If this line got to the press, it would inspire think pieces on how this is the core of terrible officiating. It's possible to go the other way. The NFL emphasizes accuracy among their officials. I thought their refs were a lot better than pre-PRO MLS. If @MetroFever's candidate is issuing tons of cards and calling the cops at games that were fine, that doesn't sound like games were getting out of control. It sounds like the candidate was autistic and reffed games like an internet message board where commenters come down hard on everything with no regard for real world soccer culture, where high card count games are unacceptable regardless of what the decision would be in an instructional video.
maybe I misread it. I agree you don't manage UB-reckless and UB-spa. lack of respect you got some wiggle room. I think what you're failing to recognize is that not only are you minority, you are almost close to being on referee island. Btw, worked a match this weekend referee gave two dissent cautions. 1 to a head coach, and one to a field player (same team). However, the in between is what gets you. He already managed and used all his "personality" to try to change the behavior and ultimately drew the "line" in the sand; and booked both participants. It's not that you personality them away, illegal is some high school terminology. It's you sanction or use disciplinary action. If the team kicks the ball away and they're losing 3-0 do we always sanction for DR? If the game is 1-1 and one team is playing with 10 players and that teams kicks the ball away do we not sanction? its not binary code its a spectrum. Some sanctions are musts and some are wiggle room depending on your match control. I'd also challenge you to look up the history of the yellow and red card. Look up when they became history and look what officials use to do before it.
Yeah, see, I think the problem here is misreading our posts. I think I mentioned that these technical yellows you’re listing (DR, FRD, DT, etc) are the ones that I know we “personality” away from giving as much as we can, and those aren’t the card reasons that I rack up. The whole time, I’ve just been talking specifically about reckless and SPA cards. And it was a good point of discussion for me because @MetroFever and a few others mentioned this philosophy of “anyone can give cards, but the good refs use their personality to prevent it” or that giving a lot of cards in a game is indicative of some sort of game management failure on the referee’s part. My argument was that the most commonly given cards, reckless and spa, don’t really have much of any room to be “managed” away because they are a single individual challenge where game context really doesn’t, or shouldn’t, come into play, the way that it can for the technical or even UB-respect ones. If I was some ref with 6-8 yellows a game where 5+ of them are regularly for dissent or delaying the restart because I’m officiating it to the letter, I agree that would be an issue and that referee is on an island 500 miles from every other referee. But my situation is somewhat more frequently than expected having the 4-6 card games but all of them are reckless, spa, ub-respect, and when someone says that this card count shows some sort of deficiency in my refereeing, well I hope not… I hope it’s more indicative that I’m actually punishing things properly, like when you helped analyze that 8 yellow ECNL game footage I sent you a month back
Happy Thanksgiving to all fellow referees! Here are just a few examples of a match we did together when he was still highly regarded by the state: 1) An early match foul that is a "borderline" yellow and no one is looking for a caution. He comes out whipping a yellow card and running in as if he's de-escalating a possible situation when it's nothing more than a careless foul and over-reacting. He's at the early phase of losing the respect of players at this point and digging his own grave as he's giving the impression the game is about him and not the players. 2) Issues a yellow for Delay Restart when the player kicked the ball away a few yards after a tough (but correct) foul call when a simple few words would have shown he's human and understands players can be passionate. The player didn't kick the ball out of bounds and didn't delay anything. 3) Stops the game while the ball is in play to issue a caution for dissent. When I asked what the player said, it's something none of us here would have issued a caution for and was not public as nobody knew what happened. Players and fans could easily tell he could be frazzled by any comment towards him. One caution issued for SPA and another for an obvious reckless foul no one said boo. He does not utilize the down time in-between substitutions or while a new ball is brought into to play to speak to players and deescalate a situation, which could have avoided some of the frustration fouls. This also includes lack of communication to players while the game is going on. I must admit, that when these videos go out from Prus (and others), I do I wish that they were way more specific and not so vague to give the impression you're to ignore a clear DOGSO or to look the other way on a clear reckless foul. Their point is how did your personality come into play prior to that point from the opening kickoff? National Referee Coaches are not asking referees to be a comedian, but an occasional smile and humbleness goes a long way.
