Amateur Association Football

[mack]

Then, when our lad used the word **** which wasn't even abuse towards the referee, he was issued a straight red.

Using offensive, insulting or abusive language is specifically mentioned in the laws as a straight red (it is also separate to dissent). Who it was aimed at is irrelevant.

From what you've said, he is guilty, and an appeal should fail.

I would however get in touch with whoever deals with referees as a result of the refs general ineptitude

[Wanderboy]

The word was s***, not F***.

Does that make any difference?

Seriously, it was nothing and as I said, not even abuse of the referee.

[Paul01]

5 minutes ago, Wanderboy said:

The word was s***, not F***.

Does that make any difference?

Seriously, it was nothing and as I said, not even abuse of the referee.

Sounds like a tribunal appeal to me and hope for the best.

[Wanderboy]

42 minutes ago, Paul01 said:

All depends on the competition regulations in your association. 

As it was a straight red, it is likely to go to tribunal where appeal are usually made. In my association, for any sendoff, we have to send a message to our Referees branch mobile AND file a send off report by Monday night.

I hear f... regularly, but if it is not not directed at me, I leave it alone, particularly for men's games.

If the referee thought it was directed at him, the sendoff code should be R6 and should be on the team sheet.

btw I think you should post Baccus Snr comments in the squad development thread. It implies Borda is gone if we are getting another MF.

Cheers Paul.

You make a pertinent point. And I say again. The claimed abuse was not directed at the ref. Saying "I didn't do s***" " is not abuse towards the ref. All he did was use the word s*** in a sentence. Hardly a straight red.

And if this ref thinks that's abuse, he seriously has a lot to learn.

[Paul01]

5 minutes ago, Wanderboy said:

Cheers Paul.

You make a pertinent point. And I say again. The claimed abuse was not directed at the ref. Saying "I didn't do s***" " is not abuse towards the ref. All he did was use the word s*** in a sentence. Hardly a straight red.

And if this ref thinks that's abuse, he seriously has a lot to learn.

Maybe he's a choirboy?

[mack]

It doesn't matter if it was directed at the ref or not or if it was abusive in nature, the laws allow the sanction of a straight red for offensive language, so it shouldn't be overturned on appeal.

The ref still needs to learn a bit of game sense regarding language on the field however, in addition to his mistakes.

[Unlimited]

3 minutes ago, mack said:

It doesn't matter if it was directed at the ref or not or if it was abusive in nature, the laws allow the sanction of a straight red for offensive language, so it shouldn't be overturned on appeal.

The ref still needs to learn a bit of game sense regarding language on the field however, in addition to his mistakes.

^ that

 

If someone said "I didn't do ****" to me after a decision, I'd give them a yellow - if anything - for dissent

Red? Harsh, but within the laws of the game for offensive language

Now to the more pertinent question: was it the right thing to do? Probably not.

 

As mack said there is game sense to consider

Let's say I'm refereeing a game and it's 1-1. Clock ticks over to 90 minutes but just before it ticked over, one of the team's wingers got free on the right and there is a goalscoring chance

Am I going to whistle full time? I technically can, but I'm not going to because it's not good game sense

 

The referee in your game technically could've given the red card and did so, but he/she really shouldn't have because you want to think about fairness. Is it fair to penalise a team a player for the remainder of a game for what is at best a dissenting comment? No.

Hopefully the referee will learn from their mistake

[Wanderboy]

28 minutes ago, mack said:

It doesn't matter if it was directed at the ref or not or if it was abusive in nature, the laws allow the sanction of a straight red for offensive language, so it shouldn't be overturned on appeal.

The ref still needs to learn a bit of game sense regarding language on the field however, in addition to his mistakes.

Thanks Mack, and you know what?

That's exactly what I thought the situation would be.

Clearly, the ref has a lot to learn, and clearly, our appeal would be fruitless. That's why I put this question out there. I needed to reassure my gut feeling. Our player will just have to deal with it I suspect.

