Hey, all, checking in with a question that arose after one of my games this weekend. In my game (GU14, AYSO Winter Select), I had a player who made several challenges against opposing players that were both late and hard (more than one that was 2-3 seconds after the ball was gone.) After four of these fouls, and two verbal warnings from me, she received her first caution (foreshadowing there....) About four minutes later, the same player came in late and hard again, committing a reckless foul, for which she received her second caution and a send off for 2CT. That was all pretty cut and dried, she knew the second caution was coming, and I could hear her coach yell at her, "you can't do that when you're on a yellow!" Here's the question that I'd love to get thoughts on...... After the game, I was discussing this situation with my AR's, and we were pondering if the same player can receive two cautions for PI (resulting in 2CT.) I don't see any reason within the LotG why that should not be possible, but I certainly have never seen it in my years of playing, spectating and officiating. Talking it over, we agreed that the first caution for PI should be a warning to the player that they are repeatedly playing beyond the laws, and we agreed that academically there should be no reason that a similar foul to the previous ones shouldn't result in another caution for PI, even if it isn't reckless in and of itself (in my game it was, so no controversy there.) Any argument for or against PI x2 for the same player? I'm genuinely curious about the thoughts here, more specifically related to the age/skill level I was involved in, but generally as well. Thanks! Rich
I take exception to the part I bolded. If you follow your logic, once a player is cautioned for PI, he/she can no longer commit any foul or it is again PI. That is not at all the intent of PI. While PI can result from ignorance or lack of skill at younger ages (though very rare), it is usually a tactic to slow the game or irritate the opponent(s). Look for that. If a player has already been cautioned for PI and fouls again, ask yourself "was the action a legitimate play on the ball or was the action designed to result in a foul. If the former, no 2CT. If the latter, you can issue 2CT, but if it wasn't blatant, I'd prefer a "one more and you're gone."
SB- Please note that in the part of my post you bolded, i indicated that if the player committed a SIMILAR foul (ie: not a "garden variety" foul, but one that's more than that yet doesn't rise to the level of reckless......so, the same kind of foul for which the player already picked up a caution by committing it repeatedly.) I'm certainly not saying that a players on a caution for PI should be disqualified for any further infraction. Where the discussion was centered was on the similar foul part. The player is demonstrating by continuing to commit the same level of foul that the caution has not worked, and they are still persistently infringing on the laws (again, beyond a "garden variety" foul.) Thanks for the input! R
I'm not sure of the question either now. Are you asking can a player get a second yellow after getting PI? Of course. Are you asking if a player is cautioned for PI, that every subsequent foul needs a yellow card for PI? Kind of like in basketball when a certain number of fouls changes the way every foul is handled from then on. I'm not convinced of that. I would have to see an actual second yellow card offense and not just give cards for fouls 5 and 6 (for example) automatically. However, if it seems like the behavior has not changed, and PI is about game feel and behavior, then there is nothing that says you can't.
Sorry if I've muddled things. No, for sure I'm not saying that any subsequent foul should be cautioned. The question is, can/should you give a second caution for PI after having given a first caution for PI? What kind of behavior after the initial caution would lead you to give an additional caution for PI? R
Yes, you can give two cautions for PI. If you give a player a caution for PI and they continue to commit fouls, I would have no problem giving a second caution for PI.
Can you give the same player I would think about the level of the foul and its impact. If the player is still committing fouls at the same level that you gave the caution for or if they are escalating in their fouls, a 2nd caution might be a good idea. If they are deescalating and committing a more normal careless foul, probably no need for a 2nd caution for the next foul.
I guess this might be one of those YHTBT moments but if any player did this more than once: It would seem to me that this is reason enough for the first card, doesn't even need to be PI. 2-3 seconds late would be a reckless challenge and MORE than once needs to be nipped in the bud early. As for the question of can you give two PI's to the same player I would think that yes you could. I have in fact done that in a match before. Player in the first half committed 4 fouls in about 10 minutes to the other teams star player. Nothing serious or that broke up promising attack, but just getting in his head type stuff so after the 4th he got the PI YC. 2nd half starts and he does it again. I give him the warning that THAT foul was the last one he was going to have today, he disagreed and fouled the kid again 10 minutes later and boom he was gone.
