No, we haven't all agreed on that. I've explained several times now why I think a caution for unsporting behavior IS lawful -- and also consistent with the spirit of the game. There seem to be a few other people who have weighed in on this thread and share the same viewpoint. Smart people, too.
I'd be careful how you word that. Someone might read this as there aren't any smart people on this board.
For #$%^ sake change the laws to deal with this situation instead of depending on "unwritten rules" and "sportsmanship."
What is your proposal? Complaining without any proposed change is mindless spam. NFHS has a rule for this. IFK for team with clear possession.
Almost anything is better than a dropped ball with the coach trying to tell the player to kick it somewhere or not contest it or whatever. I personally like IFK to team in possession when play is stopped or to team opposite player that is down to at least sort of address players going down for no reason - but this would penalize a players team for going down with cause I guess.
Specifically allow the ref to issue a USB caution if, ITOOTR, one side is attempting to play a sporting drop ball.
Hmm. so a defender is hurt and the GK is holding the ball, that would give an attacking IFK in the PA?!?!? As a referee, I have not once had a problem arise from a dropped ball following an injury -- I don't think a change really is needed, and the HS rule has its own issues. (While I'm doubtful this is going to change, the fact that IFAB tinkered with the DB rule in a way that has more holes that swiss cheese may lead to a broader change when that doesn't work to do it's job.) (The only issue I have ever had on a DB was when I did the dumbest thing of my referee carreer 30-some years ago . . . dual system, probably u10 [might have been u8 - they played full rules back then] and my newbie co-referee called offside near midfield for his end, not noticing there was a defender back with the GK. (It was his call since it was his end, but it was nearer to me as it was by my touchline) Somethings you have to let be even when they are wrong, but I tried to fix it. I ran to my colleague and asked about that defender back there, and he agred he missed the player and there was not OS. So I ran back and did an uncontested DB to the player who had the ball and would have had a break-away, trying to restore the situation that had existed. The reality was, however, that everyone was so confused that it created a better opportunity, as the defender that was back didn't understand what was happening. Effectively, trying to fix my teammate's error, I gifted the team a goal. Of the mistakes I've made over the years, that one still embarasses me when I think of it.)
Gotta be careful here with terms -- I wouldn't have any problem with a caution interpretation where the team/player had agreed to do something specific.
I almost included this - unless keeper has possession then restart with the keeper in possession (effectively pausing to tend to the player instead of stopping/restarting play). The other alternative is to do what the teams do 90% of the time - "kick it back to their keeper" so have an uncontested dropped ball to the keeper nearest to where the ball is when play is stopped (that keepers half) which wouldn't change the rule per se, just alter it a bit. This would be for all dropped ball restarts. I agree there hasn't been a real issue with a dropped ball in my games either, it is just a clunky restart - it interrupts play in a very large way as we set up for the dropped ball, drop it, everyone stands around while the ball trickles back to the keeper, then everyone kinda starts playing again. And occasionally you have to deal with an unexpected idiot that decides to ignore "sportsmanship".
So instead of fixing the written rule you want to start handing out cautions to players that doesn't comply with your idea of the unwritten rules. Isnt that a really backwards way of trying to fix the problem? From discussions on other forum the idea I like best is scrapping DBs and restarting with the ball in the hands of the keeper on the team that was in possession.
I agree that the referee can't do anything about this, but then i see two pieces of evidence: 1) Ricardo Valenzuela stopping a game to prevent this very situation in an MLS game. 2) UEFA ultimately decided to ban the player in question for this incident (this piece of evidence being in hindsight, of course) Based on the laws, i'd have to say that both of these decisions are wrong. BUT... 1) Who the heck am i to question Valenzuela? 2) If stopping the game would have prevented a one-match suspension and a moment that UEFA has now clearly defined as a "violation of the principles of conduct," (not to mention the possibility of a fight), then shouldn't I try to do so? Using one's skills to help prevent cards/misconduct is supposed to be a hallmark of a good referee. I still believe that both cases are wrong, but i really wish an officiating authority would weigh in on these scenarios, because i'd like them to be right.
That's not a bad idea relative to what's currently done where the ball often ends up back in GK's hands anyway. I like IFK to the team in possession when the ref stopped play to deal with the injury. Here's a comparison from two games I just watched this weekend. Arsenal v WBA. 1) WBA player is injured with WBA in possession. 2) WBA player sees this and intends to knock ball out of bounds. 3) WBA player communicates this to Arsenal player to get him to back off so he can play it out. 4) WBA player knocks ball out of bounds. 5) Injury is dealt with. 6) Arsenal throws ball back to WBA keeper. WBA now has the ball about 30 yards behind where they had it when they stopped the game. Not a big deal in EPL, but what about in a lower level game? NCAA College Cup game Maryland v Georgetown. 1) Georgetown player is injured with Georgetown in possession. 2) Referee stops game. 3) Injury is dealt with. 4) Georgetown restarts game with IFK from where they had ball when game was stopped. For you referees who love to keep the game moving, isn't the second procedure much smoother, easier, quicker, and more dependable? What if the player down is having a coronary event? Isn't it worth saving a few seconds instead of waiting for all the shenanigans to finish in the first procedure?
If that is what happened in the College Cup game then I believe that is the wrong restart. It was changed to a dropped ball a few years ago. The only difference would be if the keeper had possession when play was stopped. In that case it would be an indirect free kick. Experienced officials right? Wrong!
The problem with this is it can turn something that isn't a scoring chance into one. I personally liked this rule until I was playing my high school playoff game and the team scored on the IFK after a player on my team stepped in a hole and twisted his ankle The advantage of the drop ball is that, barring terrible sportsmanship, there is usually no scoring chance from it.