Now that I've been calm and collect with this discussion, I just want to finish off by saying he was the worst ******* ref we've ever had, it was all about him all day, (taking the limelight away from what would have been a good match) and if I could punch the ****er in the nose, I would.

Despite my frustration, I will be taking this matter no further than sending an email to my club president and presenting my concerns.

As I said earlier, (and we would all like this) this referee was so far out of his depth it wasn't funny and should be jettisoned. Forget the red. It was everything else that I mentioned before that proved he was not up to this standard of game. (Div 1)

[Wanderboy]

28 minutes ago, Unlimited said:

^ that

 

If someone said "I didn't do ****" to me after a decision, I'd give them a yellow - if anything - for dissent

Red? Harsh, but within the laws of the game for offensive language

Now to the more pertinent question: was it the right thing to do? Probably not.

 

As mack said there is game sense to consider

Let's say I'm refereeing a game and it's 1-1. Clock ticks over to 90 minutes but just before it ticked over, one of the team's wingers got free on the right and there is a goalscoring chance

Am I going to whistle full time? I technically can, but I'm not going to because it's not good game sense

 

The referee in your game technically could've given the red card and did so, but he/she really shouldn't have because you want to think about fairness. Is it fair to penalise a team a player for the remainder of a game for what is at best a dissenting comment? No.

Hopefully the referee will learn from their mistake

And everything you just said screams common sense. 

That is where today was an issue. There was absolutely no common sense displayed in almost all of the decisions today.

Anyway, I thank thee for the advice.

[Unlimited]

Wanderboy, did this referee have any assistants?

Refereeing a Division 1 game is hard enough, but if he/she had no assistants... it's a lot tougher, especially in offside and ball out situations

[Prydzopolis]

Wanderboy, I think you should have a cheeky appeal and specify that the offensive language wasn't directed at the referee (you are a **** referee) rather the ball (I didn't do ****). Can't see it likely you'll get off though...

Have to disagree with Mack, I'm all for backing my fellow referees but at the same time, there is a lot of swearing that happens on the field. A bit of common sense needs to be applied especially at amateur level football. I hope you put the appeal in and you get it over turned. Agree with Unlimited,  yellow for dissent but red? I know in my comp, it would be a tough one. Swearing in general in the churches competition can cop a yellow in most circumstances so would have been an interesting one had it been my game  

Also, let's just have a moment to think of the referee. He won't be feeling too crash hot tonight. He knows that he had a **** game & I think the straight red was a culimination of the stress on him during the game. He made a rash call and probably one that summed up his day. The biggest issue is that this guy has no support, nobody to guide him, nobody to mentor him, probably nobody to assess him & he will be playing it all over and over and over again all week.

At grassroots level, there isn't enough referees, too many end up having too many games like this and end up giving it away. At the moment there is the older blokes but not enough younger blokes coming through to replace them and why would they? You get enough money just to cover your base costs and have to deal with a lot of crap. I know at the Centrsl Coast, referee numbers from last year have dropped 200 and down 500 from 5 years ago. This is a symptom across all competitions.

-----------

What grade?

[sonar]

Are there many ex- A league players who after finishing turn to being a ref ? 

Edited July 22, 2017 by sonar

[Wanderboy]

14 minutes ago, Prydzopolis said:

Wanderboy, I think you should have a cheeky appeal and specify that the offensive language wasn't directed at the referee (you are a **** referee) rather the ball (I didn't do ****). Can't see it likely you'll get off though...

Have to disagree with Mack, I'm all for backing my fellow referees but at the same time, there is a lot of swearing that happens on the field. A bit of common sense needs to be applied especially at amateur level football. I hope you put the appeal in and you get it over turned. Agree with Unlimited,  yellow for dissent but red? I know in my comp, it would be a tough one. Swearing in general in the churches competition can cop a yellow in most circumstances so would have been an interesting one had it been my game  

Also, let's just have a moment to think of the referee. He won't be feeling too crash hot tonight. He knows that he had a **** game & I think the straight red was a culimination of the stress on him during the game. He made a rash call and probably one that summed up his day. The biggest issue is that this guy has no support, nobody to guide him, nobody to mentor him, probably nobody to assess him & he will be playing it all over and over and over again all week.

