The Refereeing Thread

[ursus arctos]

I always thought the "foul" was in the very public nature of the appeal, which seems designed to get the crowd worked up.

A low key verbal appeal shouldn't draw a card (and I don't think it usually does).

[imp]

I always thought the "foul" was in the very public nature of the appeal, which seems designed to get the crowd worked up.

A low key verbal appeal shouldn't draw a card (and I don't think it usually does).

Correct. The yellow-for-'let's-have-a-yellow' is a non-verbal way of saying, "Stop acting like an obnoxious cunt."

[imp]

This week, I discuss the philosophical difference between being called a bastard, a wanker and the son of a whore.

[treibeis]

This week, I discuss the philosophical difference between being called a bastard, a wanker and the son of a whore.

Getting on for 30 years ago, I had to man-mark a centre-forward who enjoyed a Billy Whitehurst-type reputation in northern German non-league football for literally decades.

He not only made me look slow and incompetent, he also spent every spare second telling me how ugly I was.

"Mate, if you don't mind me saying: right ugly bastard, you are. I mean, I'm no oil painting, but compared to you ... Jesus. English, aren't you, so I heard. Yeah, looking at you, course you are. You ugly bastard. Tell me, did you have to leave England because you were so ugly? Did they kick you out for being Quasimodo? Gotta see the funny side, though, haven't you? Having to leave England, of all places, for being too ugly. Like you did, you ugly bastard."

I didn't retaliate, verbally or otherwise, not least because I could barely string a sentence together in German at the time. The referee heard some of the 'verbals', but didn't do anything, probably because he was of the same opinion as the centre-forward.

I just googled the mouthy fucker (as I said, he played at a good amateur level for ages, right up until about five years ago, so there are quite a few references). If the photos from 2015 are anything to go by, he hasn't just eaten his words in the last quarter of a century, but also everybody else's currywurst and chips as well. The ugly bastard.

[imp]

Excellent. That is a story I am going to re-tell in the ale- and club-houses of Frankfurt am Main.

[seand]

This week, I discuss the philosophical difference between being called a bastard, a wanker and the son of a whore.

Cheers imp, I enjoyed your article as usual. The highlight though is saved for the very end- the tag "your mother insults" which links handily to four posts over the years.

[imp]

Thanks, sean. Just a six-yellow game at the weekend, but an old geezer's remark after the match got me thinking about how important verbal communication is for an amateur ref, and how much I use it in the course of an afternoon.

I played one of those advantages where you have half the team and all its fans screaming "Referee!" for the foul (which was admittedly a pretty bad late challenge), and then five seconds later they're celebrating what turns out to be the winning goal. And inside I'm going, "Yes! Yes! And you're absolutely fucking welcome." Needless to say, no bastard ever says, "Great advantage, ref!" It's almost as though they're more focused on the bloke who actually scored the goal.

In other reffing news, IFAB are apparently considering wording in the offside law that will actually articulate giving the benefit of the doubt to the attacking player. If this ends VAR-generated, toenail-length offside decisions, we should be celebrating.

[seand]

Thanks, sean. Just a six-yellow game at the weekend, but an old geezer's remark after the match got me thinking about how important verbal communication is for an amateur ref, and how much I use it in the course of an afternoon.

I played one of those advantages where you have half the team and all its fans screaming "Referee!" for the foul (which was admittedly a pretty bad late challenge), and then five seconds later they're celebrating what turns out to be the winning goal. And inside I'm going, "Yes! Yes! And you're absolutely fucking welcome." Needless to say, no bastard ever says, "Great advantage, ref!" It's almost as though they're more focused on the bloke who actually scored the goal.

In other reffing news, IFAB are apparently considering wording in the offside law that will actually articulate giving the benefit of the doubt to the attacking player. If this ends VAR-generated, toenail-length offside decisions, we should be celebrating.

Would be good to see the "benefit of the doubt" given to the attacking team, but it'll not stuff the VAR genie back into his fetid bottle- any game that's covered by VAR and/or live television will theoretically be able to remove the doubt to prove definitively that a toenail was offside.

