Bingo, and we are back to where we are which is coaches complain, "well, I didn't know I was warned (maybe because you were screaming your head off and not listening), to well, I was cautioned, but it wasn't one of the enumerated reasons." And the Australian list is a joke.
Youth leagues have long asked referees to caution or show a red card to help make clear that a coach or someone has been warned or sent off. So younger referees have had this tool, but as @MassachusettsRef has said, it becomes a crutch. I'm not saying get rid of it for youth rec, but the bigger issue is that coaches behavior is a result of leagues and associations and states not doing enough to teach what is appropriate and what is not and not working with referee groups to enforce and do this. That many young and up and coming referees don't get this instruction until they get to regionals is a major problem. Cards just become a crutch that prevents the greater game from demanding appropriate behavior from coaches. They are not players. They are adults in a position of responsibility who should be setting examples. It doesn't get any clearer than that. To expect less, to say that you can misbehave until you get a caution just gives a green light to more of it. Look at the college game. Or even the HS game. Instead of behaving from the kick, coaches will yell or do inappropriate games and goad a referee into giving them a caution. And if they go straight to dismiss, then their excuse is well, I didn't get a caution.
Just madness. It seems like FIFA, IFAB and some of these leagues just sit around looking for solutions to problems that don't exist. It's like they implement change for the sake of change to justify that they do something. This carding of coaches is going against the general trend at the professional level of having the referees be LESS involved. Every recent law change and seemingly every instruction is for referees to be less involved in the game and not be as visible and make their "mark" on the game. Everything is being done and taught to seemingly give less yellow and red cards. See the change of making the VAR symbol an automatic caution now to only being a caution if its "excessive." They've basically changed the laws and instruction of not giving yellow cards on penalty kick fouls unless its DOGSO. Everything is being done to make the referee less visible and not be the center of attention. There probably isn't a more visible and match interrupting event in the game than going over to dismiss a coach or caution/sendoff someone on the bench. It's probably one of the longest delays in the game on misconduct because the referee has to run 50 yards and dismiss or card someone in the technical area. It's a total mess right now. MassRef pointed it out how confusing it is when we do see players cautioned or sent off on the bench. Look how farcical this red card to Materazzi on the bench is? Look at this. Now they want more of that to happen? Watch the montage of Mourniho getting sent off in his career. See the one at the 1:10 minute mark with Orsato sending him to the stands. Orsato had to sprint 50 yards to send him off. You want to see more of this but now with a yellow card being show? More of this? I can't believe they are implementing this. Just crazy.
This reminds me of the Ninth Amendment, which says: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Referees want to able to caution or eject coaches for actions that are wrong but not enumerated or are enumerated in some competitions but not others.
Right- to be sure this is certainly an opportunity for self reflection but the showing of a card is by its very nature confrontational- I don’t know if you can completely separate the delivery from the action. But it is as FairPlay said: it’s not the sendoff that is the problem, it’s the in between. And not just a matter of classification. Even if I do, as you rightly suggest, manage a coach in the exact same way as I would without a card, and then show a card, I have taken an opportunity to explain, build rapport and mutual respect, and now made it much more conspicuous and potentially embarrassing. An example, HS playoff semi. Not a very difficult game, first half almost over, I have one defender on a caution for reckless, and she commits a simple careless foul. There is another defender who looks like her who has given three or four clumsy fouls, but not in a pattern, not unsporting to me. Opposing coach tees off “it’s the same girl all the time, how many fouls are you gonna let her have? Give her a card!” in an animated rant. I hold the restart and stop the clock. Walk over. “Coach, that’s only her second foul and she’s already on a yellow.” “Oh, ah, I , uh, ok you’re right.” Me: “it’s unsporting to argue for a player to get a card.” I show the YC and shrug at the coach, and he throws his hands up in the air while the announcer says over the PA “Yellow card for X coach for dissent.” So what did the card (and PA announcement of same) add to my management? The coach was quiet the rest of the game, but the whole thing could have been handled collegially.
So why wasn't it? Just because you can give a card doesn't mean you have to. Dang, if I gave a card to a HS coach every time I could if I wanted to, I'd still be writing the reports.
I agree with the whole post but this is really the main point. If bad behaviour on the sidelines is an actual problem then what do they think the cards will accomplice? Shaming managers into changing their behaviour? Yea that's likely... Managers get sent off right now so referees aren't universally scared to deal with the bad behaviour. But as long as the punishment for bad behaviour are laughable then it won't matter if referees send managers to the stands with a pointing gesture or a red card, there is still nothing to dissuade them from behaving that way. But I guess it is easier to shift the focus to how the referee deals with the situation rather than look at the FA's own actions.
http://www.espn.com/soccer/english-...-good-idea-to-help-officials-make-their-point Peter Walton not being able to see the forest from the trees. So many things wrong with his analysis here. My favorite part has to be when he said "It was me who made the headlines." If you click on the link in his quote, there is hardly any mention of the referee. It's the exact opposite of being in the headlines. Also, how will it stop from the referees "being in the headlines" when they do give a red card to a manager? Even worse what happens when Mourinho gets his 4th caution of the season and has to miss the Man United vs. Man City derby match due to card accumulation. I can understand players, coaches, fans and administrators supporting and coming out with some of these wacky law changes and modifications, but it's really surprising that so many high level referees, who have been in the trenches for years, can not see how silly and unproductive some of these proposals are.
Guaranteed way for a referee to get his picture in the paper - holding a yellow or red card out to a manager.
It's not really that hard. You still use Ask/Tell/Dismiss. But when you Tell, you show the YC, when you Dismiss, you show the RC. Pretty simple and straight forward.
Except for the most part ask and tell are handled by the AR or 4th official, so now you are stopping the flow of the match and rewarding the coach or bench staff by engaging with them and drawing attention away from the match and to you and the coach. Just look at the college game. Coaches use behavior that could warrant a caution to draw referees in to engage them by either doing it themselves or having their assistants do it.
Not debating the merits of this although I do personally support it, but the mechanics and law changes seem to be pretty easy to implement. The bench is already distinguished in the LOTG, just add "technical staff" or whatever you want to call the people on the roster that are not substitutes or substituted players (or sent off players) as a third group. In the case of youth where we allow "people" in the technical area that are not on the roster (some competitions do) they are also addressed in this category. So a yellow card MAY (not required so you can manage the technical area as you manage players) be shown to technical staff for reason a b c d... and a red card must be shown when they are dismissed for e f g h... I was not around refereeing when cards were added to the LOTG but I can envision very similar arguments against the need for them. Their use seems to have worked out pretty well for players.
True. But like I said it's not really that hard. Although, yes it looks like some will try to make a hash of it.
Cards were not, originally, part of the Laws at all. The Laws provided for cautions and send offs. The cards were a side innovation to communicate those existing sanctions more clearly--particularly in games with language barriers. Prior to that, the visual cue that a caution (instead of an informal warning) was being given is that the referee would right it down in his notebook (hence the expression "booked," which preceded the existence of cards. It was not until the (first) great re-write that cards appeared in the Laws. I don't recall how long it was from when Ken Aston first used the cards until they became ubiquitous. I know when I first started, I made my own from card stock (as did many rec refs), and had to replace them when too much ink bled out onto my sweating leg--I kept the red in my sock back then, as the short pockets were so shallow and my main shirt had only one pocket.)