handling the 'in-your-ear' player

Law 12 does not require dissent to be public to earn a caution. [EDIT: The glossary does use the word public, but I think public includes what you can hear, particular when it is persistent.]

Tell him to strongly knock off the dissent, that you’ve heard enough. And if it persists after that give the caution. He keeps doing it because he know you aren’t going to do anything about it.

 

I have no problem answering some things you quote him as saying, like 'you missed that shirt pull' with just saying 'okay.' "Why did you give him a card?' "unsporting."

If he wants to say stuff like 'you lied to me last week,' now we're in yellow card territory. Maybe "enough," maybe a card for dissent, but you have to show your disapproval of his attack on your character.

 

@vinDeezul thanks for asking a specific question and providing specific examples! You have options here depending on your personality and style of refereeing.

First, I personally always try to answer any question asked by a player in good faith. I think doing so gives me credibility when I then need to stand my ground to someone. Doing so allows me to use something like a smile, eye contact, and something like "come on, I'm not going to entertain that," when a player starts to escalate complaints or gripes to something closer to bad faith.

Next, if you've got a bad egg (a player who is acting in bad faith and trying to mess with your head to get an advantage), like @socal lurker and @Law5 have said, you need to stand up to the player and show you're the referee. Some options:

• Wait for the next stoppage of play, hold the restart with your whistle, move near the player in question but far enough away that other players can hear, then ask "hey, can you repeat what you said to me? I didn't catch it the first time."
  • This forces the player into a decision on whether to retract his statement, or double down and risk a card. Either way, you assert some control and single him out as a problem. He'll think before doing the behavior again the next time.

• Wait for the next stoppage of play, hold the restart with your whistle, move close to him so it's just you and him, and say something like "I'm not going to allow these constant potshots at me. This is your warning for your dissent. Don't be surprised if a card is next."
  • After this, you can also publicly put some pressure on the captain's shoulders. "Hey [Tom, whatever the captain's name is], can you please help me out with #34? He's constantly running by me and dissenting during the run of play."

• If the content of the dissent implies that you're unethical, or hold some kind of favoritism (i.e. something more than just "you missed that call" or "why didn't you do X."), you can stop the play dead and issue a yellow card for dissent right then and there.
  • If he complains, you can call over the team captain and explain what you heard, why you were lenient, and how he's on thin ice for a possible red card with his language. Use the fact that the restart is an indirect free kick against his team to your advantage... this can get his teammates to try and help you modify their own teammates behavior.

These are just some examples. There are definitely more depending on context/personality. Hope this helps!

 

Alex has a lot of good stuff there. I will say that, IMHE, captains in adult amateur games have little to no influence over the behavior of other guys on the team, and that don't want to take responsibility for it either. High school and college are different. But YMMV.

 

This, this, this. It's an administrative position for whoever drew the short stick and/or can keep track of ref fees and beer money.

 

It all depends on the context, really. Teams don't want to play short. And, traditionally, a captain will reluctantly do something to manage his team if he feels obligated to. So thats why I mention involving the captain as an option. Utilizing the captain's role to benefit your own player interactions and match control can still be useful at the adult amateur levels because: (a) it gets a 3rd party involved in whatever you have going on with a specific player; (b) the problem player might actually modify his behavior if he feels his actions (and possible send-off) will alienate himself from his team; or (c) in some cases, the captain will tell you that you're free to give a red card to the offending player because his teammates don't even like him. I've had that happen multiple times in O30 and O40 matches.

 

You like a tied game ≡ a direct challenge to your integrity. that is, you are favouring one team over the other. You probably are the only one who do not have any stakes, esp, in adult amateur weekend matches! You can throw the book at this player, and if it turns out the be 2Y=R, so be it. It is not you, it is on him, and his team.

You did not give him a yellow ≡ partiality, is also a direct challenge to your integrity.
You lied to me is getting to be personal attack.

You may also want to find how other referees have handled that player. If said player is not doing his run-by with them, then that player has singled you out for his treatment. Player has so far succeeded in that his comments have got under your skin, and it bothers you. Now the ball is in your court, so to speak. Take those disciplinary actions, you will have the league rulebook to help you.

