I would issue the red card. If the league/competition authority wants these games officiated, then officiate then according to the LOTG. If the league wishes to put exceptions in writing and publish them prior to the season, then follow those if you elect to take such assignments. Basically, if they don't want sanctions then just play without refs, but if they want refs then accept the consequences that come with having real referees.
It must be noted that no referee should ever touch a player at this age level, let alone drag them aside. Call the kids over and get down on their level yes, but don't touch.
Bull$hit. I'm so sick of hearing people espouse the "don't touch me" garbage. This is athletics and there is going to be contact. Deal with it. If the individual or parents object, then that should have been a concern before the individual engaged in an act of violence with another competitor.
While I agree with your sentiments here, a lawyer would probably not. I am very careful with this in youth games.
Agreed, unless it is a U-19 game or up and you can assume they are over 18 you should not touch the players, unless you are defending yourself, at which point sadly you will still be looked at as the villain.
Good point. Often on my tournaments or leageus there are exceptions to the LOTG. To me that means that those are the only thigns different from my book laws. Anything else, I follow LOTG. That includes cards for U9.
I am a referee. I am also a protective parent. If an adult referee I don't know puts their hands on my kid, I'm having issues with it. Some parents won't care, others will. More importantly, the parents aren't the point. You don't know that child's history, what they may have had to deal with in life, and how contact from a strange adult might effect them. Are you responsible for knowing that? Of course not. But being a referee is all about being preventative. So do that and don't touch a kid. You can accomplish your job without adding the risk of misunderstanding.
Going to have to disagree. The referee is not one bit concerned with the player's off-field problems and it doesn't have any bearing on how to act during the game. If your child has problems and can't control him/herself, then it is your responsibility as a parent to not put that kid out there. You need to look at the issue from the perspective of the other party involved. If one kid is physically attacking another and an adult referee can stop it by using a necessary level of force, then that is not only the moral and ethical thing to do, but my attorney informs me that there is nothing to fear from a court of law when acting in such a manner. Additionally, the parents of the victim are likely to thank the referee. As an example, there was footage of a girls game in which a player was being punched several times by an opponent. Likely teenage players. The comments expressed shock that the referee didn't intervene. The law is about acting reasonably and for the safety of another person. Self-defense is not the only legal resource for someone in an altercation.
You're both right. Depends. So, how to figure it out? #1, err on the side of keeping your hands to yourself. But, #2, if you must and can act to prevent physical harm to a child, do it.
Aren't we told not to intervene? Where were the coaches for that situation? Why are the parents shocked that the referee did not intervene when they sat their filming it? It is the referees job to ensure safety, but not at the risk of his own.
We are. But I would intervene up to U-14 probably.. I'm not gonna sit and watch if 11 year olds are having a fight.
Yes I would agree with this fully. Obviously MrRC is correct we cannot sit ideally by while children attack each other. I never meant to imply otherwise although I can see how my words could have been read otherwise. When the risk to one child out ways the risk to another it is appropriate to act.
Some others more experienced may way in here, but MrRC, imho, is way off on his advice here. I'm not getting involved with anyone on the field, and i am not putting my hands on a player. I dont care about the age, sex, or severity of the fight. I'm not getting in the middle. A loud whistle about as close to the perps ears will do far better than any lay of the hands. IMHO, horrible advice.
1. No, in 15 years of officiating I've never been instructed to not intervene. In fact, I've been advised to do whatever you can when the incident is small and early in the skirmish in order to prevent it escalating into a big mess. I have also been told that one needs to consider personal safety first and act with caution and discretion. Once you feel that things are too far out of control for you to do any real good, then it is time to get out of the way and observe for your report. 2. Have you seen the video to which I am referring? If not, your comments are pointless. I'll try to find a link and post it. 3. I agree with your last sentence.
You should do what works for you and what you are comfortable with, but I won't sit quietly while a poster tries to scare referees into not making any physical contact for fear of a lawsuit. I've been around long enough to know what is bs and what is acceptable conduct. Not a youth game, but an example from the highest level of play in this country: Did you see the RSL @ SJ game this season in which Chapman shoved Beckermann away from an altercation? Do you know what MLS said about it? Did Chapman receive a playoff assignment?
First, I believe my comments are very relevant to the post regardless of seeing a video or not. If you can find it, please post it. Second, I agree with doing whatever you can to prevent a larger skirmish but that typically involves isolating one player. The discussion we were having already has punches being thrown. Apples and Oranges. Third, your example of an MLS referee pushing a player out of skirmish is not at all comparable to a youth game. Again, Apples and Oranges. Finally, if you have not heard the "do not get involved" line in 15 years, there is something wrong.
Not wanting to start an argument, but I would advise the less experienced referees to ask their assignor or mentor or someone what they think of the advice of MrRC. I don't agree with it at all, and strongly dissuade anyone from trying to intervene in a fight.