[Janik]

Not going to help whilst the general societal misapprehension over spurious accuracy persists - the one that says a measurement is what something is rather than the mid-point of an error band (it's not x, it's x plus or minus y). The argument will come that, yes, give the benefit of the doubt to the forward but with VAR there is no doubt/offside is offside/a inch is as good as a mile, etc. Such a change would basically only codify what already happens in non-VAR matches.

[imp]

Not if it's coupled with sane guidelines about what should be referred and what shouldn't. There's been mass fan condemnation of these time-delaying, nit-picking decisions that are well beyond the spirit of sport, so if any new such law is properly administered then I think we'll see the end of referrals for micro-decisions.

[imp]

I reffed two youth games at the weekend, and only afterwards did it occur to me that 13 yellow cards over two games is quite a lot. Or, maybe it isn't.

Sunday's home team - the U19s of the team in the city that a few years back set itself up as an embodiment of inclusion and sporting values, with a former 1968 student revolutionary as its honorary president - had behaved very poorly five weeks earlier when I awarded a penalty against their goalkeeper and they went on to narrowly lose. The above blog entry tells the tale of their pre-match apology.

[imp]

Time for some more questions. Like we have nothing better to do or worry about, the Frankfurt Refs' Association has been bombarding us with online tests on the grounds that we need to keep in mental shape because there are no games to ref. There are also threats if we don't do them - we won't qualify for next season and/or won't get allocated games. Don't fucking tempt me.

Anyway, here we go with some of the usual hogwash scenarios that would never actually happen in a real game. The shinguards, always the fucking shinguards. I have never seen or heard of a game, at any level, where a player has extracted his or her shinguard and thrown it either at the ball or an opponent or a passing pigeon or any fucking thing at all. But it's absolutely crucial we know what to do when it happens. What, you'd give an indirect free-kick? You're fired, you idiot!

Remember, they want the punishment, the re-start and the location of the re-start. Get any one of these wrong and you lose both points and risk failing and then not being allowed to ref FC Psycho-Twats v Sporting Fuckwittery for €22 some time next autumn:

1. The ball is in the penalty area when a defending player throws his shinguard [as you fucking do] at an attacking player, who's standing just outside of the penalty area. Decision?

2. During the run of play an injured player enters the field of play without the referee's permission, far away from both penalty areas, and plays the ball. Decision?

3. During the run of play, a dog runs on to the field and plays the ball. Team B were the last team to touch the ball. What is and where is the re-start?

4. An attacking player only has the goalkeeper to beat. Just short of the penalty area a defender grabs him. The attacker manages to continue their run until they are fouled thanks to a mis-timed tackle in the penalty area [presumably by the same defender]. Decision?

5. While making a clear attempt to clear the ball in their own penalty area, a defender plays the ball against their outstretched arm, which is also clearly above shoulder height. Decision?

6. During the run of play the coach of the home team loudly insults the referee. Decision?

7. An attacker is standing in an offside position, but is not interfering with play. When a team-mate plays the ball towards the forward, a defender commits an intentional handball to prevent the pass reaching them. The ball reaches them anyway, and now they have a clear run on goal. Decision?

8. Direct free-kick. Two defenders form a wall at the correct distance. When two forwards place themselves either side of the wall, the two defenders complain that the attackers must be one meter away from the wall. Must the referee intervene?

[seand]

Time for some more questions. Like we have nothing better to do or worry about, the Frankfurt Refs' Association has been bombarding us with online tests on the grounds that we need to keep in mental shape because there are no games to ref. There are also threats if we don't do them - we won't qualify for next season and/or won't get allocated games. Don't fucking tempt me.

Anyway, here we go with some of the usual hogwash scenarios that would never actually happen in a real game. The shinguards, always the fucking shinguards. I have never seen or heard of a game, at any level, where a player has extracted his or her shinguard and thrown it either at the ball or an opponent or a passing pigeon or any fucking thing at all. But it's absolutely crucial we know what to do when it happens. What, you'd give an indirect free-kick? You're fired, you idiot!

Remember, they want the punishment, the re-start and the location of the re-start. Get any one of these wrong and you lose both points and risk failing and then not being allowed to ref FC Psycho-Twats v Sporting Fuckwittery for €22 some time next autumn:

1. The ball is in the penalty area when a defending player throws his shinguard [as you fucking do] at an attacking player, who's standing just outside of the penalty area. Decision?

