This recently happened during a highschool game. A player from my team was mad at another player for no real reason besides the fact he wasn't doing well against the defender, so when the defender won the ball from him and was dribbling up the field he elbowed him in the back as he played the ball, the defender turned around and pointed it out to the ref that he was elbowed in the back, the pass was astray and went to my team who played it first time and hit the defender in the private area, the forward from my team who had given the elbow said "ew he likes it like that" so the defender settled the ball turned and blasted it at the player even tho it was towards his goal(about 30 yards out and right next to the touch line). the ref blew his wistle and yellow carded the defender for USB the defender stated that he was just trying to gain a throw in even tho it was obvious what he wanted to do and they gained no help by a throw in. Was the right call made? I am a ref myself but am very uncertain about the call, and I have no idea how the ref did not hear all that our player had said. However I also believe that no matter how obvious it was that the defender blasted the ball at the attacker, there is nothing saying that this is USB. All the time defenders kick the ball off of attackers to gain a corner. I see that the card was given to keep the game from getting out of hand but I don't see under what rule the foul would be placed. And yes it was a foul because he gave them a indirect free kick for it. Your insite is very welcome, I would like to know for for future knowledge. Thanks in advance. Nathan
Nate it is difficult to assume what goes on in another referee's mindeset during his game. His match, his decision, his reputation. I have no idea what part or any of what you describe the referee may have heard or seen. There appears to be all kinds of material to award a foul or caution for USB. Although cautions to some extent are discrestionary there is in the opinion of the referee a much chanted mantra of our profession that plays the role here in determining what call he feels he must make. Be it good or bad suitable or not. Your assumptions of what makes USB is not accurate. Be it word or deed a referee can find fault if it is against the spirit of the game or willfuly endanger an opponent. It is a serious resonsibility and generally most of us take it as so. I would hope the referee in your game did also. The kicking of a ball off another player is not usually considered as USB simply because it is rarely done with that intent. Even when blasted from 6 yards on an INDFK from in front of the goal. In this case perhaps it became clear to the referee this was an attack, in my opinion if it was, a red card for a send off for violent conduct is not out of the question. Remember if the referee stopped the game soley to award a card an INDFK is the proper restart. If the whistle was because the referee felt the kick was a strike against the player I must admit a DFK would be the appropriate restart. In speculating it would be better if you asked the referee for this game to give his side of the story. AS in most of these situations you are getting our best quess.
Welcome to the boards, PCR. USB is a pure judgement call to help the ref control or manage the game. It sounds like one (USB call) could have been given earlier, but I have no argument with the ruling as you describe it. It sounds like it was starting to get out of hand, and the defender escalated the bad behaviour even though he was innocent in the previous action. The ref could have called either the elbow to the back or the comments (if he heard them), but may have missed them or considered them unconsequential (or trivial).
I would point out that the card could have been avoided if the referee was a little more proactive with the TAUNTING which is a soft red under high school rules for this very reason.......Trash talk leads to degeneration of control.
Its best to step on misbehavior from the git-go, rather than let things escalate. If the ref crew is working together -- I assume a 3-man crew, the way God/FIFA intended it -- the AR should catch any shenanigans behind the ref's back. If both of them fail to catch the initial incident, the ref should be aware of the game's 'atmosphere' enough to realize that something happened that he missed, so he should be on his toes to make sure the situation doesn't get worse. p.s. - Putting on a coach hat, players who retaliate because they didn't get the call they think they deserved are selfish. They prove nothing nothing through their retaliation, other than that they think more about themselves, than their team. (Which subsequently has to play a man short.) The captain really needs to step in and lay down the law to the selfish player. Players themselves, if their is a problem that they think the ref missed, need to go to the captain, rather than taking the law into their own hands.