PDA

View Full Version : Yellow cards (revisited)



ex-lucy
10-03-08, 18:03
green v red ..
red 3 'side entry' lying all over the ball in his own 22m ... ref blows whistle .. goes to pocket and brings out YC... as he does this ... red 2 pushes green 10 who was collecting the ball....
Ref, after admonishments all round, shows red 2 the YC and says "red 3 was going to get a YC but red 2 now has it."
Red 2 off for 10 mins ..

was it right ?

PaulDG
10-03-08, 18:03
green v red ..
red 3 'side entry' lying all over the ball in his own 22m ... ref blows whistle .. goes to pocket and brings out YC... as he does this ... red 2 pushes green 10 who was collecting the ball....
Ref, after admonishments all round, shows red 2 the YC and says "red 3 was going to get a YC but red 2 now has it."
Red 2 off for 10 mins ..

was it right ?

I don't think so, no. I think it gives the impression the ref can be bounced into changing his decisions.

IMHO, as he'd decided to card Red 3 he should have done it.

Depending how he felt about the follow up it might have been appropriate to card Red 2 as well or possibly to make the point that "any repeat would mean the guy in the bin would have some company.."

Phil E
10-03-08, 19:03
Sounds bad to me, like he is making the laws up as he goes along?

Make a decision, stick with it, then deal with the next decision.

Cant imagine the players thought he was decisive and consistant.

madref
10-03-08, 19:03
Hi

2 yellows in my book

Madref

ex-lucy
10-03-08, 19:03
oops .. this was David Rose in Glaws v Oirish at the w/end ... i thought it was bad too ..

David J.
10-03-08, 19:03
Yellow and Yellow.

Jono
11-03-08, 09:03
green v red ..
red 3 'side entry' lying all over the ball in his own 22m ... ref blows whistle .. goes to pocket and brings out YC... as he does this ... red 2 pushes green 10 who was collecting the ball....
Ref, after admonishments all round, shows red 2 the YC and says "red 3 was going to get a YC but red 2 now has it."
Red 2 off for 10 mins ..

was it right ?

YC for initial offence

Strong words for the push, this should be within a referees management capabilities without needing a card.

beckett50
11-03-08, 15:03
YC for the initial offence and penalty reversal for the second, with strong b*ll*cking

AndyKidd
11-03-08, 15:03
YC for the initial offence and penalty reversal for the second, with strong b*ll*cking

As I read the post, it was Red team who commited both offences so there is no reversal as such.

But after blowing the whistle the Red 2 carried on so he would also qualify for a YC in my book. There can be no excuses for actions after the whistle. The penalty has already been given against red so there would be no punitive measure left to the ref except for another yellow card. A B**l**g is not punitive.

One more thing. If Red 3 deserved a YC before the incident he should still get one after, regardless of the actions of a team mate.

Toby Warren
11-03-08, 15:03
Ex Lucy is this in the recent Glaws game with Rose as ref? - if not a very similar incident happened there.

My mind is clear

1st yellow stands
2nd yellow given Pen reversed

The actions of another player after the event in my mind can't excuse foul play (or professional fouls in this case)

truck'n'trailor
11-03-08, 16:03
I think he would have been hung if he had given two yellows in that situation...

oxped
11-03-08, 16:03
Yellow plus strong words with Red 2.

dave_clark
11-03-08, 17:03
I think he would have been hung if he had given two yellows in that situation...

why? one for the technical offence, the other for striking an opposition player.

AndyKidd
11-03-08, 17:03
Gentlemen, to answer the question you really only need to think about what YOU would do in the same situation. We all referee at various levels and, as we progress through the levels, our interpretations of the laws may also vary from the days when we first started refereeing.

So forget it's Glaws ........ forget it's Dave Rose ...... and respond to the senerio as if it's a game at your own level. There may well be teams where it isn't necessary to issue 2 YC's as this is the first piece of play requiring YC's to be issued. OR this could be that game that has had niggling attacks coming from the same team throughout. Your decision will usually be made not just on the event itself, but what has occured previously in a match.

The other thing to remember is that with these forums we get the time to sit back, relax and run the senerio over and over in our heads before we answer. The decisions made during a match are immediate.

I based the answer I gave earlier on a previous experience where I did actually YC 2 players one for the first offence and the second for an offence after the whistle. The team in question seemed to lose the bad attitude they had shown earlier in the match pretty quick. So on that occasion it worked for me.

ex-lucy
11-03-08, 17:03
Lizban, yes in Glaws v Irish match. both players were Glaws. so pen cant be reversed. Near try line so no point moving it forward. umpteenth time that a player of either side had been over aggressive after many warnings to both capts.
the game needed a double yellow. yes, he may well have been lynched as it was at Kingsholm and they are pretty rabid down that way.... but still.

and as fate would have it ... guess who is coming to talk to us on Thursday at Herts Refs Society meeting?
should be fun

Davet
11-03-08, 18:03
The offence that sparked the push by red 2 was green 10 interfering with the ball on Red's penalty.

Keep the YC for Red 3 and reverse it for green 10's offence, and bollock red 2?

Players interfering with the ball when it is the oppositions penalty is becoming a blight, they must understand that all they do when the refs arm goes up against them is to get back 10m NOW. No questions, no loitering, no messing with the ball - just RUN back to 10m line - end of. no debate.

beckett50
11-03-08, 19:03
As I read the post, it was Red team who commited both offences so there is no reversal as such.

But after blowing the whistle the Red 2 carried on so he would also qualify for a YC in my book. There can be no excuses for actions after the whistle. The penalty has already been given against red so there would be no punitive measure left to the ref except for another yellow card. A B**l**g is not punitive.

One more thing. If Red 3 deserved a YC before the incident he should still get one after, regardless of the actions of a team mate.