I think you handled your situation well, and your question is a good one. The answer is yes, a player can get 2 PI cards. In fact, this could likely happen at a younger level where a player lacks skill and self-control. Picture a 12yo who keeps fouling, a coach (maybe a dad) who doesn't care. They are not unsporting fouls, but the kid keeps grabbing jersey on every play. The third or fourth time you caution for PI, and if he does another he might get a lecture replete with arm motions and what not, and foul number 5 or 6 is bye-bye time. At the professional level this is likely if the first PI is for repetitive fouling against the same opponent. After that card, if the team doesn't change their defensive strategy, a second one becomes even more likely. Edit to add this: I've seen this at the pro-level, but as far as I can recall, the second is just given as a normal 2ct instead of making a big deal out of the PI part. IOW, on the second the player doesn't get the pedantic pointing at all other fouls that they might have got on the first...the idea being that the yellow itself counted as demonstrating the PI nature of the 2ct.
The question you need to answer is, has the persistent pattern of fouling continued? 3 fouls at the 2', 5' and 11' mark might qualify as persistent infringement. The same 3 actions at 2', 27' and 44' are much less likely to be PI. Following the initial caution for PI, if the player continues in her pattern of persistent fouling, it should be a second caution. If that foul happens at 14', just 3' after the caution, it's probably an easy decision to make. If it doesn't happen until 34', not as likely that the 2nd caution is needed at that point. But another foul at 36' - hey, I see a pattern there!
@Gary V , I like that take on it. As it happens, the first caution was at 60', the reckless foul was at 64'. So, reckless or not, the pattern of persistent fouling was certainly continuing despite the first caution. Thanks, Gary.
I agree with that with one exception. If the 3 actions are at 2', 27' and 44' AND all are against player #22. Then you also use the PI YC. Just so you are aware of not only who is fouling, but WHO they are fouling.
Maybe. Depends on the fouls. Is there targeting, or is it just that #7 and #22 are playing against one another? Did the R warn the player after the second foul? Ultimately, there are no bright lines on PI--Law 12 even says that there is no particular number. PI is one of the areas that most involves reading a particular game and exercising judgment about what is needed to control that particular game.
I have no issue with 2 cautions for PI but based on what I see at the U14 level that I feel is AYSO. I would issue the first PI and then if the player continues to foul I would probably would fly by the coach and say something to along the lines of "You probably want to sub her now before she picks up a second yellow". Now like in your scenario if the player commits a reckless foul she is getting the USB CT and then sent off for 2CT with no option for the coach to sub. At the higher age levels I think it is harder to get 2 PI since the players tend to have more skill and the 2CT is normally a USB of some sort.
This would be an option at U16/U19 as they have free subs, not so much with U14 since substitutions are only midway through each half, at half, and due to injury (assuming that we aren't going to condone a fake injury.....) We were at 64', so the last substitution had already occurred. A good tool in the kit, though, for competitions where free substitutions are being used, thanks! R
Okay then change the flyby to something like "She is less likely to pickup her second yellow if she is playing goalie". As far as a fake injury. Maybe you should consider the behavior of the player a "mental injury" and ask the coach to evaluate her.
AYSO does not approve of "mental injury" or fake injuries--no referee should suggest this. Nor should referees make coaching suggestions about someone playing GK (We tell them to let us ref and they coach--the reverse is fair, too.) If you talk to the coach, just keep it simple: "Bob, #12 is already on a caution for persistent infringement and pushing the envelope. You might want to talk to her." (FYI re 16s/19s--not all Areas use free subs. Some use substitution breaks to more easily monitor playing time. Mine has subs on the 1/8s. I'd rather have free subs, but the powers that be got tired of problems/disputes about whether some teams were making sure all players played half the game.)