Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Chiltern
Referee
The official magazine of
The Chiltern District Society
of Football Referees
Vol 48 No 8 March 2016
The next meeting of the Society will be held on
THURSDAY 17th MARCH 2016
Starting at 8.00 pm. in the Amersham Community Centre.
The Guest Speaker will be
NICK COUSINS
Former international rugby referee and current ECB cricket umpires training manager. We offer Nick a warm Chiltern welcome.
The views expressed in this magazine are not necessarily those of the Society or its
Committee. Reproduction of any article is welcomed,
provided a suitable acknowledgement is made of the source.
EDITORIAL The Board of the RA seems to have a penchant for suggesting or undertaking ill-considered actions with little or no consultation with the majority of the members. A current example is its move to use £20,000 on an online training scheme via our website. Where is this sum of money to come from? Well, it seems that it will be taken from the proceeds of the sale of the leasehold property in Coventry. This raises a number of points ... First, spending £20,000 on web-based training is not the best use of our precious and limited resource. Second, training is the province of the FA and should be funded by that organisation. Third, the RA Board has no mandate to spend this money.
To ensure that the subject gets a full airing and a wider appreciation, a Notice of Motion has been submitted for the RA AGM in July 2016. It was proposed by Len Randall (CDRS) and seconded by Bart O'Toole (AFA RS member). The as-submitted Motion is set out below: Notice of Motion The Board's proposal to spend £20,000 of RA money on referee training is rejected. The Board shall not deploy RA funds developing training material for display on the RA website but shall seek to persuade the FA to fund any such material.
Reasons The Board of the RA has no remit to
spend large sums of members' money on referee training, which is the function of the FA and the County FAs
The Rules of the RA limit the Association to providing an environment for personal refereeing development working in partnership with other members of the football family. The clear inference is that we should co-operate with the football authorities to provide facilities for training but there is
no implied authorisation to finance such training.
For two decades the FA and County FAs have formalised and standardised referee training processes and over that time removed any prime responsibility the RA might formerly have had. We should support training and development but at no significant cost to the Association.
An expenditure of £20,000 represents around 30% of annual membership income and it is wholly unjustified to spend this on something that is the functional and financial responsibility of our "partners in the football family".
The RA is primarily a representative organisation and the expenditure should be preserved for the Association's primary needs.
Len and Bart feel that "the first purpose of the Referees' Association is to represent its members' interests. That is where its financial resources should be deployed. In representing members' interests it should encourage the FA to deploy a generous proportion of its far greater financial resources in the best and most cost-effective training methods, and made available to all 30,000 or so registered referees, not just the 6,000 - 8,000 RA members."
The move to spend the £20,000 directly follows the actions last year when £5,000 was fruitlessly spent on producing memory sticks that hardly anyone used. The attitude of the RA Board to the spending of the £20,000, is "If we have the money we might as well spend it. There's no point in sitting on the capital and then putting it into trust for a possible alternative body if the RA collapses"........ A 'spend, spend' attitude which is very worrying! If this happens, the bank balance will quickly disappear, and there will be little financial support available for any follow-on organisation. There is another worrying development. Albert Astbury (Eastleigh RA) has submitted for consideration at the 2016 AGM, a proposed Change of Rule to prevent putting any residual money into trust following a winding-up of the RA. It seems he wants to spend it now.
Do comments and actions like these suggest the RA Board fully expects the Association to fold in the near future? I fear they might! Surely any RA bank balance could (should?) be used to support its future rather subsidise the training activities of the FA.
Brian Richards
SOCIETY NOTES
Assessor's Remuneration
We have learned that from next seasons there will be a change in the assessors' fees for County assessments. An assessor will receive an all-in fee of £30 per game to include travelling etc.
Plum Appointment B/B FA U-16 Cup Semi-Final 7.2.16 Hughenden Valley v Milton Keynes City (R) Tim Braybrooks
Society Membership
2015-2016
Welcome to New Members
Cameron Elliot Andrew McLintock
Total - 35 (as at 21st February)
Dave Adams Paul Bennett Martyn Bradshaw Tim Braybrooks
Mike Bull Mike Coventry Cameron Elliot Alf Field
Steve Flack Paul Green
Richard Gledhill Steve Hailey Brian Hardie Ewan Hardie Bryan Hardy Tony Hobbs
Michael Jacob Peter Jones Neil McCluskey Andrew McLintock
Alex Micallef John Oxley
Simon Parbery Nick Pounce Len Randall Brian Richards Vic Sanassy John Simmons Vince Smith Lindsay Szulc
Richard Turner Wilf Walsh Fred Weaving Lee Wiles
Martin Wyvill
Affiliates (8)
Bill Chamberlain Dave Clark David Holdcroft Mike Gahagan
Peter Gibbin Paul Oxley Rupe Perry Gerry Taylor
Watch What ?
You are running alongside the winger and you are moving quickly towards the corner flag as the defender forces the winger into the corner of the field of play, near you. Everything is happening fairly fast, and suddenly the problems are upon you in all their variety.
