Dissent: How Much is Too Much?

[CDM76]

Boys U14 tournament this weekend. Referee assignor reminds us before the day's matches that cards hurt teams chances of going through to the knockout so be hesitant to issue them.

First day is pool play. The match I draw is the second of the pool with Red having already lost their first match. The game starts well with both teams playing good soccer and very little foul play.

Blue is clearly a deeper side and as the match wears on starts earning goals. Blue is also a more physical side but tackles are clean and charges are fair (or trifling).

Got one player on Red who calls twice for "high kick" on a Blue player at his side with his boot at about waist level but otherwise both players and coaches seem happy with the game.

End of first half gets a bit chippy as Red is down 2-0 and getting frustrated that they can't generate much of an attack.

About halfway through the second half, Red is now down 4-1 and realizing they will not win this match. They had lost their first match of the day and will not go through.

Red captain starts criticizing calls. Any call against his team by me or the ARs gets an audible "pathetic". After the protest of an offside, I slide up beside him and quietly remind him the AR was in excellent position and could see the play more clearly than either of us. He repeats his "pathetic" mantra.

A few moments later, there's a kicking foul to the calf of a Blue defender in frustration over losing the ball. I whistle and point and get another "pathetic". The fouling player raises his hands and looks at me with the "What did I do?" gesture. I respond by kicking myself in the back of the calf. The protesting player looks a bit sheepish and stops the protest. Mr. Pathetic starts again and this time I tell him I've heard enough. He respond that he hasn't said anything. I give him "the look" and continue the match.

Same Red player who committed the kicking foul comes through with a high boot and a hip check on a 50/50 ball. Whistle and point and "pathetic". Now Red's captain starts inviting other players to participate in the criticism.

Game winds down. Players are tired. Blue has clearly shifted their competitive fervor from Red to the referees. General bad sportsmanship and chippiness.

I never felt I could quite justify the caution to Blue's captain but I'm wondering if I should have walked him over to his coach and explained that he was on the edge of a caution and risking his team's points.

Opinions? Ideas? Neither of my ARs had much in the way of input.

[IASocFan]

...
... He repeats his "pathetic" mantra.

A few moments later, ... Mr. Pathetic starts again and this time I tell him I've heard enough. He respond that he hasn't said anything. I give him "the look" and continue the match.

Same Red player who committed the kicking foul comes through with a high boot and a hip check on a 50/50 ball. Whistle and point and "pathetic". Now Blue's captain starts inviting other players to participate in the criticism.

...

If he hadn't earned the caution after the first "pathetic" after you'd "heard enough," he certainly earned it by inviting others to participate!

In many cases of dissent you have a lot to take into account, but it sounds clear, a card was earned here.

[nsa]

Boys U14 tournament this weekend. Referee assignor reminds us before the day's matches that cards hurt teams chances of going through to the knockout so be hesitant to issue them.
That's pathetic. The assignor was setting you up for failure.

Roman Emperor: We're losing too many lions. Let's send those gladiators into the ring without any swords. :rolleyes:


... Red captain starts criticizing calls. Any call against his team by me or the ARs gets an audible "pathetic". After the protest of an offside, I slide up beside him and quietly remind him the AR was in excellent position and could see the play more clearly than either of us. He repeats his "pathetic" mantra.There's the first card. Your assignor said to be hesitant, so, you hesitated on the first comment. Nail his ass on the second one.


... Same Red player who committed the kicking foul comes through with a high boot and a hip check on a 50/50 ball. Whistle and point and "pathetic". Now Blue's captain starts inviting other players to participate in the criticism. ...Why was Blue upset? Was he pissed off because you were allowing blatantly Unsporting Behaviour by Red go unpunished?

At some point, sooner rather than later, you needed to punish the misconduct as well as the foul. Red didn't care what happened and the cards would not affect them since they weren't going through anyways. By letting Red get away with shit, you left Blue with no option except to fight back in kind.

[CDM76]

Why was Blue upset? Was he pissed off because you were allowing blatantly Unsporting Behaviour by Red go unpunished?

At some point, sooner rather than later, you needed to punish the misconduct as well as the foul. Red didn't care what happened and the cards would not affect them since they weren't going through anyways. By letting Red get away with shit, you left Blue with no option except to fight back in kind.Sorry, I pointed the wrong direction. :o

It was Red's captain who started the, "Hey Joe, wasn't that a bad call" type stuff.