At grassroots level, there isn't enough referees, too many end up having too many games like this and end up giving it away. At the moment there is the older blokes but not enough younger blokes coming through to replace them and why would they? You get enough money just to cover your base costs and have to deal with a lot of crap. I know at the Centrsl Coast, referee numbers from last year have dropped 200 and down 500 from 5 years ago. This is a symptom across all competitions.

-----------

What grade?

Luke,

I've been asking a lot of people a for a lot of advice tonight and the general feeling is that it would be pointless to appeal.

I've decided to let it go, and have informed the relevant player's parent's of my decision.

I'm sorry but the referee today would not be feeling bad about his performance. He was one of those wankers that wanted to be the centre of attention. There's not many of them out there, but there are a few.

 

Grade was 16/1's.

Edited July 22, 2017 by Wanderboy

[DinoPresinger]

1 hour ago, Paul01 said:

Maybe he's a choirboy?

Choirboys normally know all about abuse.

1 hour ago, Unlimited said:

^ that

 

If someone said "I didn't do ****" to me after a decision, I'd give them a yellow - if anything - for dissent

Red? Harsh, but within the laws of the game for offensive language

It depends on what is considered 'offensive'. For instance words like 'bugger' and '$hit' and even 'f*ck' (barring certain circumstances) are no longer considered offensive by the courts in relation to public order offences. Obviously a football league will have a different threshold for what is offensive but it's possible that they have ruled $hit is not offensive. Idk tho

[Davo]

We had a referee this season that warned a player for swearing at one of our players. No cards. Ended up sending him off in the second half for swearing directly at the referee.

In between those two incidents he lost his pen on the field. One of our players found it, gave it back to him and the referee swore as he expressed his relief at getting it back. Kinda takes away his moral high ground...

[Paul01]

4 minutes ago, DinoPresinger said:

Choirboys normally know all about abuse.

It depends on what is considered 'offensive'. For instance words like 'bugger' and '$hit' and even 'f*ck' (barring certain circumstances) are no longer considered offensive by the courts in relation to public order offences. Obviously a football league will have a different threshold for what is offensive but it's possible that they have ruled $hit is not offensive. Idk tho

Abusive language can be directed at the referee, usually, or assistants or any other person. Eg your a f..en joke of a referee, or your a dog at a team official.

You have to good sense when refereeing. I had a match where one player accused another of racial abuse. 

I had just given this player a yellow for a harsh tackle when he told me of the racial abuse but as i didn't hear it there was nothing i could do. I was the lone official in an All Age/7 or 8s.

[Wanderboy]

1 minute ago, Davo said:

We had a referee this season that warned a player for swearing at one of our players. No cards. Ended up sending him off in the second half for swearing directly at the referee.

In between those two incidents he lost his pen on the field. One of our players found it, gave it back to him and the referee swore as he expressed his relief at getting it back. Kinda takes away his moral high ground...

Shame our ref today didn't lose his pen because instead of handing it back to him, I may have inserted it somewhere.

[Paul01]

6 minutes ago, Wanderboy said:

Shame our ref today didn't lose his pen because instead of handing it back to him, I may have inserted it somewhere.

Perhaps he likes Jarred Gillett and thought we was reffing the Wanderers!

[Unlimited]

U16s? Yeah I would flag the S-word as an offensive term for their age group

Personal preference but I don't really tolerate coarse language from under 18s

[Edinburgh]

12 minutes ago, Wanderboy said:

Shame our ref today didn't lose his pen because instead of handing it back to him, I may have inserted it somewhere.

Regardless of whether the red was warranted, the concern now should be the tribunal decision.  In this case the decision should be "send off sufficient".  This way there is no implied criticism of the referee (an obvious no no regardless of his performance) and no further penalty of the player. 

So don't appeal but seek no suspension.

