If an AR sees a clear yellow or red card incident behind play or obscured from CR view but can not clearly identify the culprit. What should the AR do? The CR has no idea but what information the AR gives.
If the AR can't properly identify the offending player, then he hasn't properly identified misconduct. In almost all such cases, an AR can't call the CR over. It looks very ugly when there's a conference between officials that produces 'nothing' (ie, a card). However, if the AR feels the misconduct will escalate if not dealt with in some manner, then a conference--at the next stoppage--might show the players that the officials are aware of what's going on, even if they can't deal with it in this instance. In cases such as the one described by Grizzliebear though, if the AR can't identify the culprit from the touchline, and the incident is behind the referee's back (AND it's serious enough to deal with, in other words a clear red card), why not run off the line to the spot of the incident in order to be able to clearly identify the players involved? Breaking up scuffles and 'stepping between' players who are becoming confrontational in front of an AR is now highly encouraged. If the powers that be are encouraging us to take all steps necessary as ARs to prevent violent conduct in front of us, doesn't it follow that we should go the extreme to ensure that we properly identify violent conduct that we (partially) witness? Even if such misconduct is 20, 30, or even 40 yards away? I know, some will consider this taboo and insist that we need to properly signal the referee first (with a flag) before entering. But, when misconduct is going on behind the referee's back, and an AR sprints onto the field, the CR typically gets wind of what's going on very quickly. Either the lead AR will alert the CR with a signal, or crowd/player reaction will let him now. All of this is, of course, much easier with beeper flags, but that's a luxury we don't always have.
Are we now being encouraged to get into the middle? I thought that was discouraged. Had a VC incident recently where something happened behind my back clear across the other side of the field. Turned around and started writing down numbers. Was too far away to get there before the parents decided to break it up. Not to mention the closest AR was half a feild away too.
I don't think MassRef is necessarily advocating that the AR become physically involved in the incident. However, the AR's physical presence may be enough to help terminate the incident and it will certainly enable the AR to properly identify the participants after the fact.
The ARs need to be active in helping disarm violent situations. If something goes on behind the CRs back, the AR does need to take action and get on the field as quickly as possible when necessary. The other AR should be seeing this and flagging the attention of the CR to stop play. If no action is taken the situation could become much much worse in a matter of seconds. The action of the AR running onto the field and shouting at the players to stop will slow down the situation tremendously. Also relevant is the USSF position paper on mass confrontations. USSF does advocate the ARs run to the area of activity and become involved alongside the CR, paying close attention to which players are doing what, and their numbers.
That's what I thought. I've made my presence known as an AR and have stepped out on the field to try and get those involved to stop it/and get the attention of the CR. Not physically mind you.