You find yourself looking for the ball going out of play for either a goal kick or a corner – or perhaps it might be a throw-in. Whatever happens, if the ball goes out of play you must give a decision as to whose ball it is. Moreover, you must give that decision promptly, so that everyone is aware that you are on top of your job. To do all this, you must watch both pairs of feet and the ball very carefully in order to be sure which player touched the ball last before it went out of play.
But were not the referee’s pre-match instructions to you, “All offsides are yours”, accompanied by an almost threatening aside to the effect that he would sooner have a questionable offside than a questionable goal? You then start to wonder at this stage whether he’d sooner have a questionable goal kick instead of a questionable corner, or a questionable goal kick instead of a questionable offside, or just what he’d sooner have right now! Quite clearly, this problem of the offside or not is a vital one to the referees so, very professionally, you know he needs all the help you can give him.
You now have further problems for, with the play so close to you, how easy it is to see who touches the ball last, but how terribly difficult it is to judge the exact
moment to risk a glance past the ball and the legs in order to assess the offside situation.
With all this buzzing about in your mind, you find time to recall something else the referee had said to you before the game. “If anything happens that you see and I don’t, and you think it is of importance, let’s have a clear signal …”.
Now that is all happening in front of you, you wonder just what he meant, and at the same moment you know that what he meant was incidents like shirt pulling on the blindside, etc. The blind side to him is right beside you, perhaps even in front of you if by now you have reached the corner flag and have stopped running. But offences like that will be taking place an inch or two too high for you to see, as you gaze into the apparent jungle of legs. What a job”
As if you haven’t enough to be going on with, you start to listen for those illegal calls from one player to another. You hope secretly that you don’t hear one, for you feel convinced that you will not honestly be able to assess who shouted it. But you listen, since the referee cannot be expected to hear such a call if he is in a good position, somewhere across the field in the realms of comparative ease and comfort.
You have heard it said that you must be mad to be either a goalkeeper or a referee. You now begin to think once again that to be an Assistant you must surely be on the
verge of being certified! But you know you will still be there for the next similar situation, and indeed at the next lining appointment on your calendar.
There is little doubt that the Assistant has to be almost superhuman in situations like this one which, of course, is no real exaggeration of what happens many times during a match. Yet, as soon as the Assistant makes an error of judgement during such an incident, he will be called everything from blind to useless by those who have never had the delightful experience of running the line.
Nevertheless, there are actually referees around who think that their Assistants do not have enough duties, and should be given more responsibility!
If my Assistant faces a situation like the one outlined above just a couple of times during a match and he keeps us both out of trouble, then to me at least he is worth his salt. And what goes with salt? The peanuts that they pay Assistants – surely one of football’s most underrated participants!
(Ed. I saved this from The Man In The
Middle – SW Herts mag – 1988, and
reprised for this magazine in 2006)
It’s True! Refs Really Do Penalise
Away Players It is the news that every football fan) could probably have predicted – football referees really are biased. The man in the middle is statistically more likely to award yellow or red cards to members of the away team, researchers have found.
Even after the importance of the game and size of the crowd are taken into account, referees still penalise the away side. The study also backed up one of the biggest gripes of the Premiership bosses and fans – the inconsistency of referees.
Some officials were more likely to discipline some players than others, while underdogs were punished more than the top sides. Researchers hope their findings will be used by the football authorities to improve the game. “The decisions made by the referees can have important financial consequences for the individuals and the clubs” said De Peter Dawson who completed the research at Bath University.
“I hope the evidence we have collected will help football’s authorities debate what positive action they might take to improve the refereeing of matches,” he added. (Ed. Taken from Metro (of ten years ago) and given to me by Mike Jacobs. My comments then - a typical pile of unhelpful comments from unknowledgable academics jumping on the anti-referee brigade. I stand by my comments. What was the research? What games were analysed? Did it involve referees?).
England Boxing day was a nightmare for refereeing decisions last year but performances were much improved this time out. That may largely be down to referees being chauffeur-driven to matches on the day rather then having to drive themselves to an overnight stay in a hotel like last year (Howard Webb suggests). It meant they spent more time with their families, were more relaxed and generally made better decisions. Times 28.12.15 Portugal Sporting Lisbon striker Teofilo Gutierrez has created a piece of football history after becoming the first player to be booked for stealing the referee's can of vanishing spray. The 30-yr-old swiped the spray, used to mark where the wall should be at free-kicks, after scoring in their 3-1 Europe League win over Besiktas. He tried unsuccessfully to write a message on the pitch and, although referee Manuel Grafe saw the funny side, the only thing written was Gutierrez's name. Metro Turkey A former soccer referee has won a court case against Turkey's football federation which he has accused of outing him as gay and stripping him of his license to referee games because of his orientation. The
federation was ordered to pay Halil Ibrahim Dincdag 23,000 lira in compensation.
