So late in the game, Hertha's 15 [don't know name], sort of mugs Dortmund's Mor on the ball...it goes on for several seconds. Eventually Mor shoves 15 to the ground [with a little playacting from 15, but a legitimate shove]. A melee ensues where 15 puts his hands on the ref. At that point, immediately, the ref gives 15 a yellow, then shows Mor the red. I am not here to question whether Mor's actions are red, they clearly were. But 3 questions: 1 - Should the ref have called the foul on 15 sooner, though? That might have stopped the frustration shove. 2 - Should the ref have called either two yellows or a straight red on 15, for either action. 3 - In the unlikely event you have to show someone a yellow and then a straight red, what's the mechanics? Sorry to have to ask. Sorry, no video. EDIT: While it lasts, here's a clip of the foul, though not 15's contact with the ref:
Absolutely should have called that holding and cautioned him. I'd have gone yellow to both after the push if I had made the mistake of letting it go that long.
1. Heck no -- the attacker was trying to break free of a tactical foul outside the PA -- it is a perfect example of a slow whistle to see if there is an advantage to be had. 2. I thought a yellow was warranted for the foul. Not seeing what happened with the ref, I have no opinion re a second one. 3. I *believe* the mechanic is to only show the red and to simply write the caution in the book. But I'm not sure there is any official guidance on that. (And I'm not sure it particularly matters . . . I never thought there was a need to change the mechanic to show yellow then red for a second caution . . . the only time it matters which is in post-game sanctions)
I'd disagree with that. A 2 handed shove to the chest like that is a yellow if the other guy doesn't do his crazy flop.
Link to highlights http://www.soccer-blogger.com/2016/...ights-2016-goals-aubameyang-stocker-red-card/ Personal opinion- my sense of justice means that the attacker would basically have to assault the defender to get sent off. The defender has grabbed him in an unsporting fashion, but holds on long after what is necessary just to aggravate and goad the attacker, until the attacker pushes him to get away. I could go yellow for the attacker, but to be frank, i don't think I would sanction the attacker at all.
Hi, not sure 'sense of justice' applies in refereeing. The referee lets the attacker progress as long as possible to see if he breaks free as he is in a good attacking position. This seems like good playing advantage to me. The push to the ground is obviously cautionable and in this case looks like he went with violent conduct which is pretty much what I have been trained to give in such an overt situation (even with the play acting). As for the other player if it was a second yellow situation we are trained to show the second yellow then the red so everyone is clear that it is not a straight red. The showing of cards being largely information to players and bench as opposed to you as ref only noting them down.
Let's replace "sense of justice" with "context" then. If a player has been manhandled on a play, and turns around and shoves the guy that did it, it's different than if a guy shoves another player without any previous contact. Different in the Laws? No. Different in practice? Yes.
True to an extent - and an argument for a caution rather then a send off here. But there is no way you can permit retaliation like that withou at least a caution.
This is not what happened. The video in the subsequent link shows otherwise. #15 is beckoned over to receive his caution for the tactical foul. Apparently he gets too close to the referee for his liking and the referee shoves him away, which is the part that I felt was most odd about this whole scenario. Anyway, he then gets the yellow for the tactical foul. Mor is then approached and given his red for VC. I personally have yellow for both. #15's play-acting helped sell the VC red for Mor, which is unfortunate. But Mor ran the risk by shoving his opponent in the first place. Yellow to both would be the best scenario, in my eyes. But this result is neither wrong nor unexpected, given what happened.
I think it's fascinating that you feel that way. I'm curious to know your opinion as to what you would allow Mor to do to extricate himself if the defender holds on to him until he reacts in some way. Because I think that is very close to what has happened here. Not perfectly analogous, but i recall a time when watching my son play when he was working past a defender who had a huge handful of his jersey. He reached back and swung his arm across the defender's wrist to break his grip on his shirt, and he was away. Was my son guilty of striking?
The question is very broad and hypothetical and not related to what happened here. Here the foul continued because the referee waited to whistle to see if he would break free with a scoring opportunity and the hold continued because play continued. After the whistle, the victim of the foul retaliated with force. That is unambiguously misconduct. If you want a laundry list of factors to consider for a completely different situation to determine the amount of force a player can use to extricate himself when being held, sorry, I don't have one for you. A situation would have to be evaluated on its facts as to what is reasonable. But reasonable would mean extricating not retaliating.
More than fair, but my question is specific to this case. If the defender still had Mor wrapped up with both arms, what say you if Mor used the same energy and motion as he did to get out of the grapple? Too much or fair? I'm not trying to be argumentative: I literally get more out of your posts on this board than any other single person, so I read every post you make more than once (and often wish others would read yours more closely), so I'm asking you to help me where to put my line.
Sorry, only saw it live and must have misseen it. I saw the push back and I must have imagined a first push by the player. Apologies.
Probably too much, but I really can't say without seeing the actual event. (But it wouldn't look the same if he was still being held, so it really is hard to say and would depend on how hard he was being held. I'm not trying to be evasive, I just don't seen a good way to describe how I would react other than I would have to believe in the moment that the level of force was reasonable and directed at extrication and not retaliation. In practical terms, if he was still being held and exerted that much force, the result is probably a fight that makes the discussion moot . . . .)
I don't think sending Mor off is the right answer. It rewards #15 for a ridiculous foul followed by a ridiculous flop. Mor absolutely deserves a caution for the 2-handed shove.