Justylove
RefChat Addict
What have I stated that makes me look incompetent?
Also a question. A player misses an open goal and shouts "you Mong" at a loud volume do you send him off for OFFINABUS on the basis that it's offensive?
Swearing on the pitch
- Thread starter QuaverRef
- Start date
- Status
Also a question. A player misses an open goal and shouts "you Mong" at a loud volume do you send him off for OFFINABUS on the basis that it's offensive?
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
So...you have told the players that swearing is unacceptable and not to do it......why is it unacceptable? So they ignore you and do it anyway......you have already decided that it is unacceptable (and lets be honest, it's because it's offensive) so you know you need to take some action......unfortunately the LOTG only allows one course of action for offensive language......but you don't want to take that option (for god only knows what reason) so you try to invent something that will let you cop out of sending the player off.......
Basically, it's your own fault.....you have backed yourself into a corner by telling the players before the game that swearing is unacceptable and not to do it.......which suddenly becomes crystal clear when they ignore you and do it anyway......when the realisation sets in that you now need to dismiss the player if you are going to do the job properly.....but because it might that frustrated shout which normally would never be viewed as OFFINABUS, except that your pre match instructions has now turned it into OFFINABUS because you've already set your stall out that swearing is unacceptable......so you desperately grasp at anything that offers you a way out of the hole you have dug for yourself, and invent some mythical instance of dissent that allows to swerve your responsibility yet try to hang on to some semblance of credibility.
For a start a petulant and childish post using "Mrs Brown" in ridiculous statements.....
Who has he shouted it at? Himself?
Has it provoked a reaction from anyone?
Is it a disability match?
Context.
Consider this one then.......a black player misses the same open goal and shouts "Damn N*gger...".......is he walking?
I completely agree that context matters, as there are extremely few words that are inherently offensive, however used. Yet that last example is perhaps one for which you can argue an absolutist interpretation, unless you are presented with the alleged John Terry scenario ("I didn't say ...").
As regards tolerance of standard swear words, the mere presence of children, for example, will never be a factor in making something more offensive (and thus worthy of a red card). Propriety is a matter of perception, and it's not something I would be inclined to police. Maintaining consistency across a competition would be very difficult if you went down that route.
And yes, stating what you will and won't allow in specific terms is to make a rod for your own back.
As regards tolerance of standard swear words, the mere presence of children, for example, will never be a factor in making something more offensive (and thus worthy of a red card). Propriety is a matter of perception, and it's not something I would be inclined to police. Maintaining consistency across a competition would be very difficult if you went down that route.
And yes, stating what you will and won't allow in specific terms is to make a rod for your own back.
Justylove
RefChat Addict
wires crossed maybe here.
1) i don't think I've ever stated I'd tell the players what is an isn't acceptable language. I do agree that if I had gone down that path it's a slippery slope and I'm backed into a corner.
2) my question, which you've ignored is "who decides what is offensive or not?" I've stated that as the Referee, it's down to me to decide what is an isn't, no-one else.
3) my reference to Mrs Brown was in reply to another poster using that example
4) when it comes to The Offensive element, does it matter whether he's shouted it to himself or not? I'm not looking at Abusive or Insulting, purely Offensive, which comes back to point 2.
Feel free to reply, but I'm out on this thread.
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
2 & 4....you need to consider whether a word or phrase is intended to be offensive, regardless of whether it achieves the desired result, and whether certain words/phrases are just inherently offensive, even if you personally don't find them offensive........and that is where most referees get it wrong. They think because they don't find something offensive then no one else should and therefore it isn't offensive. This is massively incorrect, why context is important and why you have to think beyond your own moral standards.
Personally, there is very little that I find offensive....I work in an industry where robust language is the norm, where the banter would have the snowflakes crying over their lentils and where I am more than capable of dishing it out. However, this doesn't mean that I cannot see when someone is trying to be offensive, insulting or abusive and take the required action regardless of whether I, or anyone else, is actually offended, insulted or abused.
one
RefChat Addict
This wasn’t about “getting you” and being elated about it. It was about understanding if you send a player off every time he/she swears in frustration and there is a good chance someone in the crowd is offended. In most cases not by a great deal to get a reaction out but nonetheless offended. It sounds as though you don’t.