While I agree that seeking that advice makes sense, I'm going to quibble with how you phrased it, as it may be misleading. I think a referee should always "intervene" if a fight occurs -- I think the question is really not "if," but "how." Blasting the whistle, moving toward the altercation, and continuing to blast is a way of intervening that I would expect we would all agree is appropriate. Pysically restraining players raises a different issues at differnt levels (gender can matter, too, both with respect to the referee and the players). With larger/older players, it raises questions both of efficacy and injury to the referee. At youth levels, it can raise touching issues on one hand (depending on context and behavior) and a kid getting beat to a pulp while you watch on the other. Reaching between kids while blasting the whistle (an argument for the loose whistle instead of lanyard or finger grip) is often likely to be enough. (IMO, the most important step in defusing is to be right there as soon as possible to deescalate as quickly as possible.)
One basic principle for answering true/false questions where you aren't sure what the correct answer is says that if the words 'always' or 'never' are in the question, the answer is 'false.' I think any prescription that says "Never touch a player" or "It's always okay, especially if they are fighting" will always be wrong some percentage of the time. I don't think a blanket rule is helpful. There are too many variables, especially in the heat of the moment. I don't normally touch players, but I know they are going to touch each other! I do not come from an ethnic background where touching someone you are speaking to is normal. But some people do and I don't try to tell them that they are wrong. If players are threatening to fight, I will jump between them. That may involve physical contact with either or both players. No one has ever objected. And none of them have subsequently come to blows. YMMV. If they are already fighting, which hasn't happened in one of my games in a VERY long time, I do not try to restrain the players myself. I'm too small, frankly, for that strategy to work. I also remember a referee colleague who went to the aid of a player who was being assaulted by four or five opponents. He decided that helping the guy up only transformed the situation into "Here. I'm hold him while you punch him." Not a viable plan.
I think most of the comments here, like " I don' t give cards to players under x year sold, I won' t let players of any age fight by grabbing them, etc are being made by people who are not licensed FIFA/USSF or NFHS referees - they are just rec refs or people who stop by the forum to spew nonsense. If I'm your assignor and you fail to give a U9 a red for fighting, the future games I assign you will be zero. If you grab or hold back players, you should be suspended for a year. One response was that in fifteen years, they were never told or taught not to intervene in a fight - well they were either sleeping or had a clown teaching the course, if they ever took it at all.
I have done this several times in HS matches. Not because that's what I've been trained to do, but instinctively because is seems like the right thing at the time. Normally, I'm close enough to the action I have time to get in between the culprits before a couple of shoves turns into something much worse. If the swings have already started, or begin after I intercede, I agree that one should stay/get out of it. Use the whistle, as has been said, but in my experience, teammates will eventually come to the scene and try to get them apart. Hopefully without adding to the carnage by aggevating each other in the process.
I wouldn't go that far..... but some people have developed habits or beliefs over the course of their career. They may be perfectly fine for them. They may work for them. They also may not be the best advice for younger officials. Law5 actually summed up my opinion on the subject pretty well.
I feel, in general, I am not overly afraid to touch any player as long as it is appropriate for the situation. What that is specifically is different for every situation and up to your personal culture, opinion and situation. In most cases, I am standing in the middle of a field with 8-12 year old children with at least 20 parents watching. Yes, I will help a player up. I will touch a shoulder to get attention if nothing else works. I will not touch any player in a way the would be considered "inappropriate" or could be considered sexual or abusive while standing in front of 20 witnesses (or any other place). I will hug players that come ask for one. I will hug and kiss my daughter while on the field. I will not lift players off the ground or carry one off the field. In the league I referee for, I have known a large percentage of the players for several years and see them in school, church, soccer, Girl/Boy Scouts. I have a personal relationship with the child... and in many cases have no idea who his or her parents are. I don't know if it matter, but as a referee, I have passed a full background check before being allowed on the field and we have guidelines about who can be alone with what kids.
I think you'll find that although there are some posters who fit your description, the majority have respected referee cred. FYI -- rec shouldn't have a negative connotation. Funny that you blast rec referees and then come around to make this comment. I am in agreement that contact with players should be limited and needs to be a case by case scenario. However, to say that referees who hold back players during a fight need to be suspended for year is just plain crazy. I don't want to bust out a ruler so I'm going to give you some benefit here and assume you've either refereed or spectated at high level youth and adult matches. Think back to DA games or maybe PDL for adults... Can you think of times when the referee touched the players? Especially same gender situations, this happens all the time. Finally, on the whole "social stigma" undercurrent. This has all gone way too far. You're in a public place, in front of dozens or more spectators in a sporting event where contact occurs and is expected. Do you really think if you make contact with a player you're going to get sued? Of course we all know of extreme scenarios but, that's what they are, extreme and isolated events that get major media attention. Just be smart and reasonable with the times you do make contact, especially when a fight is occurring. Nothing worse than a player reacting to your firm grab by striking you (unintentionally, er, not deliberately) because they didn't know it was you, the referee.