Blue was very good throughout.

[thearbiter]

Red captain starts criticizing calls. Any call against his team by me or the ARs gets an audible "pathetic". After the protest of an offside, I slide up beside him and quietly remind him the AR was in excellent position and could see the play more clearly than either of us. He repeats his "pathetic" mantra.



Use this tactic the first time you hear him - especially if others can hear his dissent and it's not simply an ongoing "conversation" between you two. However, I wouldn't slide up or quietly remind. I would stop the match and make sure everyone knew exactly what we were discussing. You'd prefer that your message gets across to everyone and not just this one player.

[campton]

AFter one warning, if he persists, issue caution 1. If he invites others, send him off. Dissent is one of those things that arent accidental. With a sloppy challange you can give him the benefit of th e doubt that he really didnt mean to. With speech, he's asking for discipline.

[ctreferee]

First of all id pretty much toss that comment from the assignor out the window, giving referees a blanket directive to not give cards is ridiculous.

As for the player i would probably ignore the first comment or two, depending on how loud they were, call him over and give him a nice ass chewing on the next, and card thereafter.

[AspireNatlRef]

Hi,

Well on another thread, there was a discussion about dissent from coaches, which I find works well for players, too.

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=629696

When players dissent, they get a little more leway with me. Often they are not dissents, but explaining what they saw, felt, ect. And sometime I am missing something, so this works for me. Now if every time I make a call I hear pathetic... that works once, thats it. If its personal, its dissent (YC), if it continues after a card, its a send off. If it happens 3-4 times, card.

And I have never made decisions according to assignor directions. If they say something out of the ordinary, "Cards affect knockout..." They I would say, cards a there to events on the field, in the game they are being played on. AND THE REASON cards affect later stages, is s players play fair. If they don't they get a card. Not, "slow card" because of what might have happened. I would also speck to tourney director and each coach before the game with, "I know cards my affect later stages, but the players need to know if they commit a card offense, then a card is coming out." I would also demand a copy of the torney rules and ask where it tells me where to "not card because of later stages..." That gets them every time. Of course this is all done after I get my schedule for the day :p

But to each his own.


ANR

[refontherun]

Hi,

Well on another thread, there was a discussion about dissent from coaches, which I find works well for players, too.

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=629696

When players dissent, they get a little more leway with me. Often they are not dissents, but explaining what they saw, felt, ect. And sometime I am missing something, so this works for me. Now if every time I make a call I hear pathetic... that works once, thats it. If its personal, its dissent (YC), if it continues after a card, its a send off. If it happens 3-4 times, card.

And I have never made decisions according to assignor directions. If they say something out of the ordinary, "Cards affect knockout..." They I would say, cards a there to events on the field, in the game they are being played on. AND THE REASON cards affect later stages, is s players play fair. If they don't they get a card. Not, "slow card" because of what might have happened. I would also speck to tourney director and each coach before the game with, "I know cards my affect later stages, but the players need to know if they commit a card offense, then a card is coming out." I would also demand a copy of the torney rules and ask where it tells me where to "not card because of later stages..." That gets them every time. Of course this is all done after I get my schedule for the day :p

But to each his own.


ANR

Agreed. A referee should officiate in accordance with the LOTG, regardless of how it affects a team/player in a specific tournament. There must have been a reason for the rules of the competition (ROTC) to be written the way they were, but it still doesn't supercede the LOTG. If they didn't want misconduct to affect later stages, they should not have put it in the ROTC.

[whyref]

Boys U14 tournament this weekend. Referee assignor reminds us before the day's matches that cards hurt teams chances of going through to the knockout so be hesitant to issue them.

I have to agree with 'nsa'; what was the assignor attempting to achieve here. I would also have to ask myself if I would work for this person in the future. Referees are empowered to act to preserve the game through the application of the laws in order to provide some balance to play. That's all I would have been concerned with because referees do not determine the result of the match; the players do through their actions on the pitch.

As for the pathetic comments, I had one of these during a U18 boys match in a college showcase tournament recently. After the second time I asked him "Do you mean me or you? Regardless of what he said I had him where I wanted him. If he had said him, I would have told him that it was okay to be upset with himself but to keep that type of comment where it cannot be heard. But, he said me to which I warned him to keep it to himself, which he did not. So the next time he was carded for dissent and the remainder of the match went without any issue with that player.