I have never had to red card or yellow carded “as a result of” swearing for frustration. That includes yellow carding for dissent or USB. But I have warned players for it quietly and publicly. Reading what you have said warning them is also cop out which is a fair statement. However I think it want the real intent of the LOTG for a player to be sent off in these cases.
I am happy with the alternative approach you are taking/advising which is “pretend you didn't hear it”. But be under no illusion because it is also a cop out or bottling it. Why would you pretend you didn’t hear it if you don’t think it was offensive?
Padfoot
The Persecuted One
You are misquoting or misapplying what I said.......the "pretend you didn't hear it..." remark was made in connection with a game where you have warned players pre match that you will not tolerate swearing and that they are not to do it, rather than a general strategy which you seem to be suggesting?
Why do referees make ridiculous statements about what they think they intent of the LOTG is/was when trying to justify their actions in not applying the LOTG correctly? The LOTG are clear when it comes to offences dealing with OFFINABUS.......its a red card.
So you would send someone off for language which no-one found offensive, insulting or abusive?
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
I know it’s fun to argue with @Padfoot, but did you actually read anything he wrote?
In the context of some of the earlier posts in this thread, if no one finds the language used offensive, insulting, or abusive then why are people saying they’d verbally warn the player, and if they continued to use that language then they’d make up a dissent caution rather than send the player off.
If you, as the referee, determine that the language a player uses is offensive, insulting, or abusive then there is only 1 route available, and that is a red card.
I can accept that if a player is just generally swearing (such as out of frustration etc) that a obvious warning may be suitable before the red card, but if they continue then it has to be a red card.
If no one within earshot is going to find the language used offensive, insulting, or abusive then I would question why the player has been warned.
I agree. Suggesting that straightforward swearing can be punished in the absence of offence or insulting/abusive intent is making up laws. But so is a dissent caution if you do decided to punish language that someone is being offended by. If I tell a player not to spit at his opponent and he does so, am I going to try and justify a caution for "disobeying an instruction"? The correct punishment there is a red card, and it's the same if you consider OFFINABUS to apply.
I think what clouds the waters here is that some leagues have a zero tolerance for ANY swearing, they ask refs to send off players, I think one was in the North East somewhere.I'd of been a lonely man in my times obeying that rule with my usual miscreants!!!
one
RefChat Addict
A couple of things.
What is offensive what is not? I wont open that can of worms. I know Rusty will close this down in a snap of a finger
, but I think most would agree that swearing in frustration is not in the same category as swearing at someone. I also think that many agree that some people (especially mothers/partners with very young children on the sideline) get offended to some degree by swearing even in frustration. (oops I think I just opened the can of worms)
Secondly, I sometimes wonder if some advise on here is "do as I say not as I do".
What is offensive what is not? I wont open that can of worms. I know Rusty will close this down in a snap of a finger
, but I think most would agree that swearing in frustration is not in the same category as swearing at someone. I also think that many agree that some people (especially mothers/partners with very young children on the sideline) get offended to some degree by swearing even in frustration. (oops I think I just opened the can of worms)Secondly, I sometimes wonder if some advise on here is "do as I say not as I do".
A Freethinker
RefChat Addict
What about a Christian asking them to stop swearing because it is against their religion and they find it offensive?
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
There is a Church league where I am, and the behaviour and language used would not impress the big man in the sky if he was indeed watching !!!
As I mentioned, I have no desire (nor right) to police morality or propriety as dictated by a religion (least of all on the field). A Christian is entitled to take that up with the club/player. Unless the words are offensive/insulting to the religion itself or abusive to the individual, I won't invoke the laws of the game.
Presumably all directives (concerning language) from leagues are advisory, though they of course have a right to ask you not to referee again.
Presumably all directives (concerning language) from leagues are advisory, though they of course have a right to ask you not to referee again.
zarathustra
RefChat Addict
But again it comes down to context.
It isn’t about whether you (as the referee) find something offensive, it’s whether you deem it to be offensive (to someone).