If it happens that that player is the only one getting sanctioned by you, that will be due to none other players on the field are running-by with comments on your actions. As mentioned earlier, when you book that player, you will have a solid basis to tell "looks like you are the only one having problems [with my actions]."

 

In adult amateur, I make it my mission early in the game to identify the team leaders who are level headed and here to play football, not whine and moan. Whoever is administratively "the captain," those players are the ones who you can tell about a problem player and request their help lowering tensions.

 

The fact that this needed to be made a thread upsets me. Not because it’s dumb or anything. But because it's so frustrating to see referees unwilling to use the tools we have to manage dissent

OP, the player you mention should be receiving a dissent yellow card quite early on, especially in some crappy adult amateur match, the type that usually use solo refs. Why are you just ignoring his dissent? Why subject yourself to abuse in a league like this? It's the fact that you ignore it that makes him keep doing it, which clearly upsets you, but then you continue avoiding using your tools to deal with it.

You ask what method there is to deal with it. If he asks a good faith question, answer it and don't allow follow up. If it's in bad faith, which it appears to be, tell him to stop. If he continues, yellow card. If he continues, boom, second yellow, goodbye, now you don't have to deal with him anymore. That's what method you have to deal with it.

I've been working in a similar crappy adult amateur league for 3-4 years now, it's coed recreational and we work as solo refs. I'm not being disrespectful calling it crappy, it's just that it's a kick the ball around for exercise and socializing league, men and women play together, various ages, no trophies. I've reffed all the teams, and all the managers know that I'm a ref who doesn't take dissent and tell their players such. If players whine about offside, I will offer to stop the game and go to my bag to get my flag so they can act as my AR. This usually shuts them up. Any loud exclamation directed towards me about a foul call/no-call, even COME ON REF, is an immediate yellow, 10 minute cool off period. When the players see that I do that, they shut up for the rest of the game. What a concept, punishing players for dissent actually gets them to stop doing it. We are not in these casual adult amateur leagues to be abused. If there's ever a mass confrontation, which has happened because some adults are very sensitive about things, immediate match termination.

I had a ridiculous incident a few months back where one team had to lend a female player to the other team to even out the gender distributon, then her original team manager got pissed when they kept her as a substitute for the beginning of the game because they knew their few female players would need to be subbed out. He said if you're not gonna play her we want her back. An argument ensued between the two managers on the touch line. I immediately stopped the game mid-attack, called for the ball that was on the other side of the field, and told them we will not be starting again until they work it out, and the clock is running, and I walked off the field with the ball. Lo and behold, within 30 seconds, they fixed the issue and shook hands and apologized to each other.

People above posted good techniques and you can definitely study and use some of them, especially for more consequential games. But don't just sit there and subject yourself to that crap man. I'm not saying you have to be Istvan Kovacs from Euro 2024 who issued 20 cards and 12 were for dissent, but use your tools.

 

I'm always willing to talk to the player, if its sincere. Jersey tug? Yeah I saw it, but IMO it didn't influence the play.

Now, the guys like this example, who keep talking like this, they aren't interested in your thoughts, so obviously not worth engaging beyond a warning and then the yellow card.

 

This approach works fine for low-level leagues. Plant your flag, put your foot down, draw the line, feel real good about yourself for doing it. Great!

The second you try to take that approach into a more competitive league you will immediately find that it is inflammatory to every situation you are trying to calm. You will blow games up and lose the trust of teams and assignors alike.

I know that you, personally, are of the belief that we must be the change we want to see in the world and that each of us can be the spark that ignites the flame of changing soccer culture for the better. Call me a cynic, but you're wrong. Our job as referees is to do the expected. Aim for the middle of the bell curve on what the other referees in the league are doing - or you will find yourself on the outside looking in of the games and opportunities that you want.

We all want dissent to get better. But encouraging referees (in a public forum read by many) to stick their necks out and be a one-man crusade is irresponsible. The path to improving dissent has to be top-down and driven by the leagues, backed up by the assignors and every referee in the league.

