A&H

Open Age Tolerance for showing cards, first game as a trainee ref

N

NotAnthonyTaylor

New Member
New ref here.

Had my first game recently. Open age league match, and I gave my first ever yellow card for a reckless challenge. Player apologised, and I had no significant incidents for the rest of the match.

I was very confident it was RP, but after the match the manager and a few players told me they thought it was soft. The manager also tried to convince me not to log the card online. After speaking with a few people, I've been told it's quite common for referees at this level to be very forgiving with their cards, and often not even reporting the cards online so players don't get a fine.

I'm just wondering if anyone at this level has any insight on this? I was under the impression that I had to report any disciplinary action after the game, no matter how soft, or I could get in trouble, but maybe there's a bit of allowance?
 
Last edited:
The Referee Store
If you issued a card it gets reported. It's not at all uncommon for players and managers to ask at the end if you're going to be putting the cards through. The answer is yes.
 
Probably one of the most covered topics on this forum, the simple answer is = always report it. Technically you should report the manager/coach/club for asking. It simply isn't worth it, especially if you want to advance up the refereeing pyramid.

If you don't report it there are implications for both you and your fellow officials;
  • If the league find out, you will get a "ban" from officiating

  • You create a "last week's ref" issue which has a knock on affect for your fellow officials
 
Last edited:
My county have started punishing refs who don’t submit their cards. The managers and players who ask us not to often get very large punishments. As @Viridis1886 said, if they ask, the answer is yes, it is being reported. Report the question as well if you want.
Edit: just report the question. You should and may get in trouble if your CFA find out you haven’t. Also, when it comes to tolerance, whether it is soft or not is irrelevant. You are the ref. If you think it’s RP then it’s a yellow. End of.
 
If I give a card, it goes through. That is in competitive or friendly games.

Cards are there to protect players, officials and integrity of game. Also, in friendly matches teams should be playing to train as if it were a competitive game.

I think there is a gut instinct as to when it is a yellow or not (or more), but generally there are some good tools to help you differentiate.
 
Wolf_Ref said:
I think there is a gut instinct as to when it is a yellow or not (or more), but generally there are some good tools to help you differentiate.
Click to expand...

In actuality, my initial thought was a red card for serious foul play.

In the tackle, the offender sprinted at the opponent before lunging in from diagonally behind the opponent (roughly at the opponents 4 o'clock). Two feet off the ground, considerable (but not excessive) force and catching the man with their upper leg before getting the ball with their studs. I was told this was in retaliation to (allegedly) being "kicked" a few seconds earlier when he lost possession (I didn't see this).

My initial belief was that the tackle "endangered the safety of the opponent", but I thought about it for a few seconds and decided instead it was RP, for "acting with disregard to the safety of an opponent". The mitigating factor was that the majority of the force put into the challenge was put into his studs, which missed the opponent by just less than a foot, however that was partially due to the opponent backing out to avoid it. Also, I was terrified of giving out a red card before I had even got through my first 30 minutes as a ref.

When people started telling me it was a soft yellow, I was genuinely shocked - I was under the impression that he was lucky I found a reason that he could still be on the pitch, so that left me with serious doubts about my judgement.

If anyone has any thoughts based on this description I'd love to hear them - it'll give me a lot more confidence if I could find out what the "right" decision was for this foul.
 
The Ginger Ref said:
Probably one of the most covered topics on this forum, the simple answer is = always report it. Technically you should report the manager/coach/club for asking. It simply isn't worth it, especially if you want to advance up the refereeing pyramid.

If you don't report it there are implications for both you and your fellow officials;
  • If the league find out, you will get a "ban" from officiating

  • You create a "last week's ref" issue which has a knock on affect for your fellow officials
Click to expand...
Very well explained - I had already reported this one but I was a bit doubtful about it for the next time I have to do it. In this match, I gave the manager a very timid "no, I think I have to report it", but it'll be a lot sterner if I get asked again.
 
NotAnthonyTaylor said:
In actuality, my initial thought was a red card for serious foul play.

In the tackle, the offender sprinted at the opponent before lunging in from diagonally behind the opponent (roughly at the opponents 4 o'clock). Two feet off the ground, considerable (but not excessive) force and catching the man with their upper leg before getting the ball with their studs. I was told this was in retaliation to (allegedly) being "kicked" a few seconds earlier when he lost possession (I didn't see this).

My initial belief was that the tackle "endangered the safety of the opponent", but I thought about it for a few seconds and decided instead it was RP, for "acting with disregard to the safety of an opponent". The mitigating factor was that the majority of the force put into the challenge was put into his studs, which missed the opponent by just less than a foot, however that was partially due to the opponent backing out to avoid it. Also, I was terrified of giving out a red card before I had even got through my first 30 minutes as a ref.

When people started telling me it was a soft yellow, I was genuinely shocked - I was under the impression that he was lucky I found a reason that he could still be on the pitch, so that left me with serious doubts about my judgement.