Andy you're right.

What I meant to say was YC for the original offence and march them back 10m for the 2nd.

Whether a YC is justified is debatable. As you say, it is very much situation dependant and each case will be different in its outcome.

ex-lucy
12-03-08, 13:03
davet, it wasnt red's pen in the first place.
the pen was against Red 3 for coming in the side.
green 10 was going to get the ball for his pen.
then red 2 shoved green 10.

Davet
13-03-08, 01:03
Ah - OK.

But I still say that players interfering with the ball at the oppposition penalty is a blight and a real flsahpoint.

truck'n'trailor
13-03-08, 10:03
This is actually what happened:

Scenario - in the last six minutes of a fractious first half at Kingsholm in an evening fixture in light rain. The referee had spoken to the teams on three separate occasions in the half in order to try to calm them down and stop the escalating ill-temper (eg the no 2s brawling after play had moved away), and had spoken to the captains instructing them to take responsibility for their players.

Incident - Green 10 (Mike Catt) broke into the Red 22m in good attacking position only to be hauled down by Red 3 who failed to release and move with material effect. Penalty advantage. No advantage coming. Ref blows for penalty and reaches for his pocket. At this point Red 16 (Olivier Azam, blood replacement for no.2) takes exception to Green 10 who is getting up off the floor post tackle (ball is nowehere near btw). Another scuffle breaks out but no clear punches thrown, just a lot of pushing and shoving amongst a group of players. There was no indication that Green wanted to take the penalty quickly at all.

Ref blows up and separates the players. Calls to his TJ to 'flag in please' which he duly does and gives the ref the opportunity to take time out and jog over. Quick discussion that was of no consequence and ref returns to deliver this verdict:

He had been ready to YC red 3 for cynical play in the red zone, and said as much. But was now going to YC Red 16 for 'escalating the situation'.

IMO this is a great example of very smart reffing, and this is why: the scuffle in itself was never a YC offence, even with the rising temper of the match, and David Rose would have been hung if he had YC'd on that basis. However, he used the 'red zone cynical' YC opportunity to enforce discipline: Red 16 went to the bin and the players saw that it was for ill-discipline, Red (especially 3) was made aware that cynical offences would not be tolerated.

Smartest bit of shrewd reffing I've seen in a while.

Ex-Lucy - I'd be surprised if this is not his justification if you ask him about it tonight.

Dickie E
13-03-08, 10:03
"He had been ready to YC red 3 for cynical play in the red zone, and said as much."

But what does that mean? I had the card 1/2 way out of my pocket then changed my mind?

Why didn't he just say "I had the situation in control - no need for you to join in Red 16"

truck'n'trailor
13-03-08, 11:03
This was a golden opportunity to impose on what was becoming a pretty ill-tempered game, and he took it.

tim White
13-03-08, 13:03
Not comfortable with this. Card the cardable offender. All the players would have understood the YC for red 3, so do it. Then deal with the fool coming in late, minimum 10m advance of PK, YC if he stopped a quick tap. Don't shoot the messenger, shoot the fools who deserve yellow cards. At my murky level this sounds like he copped out and took the easy decision, perhaps not the best one.:chin:

SimonSmith
13-03-08, 13:03
I don't think that that was the smart bit.

Goes over to the TJ. Things settle down. Players wonder what they're talking about. He comes back and cleanly and decisively gives the card.

Completely sells the decision. Doesn't really matter if it's technically the "right" card - sells the decisions and gets the right outcome. Going to the TJ, as I read it, was smart.

OB..
13-03-08, 13:03
Card the cardable offender.
Makes sense to me. If both are justified, why should giving two yellow cards be a problem?

In this case there is a management problem. On the spur of the moment we do not always find the best form of words, but to suggest that a YC somehow transfers from one incident to another is not a good idea.

If the referee reflects on this, then perhaps he will say something different if this unusual situation happens again. It's called gaining experience.

Davet
13-03-08, 16:03
I guess the proof of his management skills is in what happened to the game after this.

If it setteld down and the niggle stopped or significantly reduced then I guess that what he did was the right thing - by virtue of working.

If not, then the opposition to his acts as seen here becomes more valid.

At the end of the day what matters is what works.

And that dependes as much on the idividuals concerned, players and refs as on what is done. The skill in reffing is in making these sort of decision smore often correctly than not.

OB..
13-03-08, 17:03
I guess the proof of his management skills is in what happened to the game after this.[...]The skill in reffing is in making these sort of decision smore often correctly than not.
I agree with the last bit.

However a wrong decision does not become right simply because it happens to produce a good result.

truck'n'trailor
13-03-08, 18:03
Why was it a wrong decision? It is up to the referee to apply YCs as and when. This case is no different.

OB..
13-03-08, 19:03
That was a generic statement.

IMHO there was a management error in this case: saying the card had transferred from one offence to another. If both offences are worth YCs, then both should get them. If it worked to calm things down, it was despite this rather than because of it.

It was not me who judged the first offence to be cardable - the referee said so.

truck'n'trailor
14-03-08, 10:03
As I have previously said earlier in this thread, the pushing/shoving between players was probably not in itself a cardable offence, but the opportunity to settle the game by using this incident was a good one, and one which the referee smartly took - under the circumstances.

Perhaps if you had seen the video of the incident, you might have a different opinion.

OB..
14-03-08, 15:03
My concern is not whether or not yellow cards were justified - it is the unfortunate impression given by the comment that the yellow card had in effect been transferred.

I suspect the players did not really take it in, but I would still advise against it.

truck'n'trailor
14-03-08, 18:03
Agree the 'sell' could have been better. The mistake came when he was too quick to put his hand in his pocket for the original offence and prior to the scuffle. But having donw that he certainly got his message across and the desired effect was that the game calmed down as the players finally responded.