[Wanderboy]

10 minutes ago, Unlimited said:

U16s? Yeah I would flag the S-word as an offensive term for their age group

Personal preference but I don't really tolerate coarse language from under 18s

But it wasn't a direct assertion towards the referee.

Every kid swears on the field. Normally in frustration.

 

So, if he said "I didn't do anything" instead of saying "I didn't do "s***" It makes a difference? Come on??? It's all in the context, and in this case the context was NOT directed towards the referee. Get a grip.

Edited July 22, 2017 by Wanderboy

[Wanderboy]

12 minutes ago, Edinburgh said:

Regardless of whether the red was warranted, the concern now should be the tribunal decision.  In this case the decision should be "send off sufficient".  This way there is no implied criticism of the referee (an obvious no no regardless of his performance) and no further penalty of the player. 

So don't appeal but seek no suspension.

I've decided not to follow this issue up and our player will have to deal with the consequences of his actions. Whether they were appropriate has already been decided. It will cost our club $$ to appeal. I'm not going down that path.

As I said before, the ref was a ****wit. With the season almost over, we've had a pretty good run with good ref's. It ain't worth pursuing any further, although I will certainly put in a report to my club and hope that this particular referee is given matches in future in line with his ability to make judgemental calls that ascertain to his ability. Those games would be matches far below this age group.

 

Edited July 22, 2017 by Wanderboy

[Edinburgh]

I'm not suggesting an appeal or any $ cost, merely represent the player at the tribunal and ask for send off sufficient and no further penalty. Based on what you've told us that would be a fair and reasonable outcome. And I would think a not unreasonable expectation.

[Wanderboy]

6 minutes ago, Edinburgh said:

I'm not suggesting an appeal or any $ cost, merely represent the player at the tribunal and ask for send off sufficient and no further penalty. Based on what you've told us that would be a fair and reasonable outcome. And I would think a not unreasonable expectation.

I couldn't agree more.

I'd like to reiterate one important point you made. And that is the information that I have forwarded in my comments. It's all true and correct with regards the situation. I would never take on a case like this at a tribunal unless I thought we a solid case and in this situation I believe we do. However, surely it comes down to one man's word against another? I'll could put my player's case forward yet the referee who made the decision would surely have to be there and if he said he felt he was personally abused, we wouldn't have a case.

That is unless the tribunal take into account the evidence I could gather from our opposition who also said they would back our player up and who also agreed the ref was a ****wit and who were also unhappy with his performance and said that this decision was wrong.

For what it's worth, we lost 6-1. The score line is irrelevant to this referee's performance.

[Hughesy]

Good move. Very rarely will you get anywhere with an appeal when it comes to swearing. 

I helped out with the U6 and U7's drills and then during their little games the other week and it left me stunned. I know why we aren't winning any world cups soon... it was organised chaos. The kids themselves aren't necessarily bad, it's the structure (or lack of). Fair play to them for volunteering but most of the parents have absolutely no idea what they're doing. Half the kids are wearing their shin pads on the outside of their socks which I found symbolic of the whole fiasco... this business of not officially keeping score is ridiculous because A) there is no urgency to the way the games are run and B) the kids are keeping the score and know exactly who and how many goals have been scored. We aren't fooling anyone there. Plus they'll all be expecting a medal or trophy at the end of the season, for achieving what? Competition is what makes sport sport, you need to build that early and establish a winning mentality in the way they play the game. 

A few of the teams I worked with I asked the kids what position they were playing (very basic, either a forward or a back) and half of them had no idea what that even was because the games are just a ball dropped in the middle of the field and it's free for all. 

You've got kids scoring own goals with no idea what way they're running and kids just belting the crap out of the ball everytime it comes near them. What do they get? A round of applause and told how wonderful they are. Let's not crucify them but a bit of constructive feedback or even just general advice and teaching would be good. 

I know these kids are here to have fun but it's honestly a joke. I don't remember things being like this when I was that age. To me it's just a sign of the times really, the PC age where we can't possibly offend anyone so we fluff around. 