If anyone has any thoughts based on this description I'd love to hear them - it'll give me a lot more confidence if I could find out what the "right" decision was for this foul.
Click to expand...
Did people from both teams say it was soft, or just the team of the player you cautioned?

From what you describve, its hard to tell - you had to be there to know! However, catching the upper leg, from behind can often bring you into considering a redc card.

What was the oppositions reaction, was anyone asking for a red? If not, player expectation might tell you you've got the yellow right.

The biggest takeaway is ultimately don't doubt yourself, its caution number 1, and there's many more for you to learn from! Well done!
 
NotAnthonyTaylor said:
If anyone has any thoughts based on this description I'd love to hear them - it'll give me a lot more confidence if I could find out what the "right" decision was for this foul.
Click to expand...
Certainly from the way it's been described, it doesn't sound a "soft" yellow at all!! It's probably one of those where you would have to see it to offer a proper opinion.

One thing to always remember is not everyone is going to agree with your decisions regardless and it could also purely be players trying to place that element of doubt in your mind and influence future decisions. Make sure you don't let that in!!
 
george.g said:
Did people from both teams say it was soft, or just the team of the player you cautioned?

From what you describve, its hard to tell - you had to be there to know! However, catching the upper leg, from behind can often bring you into considering a redc card.

What was the oppositions reaction, was anyone asking for a red? If not, player expectation might tell you you've got the yellow right.

The biggest takeaway is ultimately don't doubt yourself, its caution number 1, and there's many more for you to learn from! Well done!
Click to expand...
Edited my initial post - the victims team had one player tell me it was soft, and that was only said 50 minutes later to try convince me a different (much less dangerous) challenge should have been a yellow (which literally doesn't make sense), so I shouldn't have considered that when reflecting on my decision.

Initially, the victims team were arguing for a red - "He's two feet off the ground there ref, why's it only a yellow" - I gave them my explanation and there were no further complaints from them, and the game calmed down nicely, so even if I got it wrong and it technically should be a red, I'm satisfied the yellow was sufficient.

Absolutely agree with that takeaway. First yellow out of the way, makes the second one easier to judge. Eager to get on with it 😁
 
You’ll find as we all have that there are so many “universal truths” that permeate the game, and many are actually incorrect.

Sounds like you’ve had one of those today with the 2 feet argument. There’s a strong belief that 2 feet off the ground is always a red.

A good rule of thumb (there will be exceptions of course) is:

-No contact with player or ball, free kick and yellow card.
- No contact with player, but ball only; free kick and yellow card.
- Contact with player and ball from both feet; free kick and red card.
- Contact with player with one or both feet, nothing on the ball; free kick and red card.

In your description it’s one of those exceptions as it’s the upper leg that brings the player down. A yellow here is appropriate I think.
 
I had a situation in my game yesterday whereby a player flew in off the floor and narrowly missed the player and ball, had he connected, it would've easily been a red. IDFK and Caution given. Fairly confident that it was the right decision and there weren't an awful lot of complaints.
 
Josh the referee said:
I had a situation in my game yesterday whereby a player flew in off the floor and narrowly missed the player and ball, had he connected, it would've easily been a red. IDFK and Caution given. Fairly confident that it was the right decision and there weren't an awful lot of complaints.
Click to expand...

Out of interest, why IDFK? I assume because you decided it was PIADM or impeding progress without contact (and you’re probably not wrong, I’m still getting my head around the correct award)

I think I’d be looking to benefit the team with a DFK. Could you have given:
  • Jumps at
  • Attempts to kick
  • Or the very vague “tackles or challenges”
And not forgetting, it can still be SFP even without contact (but I guess you’d “have to have been there and seen it”)
 
The Ginger Ref said:
Out of interest, why IDFK? I assume because you decided it was PIADM or impeding progress without contact (and you’re probably not wrong, I’m still getting my head around the correct award)

I think I’d be looking to benefit the team with a DFK. Could you have given:
  • Jumps at
  • Attempts to kick
  • Or the very vague “tackles or challenges”
And not forgetting, it can still be SFP even without contact (but I guess you’d “have to have been there and seen it”)
Click to expand...
My decision making process in the split second was it was PIADM and whilst he wasn't too close to the player, it certainly impeded the players progress. I felt it warranted an IDFK and a caution for Dangerous Play, which I believe was the right thing to have done.

I think SFP would've been extremely hard fot me to sell to anyone there and whether it would've met that threshold, I'm honestly not sure!
 
Josh the referee said:
My decision making process in the split second was it was PIADM and whilst he wasn't too close to the player, it certainly impeded the players progress. I felt it warranted an IDFK and a caution for Dangerous Play, which I believe was the right thing to have done.

I think SFP would've been extremely hard fot me to sell to anyone there and whether it would've met that threshold, I'm honestly not sure!
Click to expand...
For next time, I’d suggest that if you felt it was reckless this is definitely a DFK not an IFK, a careless or reckless tackle or challenge is one of the DFK offenses, and seems to be exactly what you are describing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top