actually card him. And before someone tells me I should, I'm in disbelief at myself when I think of it!
 
Not to hijack the thread but what if the substitute was a player and the manager as you find many do at lower ends of the pyramid? Is the straight red sellable for the same scenario?
 
Josh the referee said:
Not to hijack the thread but what if the substitute was a player and the manager as you find many do at lower ends of the pyramid? Is the straight red sellable for the same scenario?
Click to expand...
This was my situation in fairness. As they were listed on my team sheet in the subs box, as opposed to the Tech Area Occupants box, I classes them as such.
 
If it was a Y for entering fop and then dissent, wouldn't it result in a sin bin or had they already picked up a caution?
 
If he's named on the teamsheet as player, then I believe that he should be treated as a player (regardless of whether he is also the manager) thus not a 'technical area occupant'

LOTG state a substitute or substituted player is cautioned if guilty of any of the following offences:
- delaying the restart of play
- dissent by word or action
- entering or re-entering the field of play without the referees permission
- unsporting behaviour
- entering the referee review area
- excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal

The sin bin guidance states that if a substitute commits an act of dissent, then they are issued with a standard Dissent Caution (you would just note when reporting via WGS that the player was a substitute at the time of offence, which is why the sin bin wasn't used)

So, a double caution would be supportable in law. Whether that was or wasn't the right thing to do at the time, only you will know the answer to as you were the only one there. But it's definitely one caution at an absolute minimum.

Of course, if anything that was said you deemed to be OFFINABUS, then that would be a straight red. Likewise, if he was just the manager and not named on the teamsheet as a player, the same offence is also a red.
 
Viridis1886 said:
If course, yes. Too early to be thinking. I'm glad I don't referee at this time!
Click to expand...
To be fair, my initial thought on reading was also that then it would only be a sin-bin but I then managed to correct myself before posting it! 😆
 
george.g said:
It does, doesn't it. And for some reason I didn't.

I disallowed a 'goal, as it hit the side netting so hard it ripped it and went into the back of the net. I awarded a goal kick, after verifying and showing the damage to the goal to the attacking team. By this point, the sub (player/manager) had marched over to the goal area to remonstrate with me.

For whatever reason, I sent him away, but didn't actually card him. And before someone tells me I should, I'm in disbelief at myself when I think of it!
Click to expand...
Depending on what level the game was at, I wouldn't beat yourself up too badly. If its at supply league or above with proper technical areas and benches etc then it's probably easier to deal with than if it's on a park pitch where they tend to stand at the side but in theory there isn't much to stop them freely moving around. Also, any time you encounter a situation that you don't expect and haven't had before, it can be hard to know how to react.
 
CA1992 said:
If he's named on the teamsheet as player, then I believe that he should be treated as a player (regardless of whether he is also the manager) thus not a 'technical area occupant'

LOTG state a substitute or substituted player is cautioned if guilty of any of the following offences:
- delaying the restart of play
- dissent by word or action
- entering or re-entering the field of play without the referees permission
- unsporting behaviour
- entering the referee review area
- excessively using the 'review' (TV screen) signal

The sin bin guidance states that if a substitute commits an act of dissent, then they are issued with a standard Dissent Caution (you would just note when reporting via WGS that the player was a substitute at the time of offence, which is why the sin bin wasn't used)

So, a double caution would be supportable in law. Whether that was or wasn't the right thing to do at the time, only you will know the answer to as you were the only one there. But it's definitely one caution at an absolute minimum.

Of course, if anything that was said you deemed to be OFFINABUS, then that would be a straight red. Likewise, if he was just the manager and not named on the teamsheet as a player, the same offence is also a red.
Click to expand...
Back when I was an L4 this generated a lot of interest as a player manager got sent to the stands for irresponsible behaviour in the technical area. He then tried to come on as a sub and the referee refused this as he had been "sent off". The league had to ask the FA for advice and the answer back was that he should have been allowed to play, as the action that he had been sent to the stands for was a non-playing offence, whereas had he been sent to the stand for VC or OFFINABUS he would not be allowed to play as they were offences that would see a player sent off. I distinctly remember sitting in the league meeting when they tried to explain that and everyone was looking around at each other scratching their heads.

I assume that is no longer an issue though now that cards are shown to technical area participants.
 
RustyRef said:
I assume that is no longer an issue though now that cards are shown to technical area participants.
Click to expand...
Yep, and coupled with, at least the leagues I do, if a manager/TA occupant is dismissed they must go to a placed that does not afford them a viewing the pitch.
 
I had a similar situation. Substitute enters field to remonstrate with an opposition player uses foil and abusive language. I straight red him because I thought he was an official. After I realise he was a sub and I thought.. I can’t straight Red him for entering the field of play .. it would have to be two yellows. I sold it by saying it was for foul and abusive but there were plenty of others that could have gone for the same thing!
 
Redref34 said:
I had a similar situation. Substitute enters field to remonstrate with an opposition player uses foil and abusive language. I straight red him because I thought he was an official. After I realise he was a sub and I thought.. I can’t straight Red him for entering the field of play .. it would have to be two yellows. I sold it by saying it was for foul and abusive but there were plenty of others that could have gone for the same thing!
Click to expand...
I'm surprised you had to sell it as I didn't think most would realise the difference in consequences 🤷🏻‍♂️
 
They didn’t .. but I thought it would be easier to explain why I hadn’t sent off others for language then I why I had sent off a substitute incorrectly in law .. for the record .. I think that a substitute entering the field of play and demonstrating with someone should be sent off but I’m not sure I would with two yellow cards if I was presented with the situation again!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top