It just seems like two cards is too small a quantity for a game suspension. I realize if you get two in one game it's a red for 2CT and you miss a game. So you could possibly have to go 80+ minutes without doing anything to earn that second yellow. However, having 2 yellows in 4 games earning a suspension seems excessive. This is only a maximum 6 game tournament for any given team. With the reset after the 4th game (Quarter-finals), that means if you get a caution in the early minutes of game 1 of pool play, you could miss the semifinals if you get another yellow in the late minutes of the quarterfinals, up to 360 minutes of play later. In fact, Maggio, for Italy, is missing the semis after getting a YC in the 1st pool play game (89th minute) and a second YC in the quarter-finals (94th minute). Two yellow cards 275 minutes apart across 4 games and he misses the semis. Both may have been well-deserved, but there are always those situations where it could have gone either way or one referee might have been able to manage without the caution but another referee's style or the tone of the game forced the yellow, and then you have to sit out because you're already sitting on a yellow from 3 games ago. Yes the cards are for reckless or unsporting behavior or "cheating" or whatever, but it still seems harsh.
Cumulative cards are pointless. They do not result in players changing behavior. They result in officials being reluctant to give cautions. They needlessly take players out of games. They unfairly make all conduct equal. Compare the following. Players A & B have a string of 4 matches. In games 3 and 4, Player A makes reckless tackles and is cautioned. He sits for cumulative cautions. Player B gets a caution for encroachment in game 1 and in game 4 is cautioned for removing his shirt after a goal. He too must now sit for cumulative cautions. Now, everyone one of us knows that the threat those two players has towards our game are entirely different, yet, cumulative cards forces identical treatment. Completely illogical and unfair.
Move the threshold up to three cards and don't reset? I get the argument with two, but 3 in 5 much harder.
If you get a red card, you sit the next game (or more at the discretion of the Discipline Committee). If you get yellow cards in two consecutive games, you sit the next game. If you accumulate a total of 4 yellow cards, you sit the next game. This would work for 16, 24, and 32 team tournaments, discouraging persistent misconduct while preventing perceived unfairness with players getting two yellows very far apart before the "cutoff" point.
I think the entire premise of accumulated cards is wrong. Each game is an entity, with rules. New game, new day. The only yellow accumulation needed is the one already in place: 2 in one game, you are gone and sit one more game. Enough right there. I don't buy the entire premise that more is needed. Especially with the more recent trends of more yellows coming out and the clamp down on overly physical play.
I like the idea, but I have a question as well. If a player gets two yellow cards in one game, and thereby a red and a game suspension, would those two yellows be incluced in the yellow card accumulation, or would they simply morph into the red card and not affect accumulation? It would seem harsh to have a player sit out for a red card, and then have the two yellows that precipitated it cause him to sit another game for two more yellows in later matches.
A player who manages to accumulate a yellow card in one match, two in another, misses a match as a result, and then gets a fourth yellow card, in a tournament with no more than 6 or 7 games (in which he could have only played in 5 or 6 at most), is not the first player in line for my sympathy vote.
I would propose a system based on cautions that expire with time, sort of like points on a driver's license. Depending on the length of the event you can set the expiration to whatever number of games you think is fair. You can also set the trigger point to whatever number of cautions you think is fair. Also, once an accumulation suspension is triggered, their rap sheet would be cleared too. Given: A player is suspended for receiving cautions in two matches over a five match event, and that cautions expire after the completion of the next match: A player gets a caution in game 1 and game 2 = suspended. A player gets a caution in game 1 and no caution in game 2 = they have no active cautions on their record for game 3. A player gets a caution in game 1 and game 3 = not suspended, but has an active caution heading into game 4. Send-offs inherently result in the resetting of the active discipline record. Again, you can set the numbers to suit your event and alter them if you perceive it to be too harsh or too lenient based on trends in the games.