A pitch in the middle of nowhere where the only spectator is a cow in the next field over, I’m more relaxed (as long as it isn’t at some one), if they’re screaming it at the top of their lungs then I’ll ask them to keep it down or to choose another word, however if they continue then they’ll get themselves a red, in those situations I’ll give the client enough rope to hang themselves with.
But, a pitch surrounded by houses I will be much more proactive in trying to get the players to control their language, even if I don’t personally find the language offensive I’m sure that Mrs Johnson at number 48 doesn’t want to listen to Big Bazza f’ing and blinding every time time he slices a shot while she is enjoying a cup of tea on Sunday morning.
I’d still give warnings, if it’s general swearing out of frustration etc. But I’ll be quicker to deal with it.
Thankfully the leagues I referee in it isn’t much of a problem, there’s swearing, obviously, but players rarely go over the top etc.
There is a team near me who were very close to losing their pitch last season, it was surrounded on two sides by houses and was next to the local community center. The local residents had started a petition due to the language etc used during games.
I agree with your sentiments, but I just think this is too large an issue for the laws to deal with. If there are neighbourhood concerns, it is for the the club and the community to resolve.
I interpret 'offensive' in the laws as pertaining only to definitions 1 & 5, not 2 or 3 (however valid these may be in a wider context, they are too subjective):
1.
causing resentful displeasure; highly irritating, angering, or annoying:
offensive television commercials.
2.
unpleasant or disagreeable to the sense:
an offensive odor.
3.
repugnant to the moral sense, good taste, or the like; insulting:
an offensive remark; an offensive joke.
4.
pertaining to offense or attack:
the offensive movements of their troops.
5.
characterized by attack; aggressive:
offensive warfare.
I interpret 'offensive' in the laws as pertaining only to definitions 1 & 5, not 2 or 3 (however valid these may be in a wider context, they are too subjective):
1.
causing resentful displeasure; highly irritating, angering, or annoying:
offensive television commercials.
2.
unpleasant or disagreeable to the sense:
an offensive odor.
3.
repugnant to the moral sense, good taste, or the like; insulting:
an offensive remark; an offensive joke.
4.
pertaining to offense or attack:
the offensive movements of their troops.
5.
characterized by attack; aggressive:
offensive warfare.
santa sangria
RefChat Addict
Surely #3 is one of the key subjective problem areas for us to interpret and handle. I don't see how you can count it out!
The weaker end of #3 often straddles the line between USB/dissent and offensive language/gestures I think - e.g simple example of the sarcastic clap/dig/joke at the opposition's expense... it's insulting, but surely we don't interpret it as a red card, we file it under USB... but probably warn first, depending on the level, match context and detail of the action...
The weaker end of #3 often straddles the line between USB/dissent and offensive language/gestures I think - e.g simple example of the sarcastic clap/dig/joke at the opposition's expense... it's insulting, but surely we don't interpret it as a red card, we file it under USB... but probably warn first, depending on the level, match context and detail of the action...
To be honest, much of this is easier to decide in practice than theory. My point is not that morally repugnant statements should never be sending off offences. I am saying that, by and large, they are very small considerations compared to impact upon a person.
If a player uses a few profanities after he misses a great chance or in order to motivate, and a vicar happens to be nearby, that's not magically going to make it a red.
I just don't think it is possible or fair to judge content based on who is present, but tone/aggression/aim are very important factors.
For example, would you dismiss a player for calmly stating an atheist world view if the captain of the opposition was a devout Christian?
If a player uses a few profanities after he misses a great chance or in order to motivate, and a vicar happens to be nearby, that's not magically going to make it a red.
I just don't think it is possible or fair to judge content based on who is present, but tone/aggression/aim are very important factors.
For example, would you dismiss a player for calmly stating an atheist world view if the captain of the opposition was a devout Christian?
Ciley Myrus
RefChat Addict
Its not really a matter for simply the clubs and community. Its more simple than that. Its for YOU, as referee, its YOUR pitch during your game, you call the shots and YOU are responsible for what goes on during your visit You decide if the colours clash, you decide if the park is playable, you are responsible for volume, tone and nature of what is going on.
If Mrs Brown complains to the facility, they simply would ask the league as to who the referee was that allowed the offensiveness to continue and you would be answering to your association as to why you allowed it.
- Status