This seems to be why this keeps going around in circles: there is a difference between "borderline" yellow, and “clear” yellow/100% misconduct, and it’s on a spectrum
Really what set me off with it is hearing the “manage away yellow cards” stuff. Because yes, there are things that are clear yellows. And then even when you have a clear yellow, then people come out with the “well what has the game been like up to that point?”, like it’s the referees fault
I don't think you understand what is meant by the question of what the game has been like up to that point. Every game has physical play to some degree. You can think of analyzing this in terms of a graph. X (on the horizontal axis) as time, with the game starting at the origin point and extending out to the right. On the Y axis, you can note the degree of physical contact. How much energy was used in that contact with an opponent? The stronger the contact, the higher up the scale you mentally mark it. Engineers might think in terms of ergs. (Yeah, this analysis doesn't really handle handling but let's ignore that for the moment because handling isn't a major category of fouls in most games.) So as you go through the game, moving along the x axis, you see the contact and chart it. There, of course, is some contact that is light. And there is some contact that is heavier. As you go along, you have to use your judgement about how heavy the contact has to be for you to blow the whistle. Initially, you are probably going to make that decision based on your experience with teams at this level of play. But once you call that first foul, now every contact above that point also has to be called as a foul. Essentially, you have drawn a horizontal line that says 'everything above this line is going to be a foul.' I will pause here to note that, IMHE, frequently, particularly with older players, I see the first contact of the game as being 'medium.' Essentially, the players are asking you a question, "Is this going to be a foul today, ref? We can adjust to whichever way you want." Drawing that line on the graph makes us consistent! And that's what they all say they want from us. Back to the graph. Somewhere above your line, you have another line drawn mentally. Everything above that second line is going to be, should be, a caution. Maybe they never get above that line in the whole game. Whew! And, of course, somewhere above that is a third line, for serious foul play. But you have to set that line based on your experience with players at the level of today's game. I find that the cautions really jump out at me as clear escalations from what the game has been like up to that point. And we can go on later to talk about how the referee can then give the caution in ways that send the message that what they just did will not be tolerated today.
You keep saying SPA and reckless are your most given, but I’d swear I saw you list a ton of dissent and delaying on an earlier post or other thread
if I found my number of SPA cards was high, the question I’d ask myself is whether I’m being too generous in deciding attacks are “promising” for actual level of the game. What is promising in the pro ranks is completely different from what is promising at lower levels. (Same for DOGSO.) I like @Law5 ’s description. I would add thar, in appropriate game situations, that bar may move up or down. I’d put that first foul as the presumptive bar, and as we learn more we can loosen or tighten to address the game in front of us. The more our foul bar is well tuned to the game the players expect, the more likely they are to play near that line, rather than the reckless line. And to get back to SPA, in my view, when we need to tighten the game, that can lead to “gray” scenarios being card worthy, whereas when the game is more collected, the grey ones can go without cards. (I’d also add that, while not official criteria, wheeze grey as to a promising attack, I believe the cynical nature of the play, or lack thereof, can tilt the scale.) YMMv.
I agree with socal lurker about how many SPA fouls you are finding. Sometimes, it's just a foul in the attacking third, particularly among younger, less cynical players, and among those with less defending skill. I see SPA as a recognition that sometimes there are fouls that don't meet the definition of DOGSO but they're still close. Another thing to add about my previous post. Sometimes, you have a close game that's been physical all along. I don't mean nasty physical necessarily, but the adrenalin is flowing and both teams are trying to do just a bit more to get another goal in the last five or ten minutes. They clearly want to play more physical now, and I can feel that vibe. In that case, I will tend to raise where the line between foul and trifling is. That doesn't mean that anything goes, of course, but they also want the referee to 'let them play.' There is a difference in these situations between playing more physical (using more ergs) and doing overly physical stuff just to stop the opponents, probably with less regard to actually winning the ball. That's when I'm telling them, "You want to play more physical? You can't handle more physical."
That was probably the U19B ECNL game I did a few months back. I had three DR cautions of my 8 cards given, which probably equaled my entire year of DR cards combined. It was an anomaly game from that standpoint. And despite what’s being said here, that game actually kind of helped me to realize that my reckless and SPA cards are pretty accurate, because I had a few users here analyze those 5 cards and they pretty much agreed they were all correct. Thinking more closely about it, my yellow card breakdown I would estimate as 40% reckless, 40% spa, probably 7-8% each for PO and ub-respect, and maybe 5% everything else combined. At least at the youth level when it comes to SPA, when the ”alphabet soup” high level youth leagues come into play, I feel they deserve to be officiated in a way that reflects the high level of play they pay for and consider themselves to be, and so yes I’ll use the training we receive on pro games to officiate them. Hell, I’ve had U13 MLSN players (correctly) expect a spa card for a counterattack being chopped down in the defending third. So yeah, a player having plenty of space in the attacking third? A player with a path into the box? A defender with plenty of space and speed starting a counter in his defending third? A card is most likely coming at these high level youth leagues. And you know what? Almost no one ever complains about any of those cards that I give, so that also helps to show they’re accepted and likely correct
Your breakdown seems reasonable to me, and as I’ve said before, I appreciate your willingness to be so honest. I know I could give more yellows. I definitely give them when needed much more now than from when I first started.