2. During the run of play an injured player enters the field of play without the referee's permission, far away from both penalty areas, and plays the ball. Decision?

3. During the run of play, a dog runs on to the field and plays the ball. Team B were the last team to touch the ball. What is and where is the re-start?

4. An attacking player only has the goalkeeper to beat. Just short of the penalty area a defender grabs him. The attacker manages to continue their run until they are fouled thanks to a mis-timed tackle in the penalty area [presumably by the same defender]. Decision?

5. While making a clear attempt to clear the ball in their own penalty area, a defender plays the ball against their outstretched arm, which is also clearly above shoulder height. Decision?

6. During the run of play the coach of the home team loudly insults the referee. Decision?

7. An attacker is standing in an offside position, but is not interfering with play. When a team-mate plays the ball towards the forward, a defender commits an intentional handball to prevent the pass reaching them. The ball reaches them anyway, and now they have a clear run on goal. Decision?

8. Direct free-kick. Two defenders form a wall at the correct distance. When two forwards place themselves either side of the wall, the two defenders complain that the attackers must be one meter away from the wall. Must the referee intervene?

Well question 1 doesn't even tell us where the shinguard chucking defender is standing. Perhaps it doesn't matter, but I'd have thought it's a free or pen depending on where the defender undertook his dastardly action. And if the offisde attacker in q7 is not interfering with play why does the defender handle it to prevent the ball reaching him? Is the implication that the defender is an imbecile? If the ball was horribly mishit and happened to be swirling towards the attacker then he's clearly interfering with play, I don't really see logisitcally how a defender's handball can change the attacker from not interfering to having a clear run on goal.

[San Bernardhinault]

Questions 1, 2 & 6: tell them to stop being arseholes, abandon the game, score it as a forfeit against the idiot's team, go home, have a beer and a hot bath.

[1974ddr]

I used to love You Are The Ref in 'Shoot!'. And my answers, though frequently wrong, were at least decisive. So (with very low expectations):
1 Direct free kick and a red for violent conduct.
2 Yellow card and a free kick.
3 Drop ball wherever it was at the time.
4 Penalty and red card (advantage for the first foul).
5 Play on (but I'm expecting to be wrong, I don't really understand handball since they started changing the interpretation every couple of months).
6 Yellow for the coach, indirect free kick to the opposing side.
7 Offside. Don't listen to the attacking side's coach or you'll have to give him a second yellow. You've already upset him in 6 above.
8 Probably. I imagine this is another recent change that I have largely ignored, like everyone else.

[San Bernardhinault]

In question 4, if the first and second fouls are by different players, both attempting to stop a direct goal scoring opportunity, I think you should red card them both, shouldn't you?

In question 7, it wasn't offside to start with, then the ball came off a defender to the attacking player, so again it's not offside. I think you have to book the defender for the handball, too, but after you play advantage and let the striker fluff his goalscoring opportunity.

[Favourite Worst Nightmare]

The attack with a shin guard deserves a red as it’s so clearly a premeditated foul.
To remove the aforementioned pad prior to the hurling of it, the defender would have had to untie and remove his boot, take his sock off, unfasten the Velcro and unstrap the heel.

[imp]

Sorry for the delay, here are the answers.

1. The ball is in the penalty area when a defending player throws his shinguard [as you fucking do] at an attacking player, who's standing just outside of the penalty area. Decision?
Direct free-kick, where the attacking player was standing. Red card. (Key here is where the player hit by the shinguard is standing. If they'd been in the penalty area, it would have been a penalty.)

2. During the run of play an injured player enters the field of play without the referee's permission, far away from both penalty areas, and plays the ball. Decision?
Direct free-kick, where the player played the ball. Yellow card. (They want to differentiate here from other possible scenarios - if a player enters the field but doesn't interfere with play, you wait until the next stoppage before showing yellow. If they come on and commit a reckless foul, then it's yellow-red.)

3. During the run of play, a dog runs on to the field and plays the ball. Team B were the last team to touch the ball. What is and where is the re-start?
Drop-ball, where the dog interfered with play, for Team B. (Testing us on the new drop-ball rule introduced a year ago - advantage is always now for the team last in possession.)

