Could the referee thought he had seen the scorer stomp the keeper? It looked like his foot came pretty close to the keeper's legs, but to me, it looked like he missed.
Great call by the ref! Spot on! A couple of years ago in the Champions League in Basel, a manager broke a side panel of the dugout after his team conceded a goal and he didn't get sent off. I bet UEFA was not happy with the crew. Think about it this way. If you allow that then where is the line for damaging property? Also the Henry kick of the corner flag is way different and I still contend that he should have received a yellow.
I don't understand why some of you are so adamant about sending this player off. He hasn't committed a violent act (as defined in the Laws), hasn't brought the game into disrepute, and in the end, hasn't done anything that can be justified as a sending off in the Laws (and that includes "Law 18"). I don't see it as any difference as to when players kick the corner flag.
You can't compare the two events. The manager is held to a different standard ("irrepsonsible behavior") than a player, who must be sent off for one of the innumerated offenses. IMO, it is a stretch to get to the red here -- but we also don't know what the instructions have been from the league as to how to interpret OFINABUS or VC in this type of context. I'm curious to see what the follow up is, though I have not a clue what the "appeal" standards are there.
The referee is pointing in the direction of the locker rooms. Walkway to them is shown in the longer video.
Fine, I'll play. I'll freely admit that I'm LOOKING for a reason to send off the player. Having said that, if you don't agree with violent conduct (blows my mind, but lets move on), how about: Law 12: "using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures". So, in what way is him putting his head through the glass/plastic NOT an abusive gesture?
For me this a yellow card. And I'm also not sure I'd want to go anywhere near this player or show him a yellow card so I might just stay the hell away from this psycho. Who is he abusing? The Society of the Plastics Industry? I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure the intent is that you must offend, insult, or abuse a human being or living creature.
FWIW at 3:52 of the longer video it shows the sign, a piece of paper with one word on it: LOCALI Don't know what that means, but there ya go.
What is interesting is I look at this event and see everything you just described. It's how he commits the act that I have a problem with. It's dangerous to himself and others, it's excessive, offensive (IMO, but of course I work on-field operations for a team so I'm admittedly a little sensitive to players damaging the field/equipment), and makes a sideshow of the sporting event. I think this just comes down to the opinion of the referee.
So lets review: Extra-mural Red Cards: 1 Tripping a field invader so the authorities can capture and remove him. 2 Throwing a dog by the neck against a fence in a very misguided attempt to remove him from the field. 3 Head butting a hole into a plastic dugout. I believe that I am in a minority of 1 that would show no Reds, and only one Yellow--for number 3.
Make that a minority of 2. 1. Mild talking to at most. 2. I'd be tempted to throw the player off the field by his neck, but no card needed seeing as how the cops already had him. 3. Yellow - and only if I was sure he was attmpting to head butt the opposing team's logo in such a way that the opposing players or fans could see it. I really doubt it was his intention to break through the plastic.
For those who are giving red for this, is it still a red card in your mind if the plastic doesn't break and his head just bounces off it?
That is a very good question. Unless that's a logo I'd say no and even still might go yellow. I might need an AR to replace me though as I probably wouldn't be able to stop laughing.
If the plastic/glass had held up, and the player fell backward to the ground, would you still send him off? If you're going down the VC road, you have to be willing to punish the act and not the result. I could be wrong, but I doubt you'd pull a red in the scenario I outlined. I know I've stretched the meaning of VC in the past, but I think utilizing it here would be ignoring the laws--not stretching them. You can't commit VC against yourself and I completely disagree that this can be interpreted as being against any other person. Edit: I see I got beat to this question.
Make it 3. None should be red cards. Only #3 has any connection to the game itself. We shouldn't be trying to apply the LotG to actions unconnected from the game.
Interesting points. I'll preface my next statement by saying this should only apply to professional matches where referees are also there not just for safety and fairness but to aid in the production of a spectacle worthy of viewership and fans. How the hell is that not entertaining as all get out? If I'm drinking some brews at a match with some friends and someone wants to celebrate by bashing their own skull and destroying what few brain cells they have left, awesome!
Add me to the yellow for the head-butting-a-piece-of-field-equipment camp. To me this was a case of the player celebrating excessively (and stupidly) where the damage was a freak happenstance. Sort of like doing a jumping chest bump with a teammate where said teammate falls down and breaks an ankle, but arguably a little more extreme. Still not worthy of ejection unless there was some context we aren't aware of.