This discussion we’re having about cards and man management jogged my memory about the extensive NCAA discussion on this board from last December and specifically the wake forest Clemson game. If anyone is interested, watch just the first 6 minutes of this video, look at the nature of the fouls and challenges for which a minor foul and non-urgent whistle was used, no cards were issued, and which teams were doing them. As was said extensively in there, apparently this was a great result for college soccer because college soccer hates cards and loves management. But I can’t remember a time when I’ve been more pissed off watching a match
Here's where I catch on this- if the argument is "you need to give cards to send a message that the behavior is inappropriate and can't continue and by doing so you prevent the players from killing each other" why do you have to give five or six subsequent cards? If the purpose is to use the cards to manage behavior, why isn't the behavior changing? Are you getting anything out of the cards you are issuing?
So, as I said earlier in the thread, if players aren’t changing their behavior despite you giving the cards, what’s your response? To stop giving them because they clearly “aren’t working”? And also, as I said earlier in the thread, I don’t just give cards just to “manage behavior”, it’s also to punish for behavior committed. I couldn’t give two craps if I’m issuing cards to players to punish their actions and they aren’t responding to them. They’ll keep getting them as long as they keep cheating and doing reckless actions. I’m not comparing myself to a top referee in the world, but I watched through the Chelsea-Arsenal game today where Anthony Taylor gave 7 yellows and a SFP RC upgraded through VAR. He started in the 5’, three in the first 13’. He had to give 2 more yellows and the red before the first half was up. Did the three yellows in the first 13’ stop behavior? Clearly not. Did he keep issuing deserved cards? Yes. That’s what matters.
He also used his personality to communicate with players and manage their behavior. After he gave the red card, he spoke with the Chelsea captain quietly and the captain accepted his explanation without complaint. Personality! Managing! Communication with words! All of those things helped keep a lid on the game after a deserved red card that HE MISSED in real time. He didn't even call a foul on the play. This is what most of us are saying. It's not just about the cards and meteing out correct punishment, Management while giving cards is the next step in referee development for you.* probably There used to be a thing in referee training called "Foul selection v. Foul discretion" and it translated to misconduct selection/discretion too. I know that's out now but it's still applicable on the field of play.
Men's league game, a couple minutes into the game. One team counterattacks and they've got a player who gets past the defense and is coming in for a 1v1 on the keeper. As he gets into the box, he starts to stumble, and while I'm a bit farther away from the play than I'd have liked, it looks like a defender tried to stick his leg out to get the ball and caught the attacker from behind. The attacker didn't go down or yell for the foul, but it seemed clear to me he was affected by the contact and would've had a great chance to score otherwise. I blow the whistle, PK, yellow card to the defender. Defending team goes crazy and keeper says to me "You're a f****** clown," so I send him off. Attacking team converts the PK, ends up winning 3-1, and the game mostly settled down (these are two of the better-behaved teams in the league). I talked to my AR at halftime (I've reffed a few youth games with him, but he's fairly new and had never done an adult game before). He says "Oh, 100% that was a foul. He bumped into the attacker from behind just enough to mess him up. I used to do that all the time when I played in this league." He also agreed with me that it was close, but he was pretty sure it was inside the 18. So I felt a lot better about after that. The first half was pretty rough because I was afraid I had really screwed up. So I guess my question is this: would going straight over to the AR (ostensibly to check whether the contact was inside or outside the penalty area) have helped sell the decision? It would've given me a bailout if I had completely whiffed. Yes, I know there are signals that the AR can make to show PK/non-PK, but that would've probably been too advanced for an AR who I think has only been reffing for a year or two.
I have to agree with others that if you are consistently giving 6+ cards per match, you may need to take a closer examination of how you look at a match. Find another ref that you respect, go and watch a match together, and tell him/her how you feel about the fouls. Yes, the above you list sound like well deserved cards, but maybe your definition of SPA, hard fouls, and even DOGSO aren't what others believe constitute those fouls as cardable offenses. I can't remember any matches that I've coached having that many cards - over the last 12+ years. I very rarely see any professional matches have that many cards, either.
Talking to the captain to manage his team pretty much only works at the professional level. Other levels they are ceremonial positions and really couldn’t give less of a crap. Believe me, I’ve tried doing it. It never works. To go with the discussion about what constitutes spa at different levels, here was a spa YC Taylor gave in a counter attack. Quite obvious despite it being in their defending half. What levels of play are you guys giving this a card in? https://streambug.org/cv/9cfa43
It's often not about the captain's armband... but who on the team is a clear leader, someone that people listen to. Those are the players to target. Not the ceremonial captain. Those are the ones to work with during the warm-ups. During the game.
Absolutely go over to ask for your AR's input. And the first thing you say to them is 'no matter what you say, nod your head.' Defenders have much less cred if there are now two referees saying it's a PK.
And, if necessary, these are the players who will appreciate your recognition of their importance to the team. E.g. one that worked for me, "Blue, help me keep seven in the game. He's been doing some stupid stuff out here." He immediately turned and yelled at seven "Joey! Stop doing stupid stuff!!!" It was very clear that seven was a freshman or sophomore and the team leader(s) always appreciate the chance to exercise dominance over rookies on the team.