4. An attacking player only has the goalkeeper to beat. Just short of the penalty area a defender grabs him. The attacker manages to continue their run until they are fouled thanks to a mis-timed tackle in the penalty area [presumably by the same defender]. Decision?
Penalty, yellow card. (I took an age over this one. It's clear that it's a yellow for the tackle in the penalty area because it was an attempt to play the ball. But do you also punish the attempted tactical foul outside the area and thus show yellow-red? Somewhere in the laws or the guidelines I found a wording that said in such a scenario you don't show yellow for the attempted tactical foul, but if it had been a reckless foul, say, and the attacking player had picked themselves up and played on, then presumably you would have.)

5. While making a clear attempt to clear the ball in their own penalty area, a defender plays the ball against their outstretched arm, which is also clearly above shoulder height. Decision?
Play on.

6. During the run of play the coach of the home team loudly insults the referee. Decision?
Indirect free-kick, on the touchline, red card. (All verbal offences are punished with an indirect free-kick. If they come from a team official, subbed player etc. on the bench/touchline, then that free-kick is taken on the touchline closest to where the gobby twat is standing.)

7. An attacker is standing in an offside position, but is not interfering with play. When a team-mate plays the ball towards the forward, a defender commits an intentional handball to prevent the pass reaching them. The ball reaches them anyway, and now they have a clear run on goal. Decision?
Play on, no punishment. (I took an age over this question too, and lost a point by deeming that the defender should have been retroactively yellow-carded once the play was over. The handball is classified as a deliberate attempt to intervene in play and thus creates a new game situation, so the 'offside' player is no longer offside when he gets the ball.)

8. Direct free-kick. Two defenders form a wall at the correct distance. When two forwards place themselves either side of the wall, the two defenders complain that the attackers must be one meter away from the wall. Must the referee intervene?
No. (Only when there are more than two players in the wall does the 1-yard distance rule apply to the attacking team.)

I got 28 out of 30 (I didn't post all the 15 questions - five of them are video questions). On the following test I had the immense satisfaction of pushing the Hessen FA to correct one of their answers. Thus I scored 29 rather than the previously allocated 28. They even had the grace to thank me. On the following test I only got 26 because I screwed up on one of the video questions. If I can find the clip I'll post it on here and ask for your opinion.

[imp]

F?rth v Wiesbaden. At the 2' 40 seconds mark - penalty or not?

[1974ddr]

I did surprisingly well on that, I thought! Not having read the Laws for a long time, albeit probably more recently than a lot of people who are paid for their expert opinions on TV.
I don't fancy the job permanently though.

[Levin]

Away teams have received fewer yellow cards in behind closed door games

[Sporting]

Question from my son:

To what extent can a ref use their command of languages during the course of a game? Let's say that two international club sides with players from different nations, are in action. There's some argy-bargy and tempers get heated during which various players berate you in several languages, most of which you don't understand apart from the Paraguayan who has told you to eff off and fuck your mother in Guarani (a language you know because you are married to a Paraguayan). Is it fair to single this player out for punishment when for all you know similar insults were coming your way in Arabic or Russian?

And if that Paraguayan gets injured and you start asking him in Guarani if he's okay, can this be considered as showing conscious or unconscious favouritism to someone whose language you happen to speak?

[ursus arctos]

I am certain that I have heard of cases in which a player was surprised to be sent off for epithets he uttered in a language he did not expect the referee to understand

[Janik]

The referee is probably unaware of, or unable to pinpoint from whom, 90% of the foul and abusive language being used comes. But he should punish any that he can identify as such, if he is certain who said it. Some of the abuse being unintelligible to him is effectively the same as it being inaudible to him.

[imp]

More often than not it's the way that players speak to you as much as what they actually say. So, "Ah, fucking 'ell, come on, ref" in a sort of exasperated, arm-flinging way might only mention a talking-to or a yellow. But getting up close and screaming "Fucking hell! Come on, ref!" might warrant a red. So, if someone was talking to/yelling at me in a language I didn't understand then I'd judge them by the tone and the body language.

I once reffed a Lufthansa tournament here of international airlines. I don't speak Italian, but it was pretty clear what the player from Alitalia meant when he called me a 'bastardo' - but it was after the match, complaining to the tournament organisers, so I couldn't do anything about it. It did cement my opinion that Alitalia is the shittest airline I've ever flown with, and shored up my vow to never fly with them again. Ha!