Just trying to get the next call, introducing the thought into your mind that maybe you were wrong last time. You're going to get worked. It goes with the territory. Like the time I was 4th on a pro game. The visiting coach yells "call it both ways!" I look up and the big screen shows the foul count is 9-9. He didn't deserve an answer. I'm way past worrying about what a player or coach thinks.
But, I wonder if we should be allowing them to do so. Does it start with a gesture, which we ignore, then escalates to verbal, which we "manage" with varying degrees of success, then further escalates to the disrespect and mass confrontation exhibited in the USA v Portugal game? It's all dissent.
While I don't disagree with your premise I think you're walking down a slippery slope. I think it's something you address at the appropriate level. The way you address it though, depends. Would I caution this player for DT maybe but not likely? Would I say something funny possibly (if the temp on the match was low). Would I ask her not to make such a public visual of it? Most definitely. I think it's the inconsistency from referee to referee is what hurts the game and player. I may not caution her but give her a "fly-by" saying "hey today can you work with me on the visuals?" And maybe get some success. The following week she'll have someone who follows the letter of the law who will book the first instance they get. The 3rd week she'll have someone who is deaf and fails to recognize the inappropriate behavior. The 4th week we have the referee who doesn't care. It's a vicious cycle So can you blame her for not trying to game the system. Especially if players are trying to gain any upper-hand they can possibly get.
Not directed at you or your example as I will never to a Pro game - sometimes they are referring to that type of foul or call and not the evenness of the foul count. Either way you are right they are working the officials. As the center I use it as a quick internal check to make sure I am not missing something or letting play continue when they prefer the call and if I feel OK then address the comment as needed, especially if it's repeated.
Almost the same thing. Pro game, national broadcast (on a low level cable channel), fixed position camera between the benches, behind me. Microphone taped to the top of the camera, which I saw but completely forgot about. Score tied 0-0, late in the game. Visiting coach siddles over to me as we begin, if memory serves, three minutes of added time. He says, "I think we've got a point here, if you guys don't F...k us over." I said nothing. Anything he said was only for my benefit as the capacity crowd noise was getting very loud. Murphy's Law required that the home team scored with less than 50 seconds remaining in added time. Visiting coach fit to be tied but I couldn't hear anything he said because the crowd noise drowned out everything. Grab my sub paddles, clip board and spare flags and we head to the locker room. Assessor gives us a good review and everybody's happy, right? Except that the next day, the assessor calls me and apologizes, but he has to add a note to my assessment about 'not taking care of the coach's language.' Nobody else in the stadium could hear it, not even the people on the benches, but it was picked up on the broadcast microphone and a guy above the in stadium National Assessor hoped that it was noted on my assessment. Oh well. Some days you're the bug, some days you're the windshield.
Ha. I would love to know what bon mot they would have offered as a riposte to the coach's observation. Sometimes -- oftentimes -- the sounds of silence are most appropriate.
Since I do a LOT of U12 and under matches I see a LOT of mimicked from MomNDadNCoach behavior like this. I do my best to help future me (when I have this kid when he's playing U16) by calling them over and explaining that they need to stop the arm waving, complaining etc.. It's not OK, you can get a Yellow card and have to leave the field for a bit. It usually straightens them up.
Thanks for your thoughts (and I apologize for my delay in responding), but I'm not sure I'm seeing the same slippery slope you are. While I agree that going straight to a caution is overkill, isn't a "fly-by" ineffective at getting the message out to everyone who, presumably, has seen that public gesture of dissent / attempted influence? If I call her out "hey, blue, are you trying to show up the referee?" or "#16, are you disagreeing with the call?", that puts everyone on notice that her behavior is unacceptable. At worst, I'm viewed as a ref with no sense of humor. At best, that (and maybe the others) player's risk/reward calculation changes for the rest of the game and for the next few games, too. I agree with what you say about inconsistency from referee to referee. But, assuming you meant to say that "players can't be blamed for trying to game the system," I must disagree. Players should be "gaming" their opponents, not the referee. Working the ref is what gets us Oscar-worthy dives in the penalty area, and players writhing in near-death agony after a foul only to be up and running at full speed when the game restarts. That's the slippery slope I'm seeing. And, I'm not claiming that the approach I mentioned is the solution to dissent and gamesmanship. I have been all of the referees you describe. Still trying to find the best one to be for the game and The Game.
I stopped worrying about that a long time ago. I was officiating a u-16 (?) indoor game once. The sequence was I blew the whistle to start the game, home team kicked off, visiting team fouled player who received the kick-off, I call the foul, and the visiting team assistant coach said, "Call it both ways!"
To answer your question about the "fly-by"; with my experiences women matches don't seem to have the same level of dissent as men's matches. Women don't respond similarly or in the same fashion as men with a public admonishment. I think where we are seeing different is with where our level of dissent lies. A simple palms facing up (like the original OP said) is very low level dissent in my book. The fly-by on the first instance she does this gesture puts her on "notice", without putting the public focus on her (yet). I put the ball in her court and then give her an opportunity to change her behavior. If it continues or she decides to add something verbal I escalate to either public admonishment (where you call her out) or possible caution (depending on the temperature, the level of cooperation with player and my mood). My question is why jump to the step 2 when step 1 could possibly work? Unless the OP is leaving out a detail about the dissent I am completely missing. However, I will leave the caveat that sometimes a quick public speaking, letting everyone know you aren't to be f**k*d with today, can be useful if you have a bunch of players dissenting or trying to erode your authority. Sure players are going to roll around and appeal for PK's and fouls, etc. However, you can chose to be Kari Seitz and book the Brazilian player for feigning an injury or not. Like Landon Donovan said about dissent to the MLS referees in the early day's "I do it because you guys allow it!" Again humor works for some referee's. It doesn't work for other's. YMMV. It also depends on your locale, emotional IQ/players and the games you are week in and out.
It's just a shame that players try to cheat or think that they have to cheat. Why do they have to try to game the "system" (whatever system is in place). I remember when I played, if the ball came off me, I would own up, as would the other 21 players on the pitch. Why would anyone want to win by cheating. I just don't get that side of the human makeup. I remember about a year ago u19Boys, one player went down like a sack of spuds in the most "apparent" agony. Arms flailing, body writhing just wanting a yellow against his opponent. His coach hobbled him to the touchline where he suddenly regained his super human strength, instantly....and continually motioned to get back on the field. Eventually at the next stoppage, I ran over to the coach and explained that I think he should be checked out further since he was in such pain and agony 120 seconds ago. "He couldn't possibly be OK. Perhaps you should seek medical attention." I did NOT give him permission to re-enter. At the next stoppage, once again I head to the touchline where the coach and the player both had my ear, and confessed that the player was just "trying it on" to influence any decision I might make. I said.."oh..ok"..Cautioned him with a big bright yellow plastic card and welcomed him back on the pitch. Did I fix all the problems in soccer. No....but I had a small chance to make a point, and I took it.
I didn’t know where to put this, but I figured here would be best. I follow a lot of hockey, and I saw that Dave Jackson retired the other night after doing 1600+ NHL games. I will clap him off with this story from Elliot Friedman’s 31 Thoughts Column: Jackson’s favourite story goes back to his AHL days in the late 1980s when current Canadiens coach Claude Julien captained the Halifax Citadelles. “They had a young player named Marc Fortier, who went too far in something he said. So I gave him a misconduct. Claude skated up to me and said, ‘Dave, you are wrong on this one. I’m his roommate on the road. He doesn’t speak any English. You misunderstood.’ I said, ‘Claude, I’m from Montreal, I speak fluent French.’ Claude tapped his stick on the ice, said, ‘Well that was a good call then,’ and skated away.”
Nothing... (It was a U18B game at 8:00 in the morning. Almost all the parents were in their cars because it was freezing cold)
It was USB for "Deceiving the referee", which I could not give until I had a confession of the attempted deception. Up until that point, I was "concerned" for the well being of the player. And, if I may be so bold...what is your point? Or were you genuinely curious?
Not to put any words in Rufusabc's mouth but I think the point is that you had at least one re-start, possibly two...then you came back and administered a caution for "Deceiving the referee"? If so, while you may have made a point and achieved your desired result, it is not technically in line with the Laws of the Game. Unless there is some latitude provided by a modification in the local league rules. Once the game is re-start it is technically incorrect to go back and sanction for an event that took place prior to the re-start. Unless, (and I am paraphrasing) the violation is a GCI involving violence or similar incident observed by another crew member and of which you become aware after the restart of play.
My point has been made. You cannot make up your own rules. I understand what you did, and why you felt you needed to do it, but it isn’t correct.
"And our GHSA referee was right on top of that call." Announcer after a whistle that went against the home side. I will accept sincere public support from any quarter.
Note that the announcer didn't say the call was correct, just that the ref was there to make the call. Kinda like the coaches or players who at the end of the game shake your hand and thank you for your time. Is that a complement or a put-down?