You can't force these parents who are volunteering to sit a coaching course but at such a crucial time in a child's skill development, there needs to be more structure and guidance. I dunno how we do that but it's not my job to figure it out. Perhaps each age group should have 1-2 curriculum supervisors who's job is to promote and implement a strategy as well as offering guidance to parents who may be none the wiser, in running a team. 

[Wanderboy]

9 minutes ago, hughsey said:

Good move. Very rarely will you get anywhere with an appeal when it comes to swearing. 

I helped out with the U6 and U7's drills and then during their little games the other week and it left me stunned. I know why we aren't winning any world cups soon... it was organised chaos. The kids themselves aren't necessarily bad, it's the structure (or lack of). Fair play to them for volunteering but most of the parents have absolutely no idea what they're doing. Half the kids are wearing their shin pads on the outside of their socks which I found symbolic of the whole fiasco... this business of not officially keeping score is ridiculous because A) there is no urgency to the way the games are run and B) the kids are keeping the score and know exactly who and how many goals have been scored. We aren't fooling anyone there. Plus they'll all be expecting a medal or trophy at the end of the season, for achieving what? Competition is what makes sport sport, you need to build that early and establish a winning mentality in the way they play the game. 

A few of the teams I worked with I asked the kids what position they were playing (very basic, either a forward or a back) and half of them had no idea what that even was because the games are just a ball dropped in the middle of the field and it's free for all. 

You've got kids scoring own goals with no idea what way they're running and kids just belting the crap out of the ball everytime it comes near them. What do they get? A round of applause and told how wonderful they are. Let's not crucify them but a bit of constructive feedback or even just general advice and teaching would be good. 

I know these kids are here to have fun but it's honestly a joke. I don't remember things being like this when I was that age. To me it's just a sign of the times really, the PC age where we can't possibly offend anyone so we fluff around. 

You can't force these parents who are volunteering to sit a coaching course but at such a crucial time in a child's skill development, there needs to be more structure and guidance. I dunno how we do that but it's not my job to figure it out. Perhaps each age group should have 1-2 curriculum supervisors who's job is to promote and implement a strategy as well as offering guidance to parents who may be none the wiser, in running a team. 

Geez, that's such a great post and I couldn't agree more.

My boy is 14, should be playing 15's but is actually playing 16's. Don't ask why. It was a decision made by his elite development squad coach. I considered it, and whether to take him elsewhere and thought it might be good for his development to play up an age.  My decision has been proven correct. He's come on in leaps and bounds this season.

But........you are so right and I've seen what you've said happen ever since he was under 6's. I'm not sure what can be done about the situation though.

A lot, if not most of the coaches are volunteers and untrained parents at that younger age group.

 

[ZachMercer]

Here's an odd question probably reserved for someone with ref experience. My son's team finished runner up in the grand final of a kanga cup match recently held in canberra. After an extra time deadlock the game came down to penalty shots. When the opposition lined up the order of shot takers they had their goalie (biggest kid on their side) line up as 2nd or 3rd taker. I always thought that a goalie was able to take a penalty shot, but not till every other elected player had had theirs, i.e. last? Naturally the goalie scored the winning penalty. Please note this was U9.

[GunnerWanderer]

Goalie Can shoot whenever 

i also remember reading ages ago that goalies in a shootout compared to others have a higher conversion rate surprised goalies don't get called up much 

[Edinburgh]

I'm not a ref but I've seen a few instances over the years of goalies taking penalties as one of the first 5.

[DinoPresinger]

 

10 minutes ago, GunnerWanderer said:

Goalie Can shoot whenever 

i also remember reading ages ago that goalies in a shootout compared to others have a higher conversion rate surprised goalies don't get called up much 

Perhaps that is because they only take one if they're confident they will score. Goalkeepers who are bad at penalties don't take penalties whereas players like Jumpei have to at some point in their career. Plus you have to take into account the english national team skewing the missed penalty statistics.