 

I know you can’t do this in a competitive game/competitive league, even at the youth level. I was talking strictly for the type of league that I (maybe wrongly) assume OP is dealing with, a low level adult league where you’re out there alone. It frustrates me to see a fellow ref getting dissented and he just ignores it and lets it clearly affect him (as he had to make a thread here) rather than using the tools he has.

I’m also well aware that we need leagues and assignors to be the one to try to mitigate dissent rather than all of us trying to make change individually. Preferably they could institute stronger punishments than a yellow card can provide at least in lower level leagues. Something like every dissent yellow card leads to a one match suspension. The problem is that leagues and assignors have not, and possibly will not, ever take dissent seriously. The euros did that, telling referees to only allow captains to talk and card everyone else. We saw Kovacs get raked over the coals for how “ridiculous” he was acting carding everyone on the field and bench for dissent, acting like a one man crusade himself. And no other refs in the rest of the tournament did the same, which was disappointing to see. If every game saw 5+ dissent yellows and players getting accumulation suspensions because of dissent yellows, maybe it could have helped change the culture, at least for that tournament. But they took the cowards way out. People always complain about the way players act towards referees, then when they do something to deal with that treatment, they get called thin skinned and ruining the game.

 

You could always play the game with him like he's playing it with you. Just loud enough for other players on the field to hear so they figure out what you're doing because whatever that player is doing to you, it's very much likely annoying them also.

"why'd you kick the ball that way?"
"Guess you like passing to the other team"
"nice shot, Shankapottamus"
"oh no, another turnover"
"that was one of your better passes this game"

I'm sure I'll get some flack for this from other posters, but if you do this with the right personality, the player will get the message one way or the other. This type of personality works if you're reffing regularly in the league and teams/players start recognizing you as a regular. They'll get to know you and you'll get to know them.

 

You are destined to venture into the forest that is amateur footy by sheer determination and carve out your own serviceable path!

You already took the first steps, by identifying the problem, and seeking out solutions.

 

My suggestions were already risky enough. But saying that you should start openly mocking players for not playing well, this is a whole nother universe.

 

Don’t do this haha. At least not out loud. Inside your head is fine. We have an expectation to conduct ourselves in a professional manner and if we stray away from that, we give refs everywhere a bad rap. Don’t be that ref.

That said, you have two tools to quickly rid yourself of the problem. Make sure you do it professionally and make sure it’s defendable, or marginally defendable and your life will be a lot easier.

 

Can I ask you why you decided to try the ignore method vs. using your cards? Are you afraid to use your cards? And I do not mean that in a mocking way. There are people who are hesitant to use cards especially with dissent, I think they feel it makes them a thin-skinned baby or something. I've even had this happen in a few other sports I referee with the same yellow and red cards like we have for soccer, where the refs are well aware that they don't give the card to the coach quickly enough. We even had one referee get in a lot of trouble because he allowed a coach to continue on, and on, and on, and instead of giving a card said to the coach "will you please just shut up", which led to him being reported to the assignor and suspended for a week.

I couldn't believe hearing that story. Imagine getting so much dissent that you need to tell the person to shut up, yet STILL haven't used your cards.

 

In my early ethnic league years I ignored it. Now I caution them. Eventually I hope google invents technology that allows me to swear back in Slavic languages

 

I was doing a high school game the other day and this kid who I had cautioned for persistent infringement told me "don't you hear them swearing!?"

I look at him and point to my sonic blast whistle and say "no bro, I am deaf"

(To his defense the opposing captain did scream the f-bomb one yard from me in the 2nd half so I sent him)

 

I am reminded of the referee at the World Cup, many years ago, who sent off a player "for the look in his eye." I don't know to know who is swearing. I just have to know when people are getting angry. I've picked up one word of Serbo-Croatian over the years. I don't know how to spell it, but it's pronounced "brow" and it means 'good.' Say it, as you raise your chin a bit, when someone does something sporting early on, like helping an opponent up, and maybe they'll assume you know the language.