Player/Referee contact

[MassachusettsRef]

A seemingly spot-on and useful memo from Kleinaitis and USSF. Probably will spark some discussion and has some decent video clips...

http://www.ussoccer-data.com/docfile/ContactWOfficials.htm

[Ref Flunkie]

I like the use of videos in the memo, very handy. For one, I would love to know what these guys are complaining about (especially #3). I think the memo is pretty straight forward other then determining when "continued pursuit" should be a red or a yellow for dissent (as sometimes they just want to argue and not make physical contact/intimidate). Beyond that, it is good to know we will be backed up if we send off a player for contact which has seemed almost "acceptable" for quite a while now.

[Claymore]

I can't get the videos to come up, for some reason.

[MassachusettsRef]

I can't get the videos to come up, for some reason.I couldn't either, initially. Cut and paste the targets into Media Player or whatever you use. All 4 should work.

Got to admit, I'm a little shocked USSF is saying Mastroeni should have seen red for that. Not that I disagree, at all; just shocked USSF is drawing attention to it.

[Ref Flunkie]

I couldn't either, initially. Cut and paste the targets into Media Player or whatever you use. All 4 should work.

Got to admit, I'm a little shocked USSF is saying Mastroeni should have seen red for that. Not that I disagree, at all; just shocked USSF is drawing attention to it.

Was that the one where he spun him around? That was a bit crazy of him to do. If someone did that to me, I would probably toss him too. The one where the guy pushed the ref's hands down off of him I thought was less "offensive".

[LoewenBoy]

Got to admit, I'm a little shocked USSF is saying Mastroeni should have seen red for that. Not that I disagree, at all; just shocked USSF is drawing attention to it.
I disagree with the red card recommendation. Yes there was contact but it did not seem over-the-top. I think a caution would have been fine, along with a friendly reminder that you do not touch officials. IMHO, while the CR was retreating to neutral ground he should have communicated with the players to let them know his intent. Instead he helped to fuel the bad feelings by simply retreating and being mute. At times it seemed he was being TOO accomodating. As soon as Mastroeni was visibly getting more aggressive, IMHO the CR should have become a bit more authoritative and issued a caution. He was being MORE than fair. An ejection would have been a bit harsh.

As a corollary, look at #4. The referee places his hand on the player as he is talking to him. He is demonstrating his professionalism and approachability, but being firm. Who knows...perhaps that may have worked for the other ref.

[Ref Flunkie]

I disagree with the red card recommendation. Yes there was contact but it did not seem over-the-top. I think a caution would have been fine, along with a friendly reminder that you do not touch officials. IMHO, while the CR was retreating to neutral ground he should have communicated with the players to let them know his intent. Instead he helped to fuel the bad feelings by simply retreating and being mute. At times it seemed he was being TOO accomodating. As soon as Mastroeni was visibly getting more aggressive, IMHO the CR should have become a bit more authoritative and issued a caution. He was being MORE than fair. An ejection would have been a bit harsh.

As a corollary, look at #4. The referee places his hand on the player as he is talking to him. He is demonstrating his professionalism and approachability, but being firm. Who knows...perhaps that may have worked for the other ref.

What, players don't know that retreating means "I want to get away from you, go away!"?? There are really no other sports that I can think of where this kind of contact does NOT get you ejected from a game. The worst I see in other sports is an arm around the shoulder when chatting with the official.

[Claymore]

I disagree with the red card recommendation. Yes there was contact but it did not seem over-the-top. I think a caution would have been fine, along with a friendly reminder that you do not touch officials. IMHO, while the CR was retreating to neutral ground he should have communicated with the players to let them know his intent. Instead he helped to fuel the bad feelings by simply retreating and being mute.

Errr...no. Grabbing the ref and spinning him around to demand that he look at the replay board (which, as we learned during the WC, is a no-no) is not excusable under any circumstances.

[LoewenBoy]

Errr...no. Grabbing the ref and spinning him around to demand that he look at the replay board (which, as we learned during the WC, is a no-no) is not excusable under any circumstances.
I did not say it was 'excusable', I said I did not think it warranted a red card. He touched the ref and his actions were inappropriate = yellow. He did not strike the ref or abuse him. What's wrong with a caution and a verbal dressing down? Or if you argued Dissent then Unsporting Conduct for touching the ref, I could go with the Y/R. But straight red for that? What ever happened to approachability? Control?

IMHO the CR did not have control of the situation. Would Colina have allowed that to happen? Heck, no. Control, control, control.

What, players don't know that retreating means "I want to get away from you, go away!"??
The same players, coaches and parents who do not know offsides, advantage, ball in/out of play, etc. Whatever happened to refs communicating? The best referees are not shy about vocalizing their intentions. Don't you think this CR could have said, "Get your hands off me or you are going to the showers?"

Again, I did not say it was appropriate, but if you called a straight red for that outside of the US you would be laughed off the field.

[Claymore]

The referee in this situation has already explained the call and retreated to diffuse any further dissention. Mastroeni subsequently chased the referee, grabbed him, and spun him around. The player has a responsibility to control his own actions; it's not up to the ref to save him from being an idiot.

This is at the professional level. The players and coaches (mostly) know the rules. They also know the consequences.

[Ref Flunkie]

I did not say it was 'excusable', I said I did not think it warranted a red card. He touched the ref and his actions were inappropriate = yellow. He did not strike the ref or abuse him. What's wrong with a caution and a verbal dressing down? Or if you argued Dissent then Unsporting Conduct for touching the ref, I could go with the Y/R. But straight red for that? What ever happened to approachability? Control?

IMHO the CR did not have control of the situation. Would Colina have allowed that to happen? Heck, no. Control, control, control.