[macheath]

I have to agree with 'nsa'; what was the assignor attempting to achieve here. I would also have to ask myself if I would work for this person in the future. Referees are empowered to act to preserve the game through the application of the laws in order to provide some balance to play. That's all I would have been concerned with because referees do not determine the result of the match; the players do through their actions on the pitch.

As for the pathetic comments, I had one of these during a U18 boys match in a college showcase tournament recently. After the second time I asked him "Do you mean me or you? Regardless of what he said I had him where I wanted him. If he had said him, I would have told him that it was okay to be upset with himself but to keep that type of comment where it cannot be heard. But, he said me to which I warned him to keep it to himself, which he did not. So the next time he was carded for dissent and the remainder of the match went without any issue with that player.

Nicely done. You clarified the situation and gave the player a clear warning. If he persists in the behavior, he has caused the caution, not you. If it is loud enough for others to hear, it can start affecting play and the game (as the original situation presented here shows.) Dissent isn't just about the individual player, but game management and keeping things from degenerating. Don't have "rabbit ears," but obvious, loud dissent aimed at the ref (or your ARs) will have a negative effect, and you may need to caution it.

[nsa]

Sorry, I pointed the wrong direction. :o

It was Red's captain who started the, "Hey Joe, wasn't that a bad call" type stuff.

Blue was very good throughout.

Too late. Match restarted. ;)

[DWickham]

13 year old boys sometimes cannot control their frustration. So, the progression of your response can help them. I find, however, that you can only move up the scale. The longest way up: A non-verbal response - a stern look or index finger in front of mouth can signal enough. Then, a quiet word. Then, a public warning so that everyone knows it is enough. Then, a caution. Then a sendoff.

In choosing how slowly to progress, be aware that true dissent infects the other players if you do not stop it. When two or more start following the chant, you need to end it. But, dissent not only impacts the other players, it impacts you. If we are thinking about the chatterbox and dealing with our human emotional response, we aren't focussed on the needs of the match.

It sounds like you tried to go up and down the chain from a public word to a quiet word to a grimmace. The player doesn't realize that your response is escalating, and so his conduct continues.

Whether to involve the coach is dicey. If the coach had heard what the player is saying, and hasn't taken action, my concern is that heading over to talk to the coach will invite a heavy dose of dissent from that source. If the coach has been trying to keep his players under control, however, and you sense that he is willing to help, the coach can be a great resource.

[constructor]

Well, you have to tailor your reaction to dissent based on age/ability/attitude on almost a case by case basis. Sometimes a quiet word will suffice, sometimes bad cop will have to be the method of choice.

I recently did a showcase tournament where there were many college coaches watching this particular match. All it took to deal with the dissenter was a verbal dressing down reminding him who was watching and that they probably weren't interested in whiners and crybabies. I didn't get loud, but when there is no one near and the ref and player are talking, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what's going on. I had another situation in a HS match where a kid got whacked, I called it, awarded a direct just outside the 18, straight on to the goal. The player who got hacked was complaining loudly, I walked over to him and basically said, yup- you got hacked, but it doesn't rise to the level of a card, you have the ball on a direct kick less than 20 yards from goal and yes, I'll keep an eye on those doing the hacking. He calmed down and asked for 10, which he got. (Ended up with PI later on the hackers) No further problems with him.

But like I said, you have to be alert to get a sense of what methods may work best. I guarantee you'll choose wrong sometimes, but that goes with the job and experience will help in reducing the wrong choices. I agree that involving the coach is a very risky proposition as he might have been the original instigator through word or action in comments about officiating and the player is just picking up on his attitude. Some coaches create a "corporate culture" of dissent and dirty play, so do you really know if the coach you're about to talk to is one of those? Best advice I've been given was to keep the eyes open and mind engaged at all times.

[futbolmania23]

Tournament officials get off kilter when referees do the job they hire them to do. Any assignor who tells me not to issue cards will be asked if there are any other LOTG that he wants me to ignore.

As part of my captains' meeting at the start of the game, I remind both sides that dissent is not warranted nor will it be tolerated. They are better off channeling their energies into their play. Besides, I have never changed a call based on a player complaint and I don't intend to start now.

Dissent from coaches is a little more fun. I have asked coaches to swap jerseys before. "Hey coach since you are a superior referee, how about switching for a while cause I think I can fix your mid-field play." That usually quiets the blabber mouth.

The tone set at the beginning of the game will usually carry through to prevent those things from happening.