USSF just couldn't help themselves - they had to stir up the pot again with Memorandum 2003. Remember last year they specifically said: "...USSF has not authorized nor will authorize any state association or local league, competition, or tournament to adopt a 'temporary expulsion' rule. The Laws of the Game may not be modified in this regard." It couldn't have been any more clear; neither the referee nor the leagues, tournament authorities nor anyone else could adopt such a rule. Now comes Memorandum 2003 and the advice has been changed to read: "... This instruction, which was first discussed in Memorandum 2002, is not subject to implementation by the referee: it is a matter for the competition authority. ..." Are we to conclude that USSF has backed away from their position and are now going to permit the "competition authority" to implement a temporary expulsion rule separate from the authority of the referee? How would it work - would the field marshal have the authority to direct the player to leave the pitch? If the player goes without the referee's permission, does he get a second caution from the referee? Does this create a substitution opportunity separate from what USYSA has designated? Why oh why didn't USSF just let sleeping dogs lie?
Maybe it's to be more compatible with the NFHS rules. High schools have a soft red for two yellows or taunting, where the sent-off player may be replaced. OR, it could be for the indoor game which has 2 or 5 minute penalties.
What they are saying is that this is not the referee's problem, or job to enforce this, but if a competiton authority wishes to impose such a standard on their players, then they may do so and they may enforce it. This is what is meant by "not subject to implementation by the referee". Yes, but this is not really relevant. Remember, under the Laws the referee may substitute at any stoppage. USYSA is a competion authority and subsitution is one of the things which may be modified in the younger (up to 16), women, and over 35 matches. In essence, this clarifies the issue and follows current instruction. I just read in another fourm how a referee was going to decline his tournament assingments if they did this. What nonsense. As long as they did it themselves, why should he care? It is not his problem so why make it so? There is a right way and a wrong way to handle this. USSF is giving us guidance on the right way. Sherman
Re: Re: Temporary Expulsions - here we go again? It was just so perfectly clear in the 2002 memorandum ... I wish had just stuck with their statement from last year and been done with it.
Actually, that was more confusing for the leagues because it sounded as though USSF was saying that they could not substitute a player after a caution, sort of like they had to leave them in and we were running into referees refusing to work games. The point is that we cannot enforce this, so if a team decides to leave a player on, we continue the game and let them sort it out. Nothing in the match report, beyond the caution, and if they ask we answer "not my problem". Same situation if a player refuses to be subbed off. That is between him or her and their team. They are a player until they leave the field. "Natchopoblemo!" The reason for the sub is irrelevant. I assisted a game a couple of years ago where a players' teammates had to drag him from the field while he kicked and screamed. The referee, just looked on, added some time, and applied a lot of common sense. Sherman
Oh don't get me wrong Sherman, as a coach I loved the ability to pull a kid off after he'd been cautioned. I just don't like the idea that leagues and tournaments will once again claim the right to make it mandatory. Last year's guidance was widely interpreted to mean that these competition authorities were prohibited from enacting mandatory temporary expulsion rules, which is exactly what FIFA was telling them. Now the advice seems to permit the practice again. The fact that we as referees are not supposed to become involved in the policy doesn't, in my mind, make it any less of a mistake. I'd much rather see it left to the judgment of the coach to decide if his player would benefit from a cooling off period, particulary for the mid-teen boys level. You're right of course that ultimately it isn't our problem as referees, but any time things are made more restrictive for coaches and players, it tends to cause problems for everyone involved with the game, including us. Oh well, we'll just have to deal with whatever comes out of Chicago last. Paul
I agree it is going to be interesting. Since we are not to enforce it, it may be manditory to the teams competing, but not on us. We must provide the substitution opportunity, (and is it unlimited?) but we don't care whether the cautioned player goes off, or for how long. All this would require in the typical rules of competion is the following addition: A team may substitute during the following stoppages: One its own throw-in, Before a goal kick (both teams), After a goal (both teams), For an injury (both teams), At halftime, After the referee issues a caution (both teams, only for the cautioned player, 1 for 1?) This is already permissable under the Laws, so there is no problem with a competion authority making such a change. I have no problem with this, as long as they don't then tell me that I must make certain the cautioned player is subbed off before I start play, since there is no provision for this in the laws. Sherman
NFHS allows for any number of substitues by either team after a stoppage for a caution or send-off. The cautioned player is to be subbed off.