I guess we will just have to disagree on this one. Just because this sport puts up with this poor behavior does not make it right. The referee in #2 seemed pretty approachable to me. He was explaining himself to the players as he wrote down everything. He did not back away or anything (probably should have, but you are saying he was not approachable). And to be honest, I doubt he even felt he needed to give Mastroeni a tongue lashing for his clear dissent. Players argue all the time on a send off, and sometimes you just have to let them vent. Still, Mastroeni felt the need to put his hands on the referee, try to spin, keep pushing him in the chest, and finally get him around to view the replay. That is VC in my book. Now if he had patted him on the shoulder while pointing to the screen or something, I can see just giving a caution, but I'm sorry, physically forcing a referee to turn around or move against his wishes is not acceptable in any part of the world and should not get the same punishment as verbal dissent.

[LoewenBoy]

I guess we will just have to disagree on this one.

I can see just giving a caution, but I'm sorry, physically forcing a referee to turn around or move against his wishes is not acceptable in any part of the world and should not get the same punishment as verbal dissent.
Well stated. I guess we saw it differently. But clearly the CR did not think it was VC because he did not issue a card...so we have even a third point of view.:D A national referee assessor in Germany I know said this:
"If he had issued a card at the first infraction of dissent he would have been better served. Harsh yes, but he should have anticipated the actions of the players given their body language...unless he is a new national official, then he would be unsure of himself. His second option was to hold his ground after his first attempt to walk away. If pursued he should have issued a caution then. But a straight ejection? I do not see it. Is the American governing organization serious?
I guess if we asked the question of 20 more people we would get 20 more opinions.:D

[LoewenBoy]

This is at the professional level. The players and coaches (mostly) know the rules. They also know the consequences.
I can see your point, but I would not be too sure of this statement regarding players' knowledge of the LOTG at this level. Many players at this level have demonstrated either 1) their inability to comprehend the finer points of the LOTG, or 2) their contempt for the LOTG. Many, especially national team players, think they can get away with more...so I don't think they know the consequences because that line is different for each referee.

To your point about knowing the laws: I heard an American broadcast of a match in the WC where a player was sent off (second booking) for breaking up an attack with a deliberate hand ball (midfield). It was by-the-book a caution, yet the American broadcaster (a former WC player) said something to the effect of "there is no such thing as a yellow card for such a foul". Clearly he missed the section in LOTG where this is both a foul and a caution.

[Ref Flunkie]

Well stated. I guess we saw it differently. But clearly the CR did not think it was VC because he did not issue a card...so we have even a third point of view.:D A national referee assessor in Germany I know said this:
"If he had issued a card at the first infraction of dissent he would have been better served. Harsh yes, but he should have anticipated the actions of the players given their body language...unless he is a new national official, then he would be unsure of himself. His second option was to hold his ground after his first attempt to walk away. If pursued he should have issued a caution then. But a straight ejection? I do not see it. Is the American governing organization serious?
I guess if we asked the question of 20 more people we would get 20 more opinions.:D


Yup, referees definitely have unique opinions on every situation, and really the only one that matters is the referee in the match :). I am shocked that the guy did not give some sort of card out and I'm with you that he should have cautioned Mastroeni for dissent earlier and that it would have likely stopped any of the following actions by Mastroeni. I guess I just don't understand why touching an official is acceptable in this sport. I'm all for being approachable...in fact I take pride in the fact that I am (well I THINK I am), but what reason is there for a player to put a hand on a referee, other then maybe a pat on the back or a hand shake? I know this is the "culture of the game", but so is diving, and we are trying to stomp that out like it is the plague. Why not stomp this out as well? It is nice to get the world view on these issues from the likes of you and our fellow Aussie referees!!

[LoewenBoy]

I'm all for being approachable...in fact I take pride in the fact that I am (well I THINK I am), but what reason is there for a player to put a hand on a referee, other then maybe a pat on the back or a hand shake?
No argument here. In Europe the FAs usually hand down sanctions upon reviewing video evidence. Anyone know if MLS had the guts to do that in this case?

[ManiacalClown]

I noticed today that these videos have been put up on Google Video. May help some of you who have been having issues viewing them.

[Claymore]

To your point about knowing the laws: I heard an American broadcast of a match in the WC where a player was sent off (second booking) for breaking up an attack with a deliberate hand ball (midfield). It was by-the-book a caution, yet the American broadcaster (a former WC player) said something to the effect of "there is no such thing as a yellow card for such a foul". Clearly he missed the section in LOTG where this is both a foul and a caution.
That would be Marcelo Balboa, and yes, he's an idiot.

[Leighs_babe]

I like the use of videos in the memo, very handy. For one, I would love to know what these guys are complaining about (especially #3). I think the memo is pretty straight forward other then determining when "continued pursuit" should be a red or a yellow for dissent (as sometimes they just want to argue and not make physical contact/intimidate). Beyond that, it is good to know we will be backed up if we send off a player for contact which has seemed almost "acceptable" for quite a while now.


which one is the # 3. is it the Conrad situation???

[MassachusettsRef]

Forward ahead to 3:00 in the NE/NY game...

http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/mls/sights/index.jsp?club=mls

Thoughts?

No way Guevera gets a yellow (the second one) for that before this memo, I think. Is that a good or a bad thing?

[DadOf6]

Forward ahead to 3:00 in the NE/NY game...

http://www.mlsnet.com/MLS/mls/sights/index.jsp?club=mls

Thoughts?

No way Guevera gets a yellow (the second one) for that before this memo, I think. Is that a good or a bad thing?

He grabbed the ref's arm which is worse than tapping him on the shoulder but it didn't seem to be violent or even in anger. But it looked like the ref was walking away and the player didn't want to let it go.

Not touching the ref is a good thing.

I didn't like the announcer's comment about "you don't send off a star player for something like that."