Not sure I understand why you think this is worth a red but Henry only worth a yellow. It's still destroying property. In the case of a corner flag at least it's a required piece of field equipment while a plastic bench shelter is not. So it would seem to me that Henry's offense was worse, not less bad. To send some one off in case like this where you are really stretching the law I think is just asking for trouble. Seems like the sort of thing that could be protested quite easily. I can't get this to fall into the abusive gesture category. We all know what that is intended to cover. And it's not an idiot smashing his head into an plastic bench cover. I'm not so sure he didn't expect the thing to break. I mean, it is dumb to head butt this thing in any case. But why would he have done so unless he thought it would break.
I talked to a non-referee friend about this and he felt yellow was appropriate. What I feel personally hung up on is that if anyone but a field player did this it would be a send off hands down for IBITTA. I recognize there is no direct justification for a send off here based on the facts, but intentionally (or gross negligently) committing property damage has to be more than just a caution. But if we go down that road we are becoming the police not referees so I really feel torn about this one. Hard to judge.
As someone that works in that environment, it makes for liability when a fan then tries to imitate the player either at the event or separately. Events like that can (but don't always) elevate a match into a dangerous fan situation. Fans do enough crazy things already. We don't need players giving them new ideas because then I get to hear a radio call for an ambulance because some bozo head-butted a window or a wall (or another person) and got hurt.
I'll also add to the minority. For me, 3 is just excessive celebration. I don't think there is any intent to be aggressive or disrespectful toward players/substitutes/coaches/the other team, etc. It looks to me like the guy just hit the plastic too hard out of excitement. IMO, the call should be the same whether or not the glass shatters (I think it's the action we want to sanction, not the aftermath). 1 and 2 get red cards from me: Showing any slight sign of aggression towards outside agents is unacceptable. A spectator clowning around should not be dealt with by the players (unless it poses a security risk). Tripping them sends out the wrong message - and that for me is aggression. Also, any kind of violence towards animals is unacceptable. Anyone else think that the player that killed an owl by kicking it should have gotten a red card?
Roped me in, too... As long as we're throwing out scenarios: Adult league match between two teams that hate each other...If the player runs over to karate kick the other team's beer cooler and sends brews flying...are you really still only giving him a YC? How's that going to go over? In the video, do we know that this is the home team and that he destroyed his team's property? For me a RC is easier if this is the visiting team -- I associate it more with a taunting-type effort by the player and the corresponding retribution will surely carry over to the field. I think it's easy for us to downgrade what happened because "well...it's his bench that he broke, so..." Did I miss that confirmation somewhere in the thread? [Edit...just saw GreatGonzo's note on p.1 and saw the "Locali" paper on the bench on the left in the video, making the bench on the right 'visitatore' presumably. So as best I can tell, it was the away team damaging the home team's property] You've stated several times in the past that the LOTG can't possibly be written to include every scenario, and that we have to use some common sense sometimes. From a Position Paper: "It is also violent conduct if the excessive force is used when the ball is not in play or if it is directed at anyone other than an opponent (e. g., teammate, referee, assistant referee, coach, spectator, etc.)". I just personally don't have that hard of a time putting this scenario in with the "etc" category, although the inanimate bench is clearly not classified as "anyone" in a strict reading. For me, I can't allow 21 other players to damage property like that and only be punished with a YC. That's kind of the way I look at it. If that is celebration is punishable by a YC, then everyone can break one thing during the game. Reasons for RC: It's extremely dangerous to himself (concussions, plexiglass shards, etc.) This is way more excessive & celebratory than just removing your shirt If I'm an opponent, I'm not going up for a header or slide tackle against him next time. He has no care for himself, nor me. That is the intimidation issue that was raised earlier in the thread. His celebratory behavior has now caused opponents to play the actual game differently. Reasons for YC: You just can't find a clean & clear reason in the LOTG that makes it a RC, goshdarnit. For me it's a RC, because I don't personally have a problem with it being stretched and written up as Violent Conduct. However, if I'm on your crew and you choose to give a YC, I'm not going to bother calling you over to discuss...a YC is within reason.
Actually, you are joining the hitherto silent majority by endorsing RC for #1 and/0r #2 . . . Videos for anyone not familiar... #1 Invader trip (the first one I remember, multiple other examples exist): #2 Dog toss: