That seems like it would raise the bar a bit higher for dealing with problem coaches. Yes he's annoying, yes his conduct is adversely affecting the game, but has it reached the level where I am willing to make his team forfeit? It must have been a fun adjustment period for both coaches and referees when that rule went into effect.
I don't know about anyone else, but it is almost a habit to check the players continuously both before and during the match. I was also in the Army for twenty years, so making on the spot corrections has become practically embeded in my psyche. To notice something illegal, whether it be jewelry or anything else, before the match or before entering as a sub, to not bring it to the attention of the player or coach is akin to negligence. Duty? Not in writing. Obligation? IMHO yes.
When the coach got carded for every instance of illegal equipment, we actually had cases of players deliberately doing stuff, like taking out their shin guards just before getting subbed in, in order to get their coach sent off. Of course, it was always boys doing that kind of stuff. At least now the coach has to help that process by getting carded for something else. My personal opinion is that the curent system is not perfect but I'm skeptical that there is a "perfect" solution. I hate dealing with equipment issues and I know coaches do too. The alternative, though, is teenagers running rough shod all over us.
Is this true? I was under impression in NFHS the player had to go off to correct, and could not return till the next substitution opportunity. Just for my own info, what is the LOTG rule with limited subs, and also how does it play out in practice in youth games?
It WAS true. It no longer is the case. I can go through my old NFHS rules books and post the old rule and the year that it changed. Now the player goes off with either the coach or the player getting a caution, depending upon whether it is the first offense by that team or not, the team MAY substitute for the departing player who cannot return until the next substitution opportunity. In games with limited subs, the player must depart to correct the situation. The team may use a sub to replace him immediately or may elect to temporarily play short until he can return. In USSF/FIFA games players who leave due to injury or equipment issues can re-enter during play with the permission of the referee. Under NFHS rules, players cannot enter unless there is a stoppage of play. They must wait. In most youth matches there are unlimited subs and re-entry, so in practice the team send in a sub and rarely do we see teams elect to play short.
Not so. While injury returns can take place during play (but only from the touchline, ATR 3.13), equipment (including blood) problem returns may not -- ATR addresses that in at least two places:
In did not read all the posts, so I apologize if I step on anyone. It is not a situation where each application of the Laws/Rules is given to the coach. The action is that the first situation 'of the day' the card goes to the coach. All subsequent situations are dealt with the player.
This didn't answer the original question. The question was not about two cautions to a coach for the issue of equipment. It was about the "first situation of the day" going to a coach who already had a card.
Giving the card for improper equipment is like all other yellows, if it happens, it happens and regardless of the cards they may already be sitting on you have to give it and possibly send them off. Its unfortunate but I bet that coach will have no equipment issues from his players the rest of the season. If they do, well that is entirely on them.
MrRC said: ↑ In USSF/FIFA games players who leave due to injury or equipment issues can re-enter during play with the permission of the referee. Thank you for correcting me. I learned it differently several years ago. I wonder if this changed sometime and I never noticed it. However, I recommend not using the ATR as your definitive source as that document often conflicts with the FIFA LOTG and its accompanying Interpretation and Guidelines. The FIFA text must prevail when the two don't agree. I and have now consulted the FIFA LOTG to find that it does clearly state that players leaving for equipment may only return during a stoppage of play. Unfortunately, I cannot find anything definitive for blood on the player or a bleeding player. Is that an injury or is that equipment? Seems we need to be precise here. If the blood is the player's own, then an injury has occurred, but if it is on the uniform or other equipment, then this must be cleaned or changed, so it would also fall under the equipment requirement. What if the blood is someone else's and is not on the uniform or equipment, merely the skin or hair? Is that injury or an equipment issue? I don't know. Can you provide anything definitive from FIFA, not the USSF?
In the US, the ATR is still the official interpretation that referees are expected to follow. If there is blood on the equipment, there is an equipment issue that needs to be inspected and re-entry is governed by the equipment standards. (The fact that blood came from an injury doesn't remove the equipment issue that needs to be addressed.) (I'd also say that "often contradicts" is a gross exaggeration. Are there a few misses, sure. But most of what the ATR does is either repeat IFAB policies (including the I&G) and fill in grey areas of interpretation where IFAB has not spoken. Any list off where they actually "conflict" is going to be pretty short.)