Independent 30.12.15 Germany Augsburg goalkeeper Marwin Hitz has apologised after deliberately scuffing up the penalty mark, causing Cologne's Anthony Modeste to fall over as he took the spot kick. Hitz twisted his studs into the turf right next to the spot under the nose of the referee just before Modeste stepped up. As the striker planted his standing foot, he duly slipped and put his kick over the bar. The incident proved crucial as Augsburg went on to seal a 1-0 win and Hitz said, "That wasn't the most fair thing to do. It won't happen again." Metro 7.12.15 Italy Andrea Cocco, striker with Italian side Pescara, was left red-faced when a goal celebration took a turn for the worse. After slotting home a penalty in a 2-1 win over Livorno, Cocco raced behind the goal and launched a joyful kick at an advertising hoarding. However, in his enthusiasm the 29-year old stuck his foot through the sign and ended up wearing it around his right leg. Fortunately it appears the only bruising was to his ego. Metro 19.1.16 Ireland Maggie Farrelly became a footnote in Irish sporting history. She took charge of a GAA Dr McKenna Cup match between Enniskillen and St Mary's in Enniskillen to become the first woman to referee a senior inter-county gaelic football game. Since 2008, Farrelly has worked her way through the ranks of a sport not known for moving with the times. Independent 2.1.16 Scotland No club was happier to see the back pf 2015 than Rothes. The year passed with-out the Highland League club managing a league win. This season they conceded 126 goals in 18 games, letting in 7 or more 10 times. Independent 2.1.16
The Adventures of Willy “Red Card” Woodwork
The Whistling Referee
46 - "The Big P"
Cockfosters Casuals v Reds Rovers League: Div 3 – Sunday Park League Nth Venue : Hackney Marshes - Pitch 165 Man of the Match : That has to be me ... the referee! I remember that excellent FA Licensed Tutor Keith Hiller who spoke about Law 14 the Penalty Kick. Keith told me all I needed to know about the penalty kick by the "Big P". Yes, that's exactly what he spoke about .... The Big P! So let me explain what that means. "B" is where the ball is placed and that the ball must be kicked forward "I" is for the taker to be identified "G" is for the goalkeeper to be standing on the goal line, and "P" is for the position of the players The "Big P" is a great method for all referees to remember everything that they are required to know in preparation for a penalty kick. If only Keith had been with me as I awarded two penalties within two minutes. In my mind there was no doubt that I had seen a careless challenge in the Rovers penalty area and immediately awarded a penalty in favour of Cockfosters Casuals. Alas the Rovers goalkeeper did not agree with my decision. He told me that I was wrong but I was confident that I was right. I politely informed the keeper that he would be cautioned if he continued to argue with
my decision and thankfully he walked away even though he was still mumbling something under his breath, I thought that as long as I cannot hear his mumblings that would be better and that a yellow card would not be required. The Casuals keeper by now had run from his goal area and told everyone in a loud voice that he was going to take the penalty. I had no problem with this as the taker had now been identified. We all know that even a goalkeeper is permitted to take a penalty kick. To my amazement the Rovers goalkeeper had walked over to his goal and was standing on his goal line but facing away from the penalty mark. In other words he had his back to the penalty taker. I calmly approached the Rovers goalkeeper and informed him the law requires the goalie to face the penalty taker and that he cannot have his back to the field of play. "OK ref" he said. He then told the penalty taker he would dive to his left and that the taker should kick the ball to the right hand side of the goal. I ignored the goalkeeper's comments as I ensured that all the other players were outside of the penalty area and that they were all behind the ball. Everything was in place and I blew my whistle. It appeared that the penalty taker took the goalie's advice only for the ball to hit the post and go behind for a goal kick. The Casuals captain approached me and claimed that was unsporting behaviour from the Rovers goalkeeper. He had a point but I decided to keep my cards in my pocket which is something I have not done too often during this particular match. Then I thought for a brief moment ... was I correct in law for the following? Can a goalkeeper take a penalty? Can the goalie tell the penalty taker where to place the ball? Can a goalie stand with his back to the penalty taker? Should I have cautioned the goalie
for unsporting behaviour? Should the penalty kick be retaken? Fortunately when I awarded the next penalty sixty seconds later my decision was accepted by everyone. Players all knew that Willy 'Red Card' Woodwork had the nickname for a reason! Keep reading the laws of the game and inspire confident as I do!
Willy Woodwork *************************************************
"Now that's what I call unlucky. He's been
sent off for sneezing aggressively"
They Said It .... "It's now 1-1, an exact reversal of the score on Saturday." Radio 5 Live Richard Keys. "Well Roy, do you think that you'll have to finish above Manchester United to win the league?" Roy Evans. "You have to finish above everyone to win the league." "Dumbarton's Steve McCahill limped off with a badly cut forehead." Tom Ferrie
Referee's Corner These translated definitions were seen by
Mick Owens in the Bicester FC Programme, about 25 years ago.
NESSIE - Seven foot referee who knows all about swimming in lochs, but sod all about football.
LINESMAN & REFEREE - The referee is well aware that the linesman's judgement is clouded by three criteria
What he thought he saw
What he'd like to have seen
What everyone around him is telling him he's seen
BEAU LOCKS REF - Foreign phrase often used by players who have just been sent off. Roughly translated it means "Any chance of you reversing your decision, Ref?"
HUGH JUAN-CARR - Hispanic name given to players who have trouble in keeping possession of the ball. Keeper rolls the ball out to Eric, who passes it to the opposing centre forward. The keeper and his fellow team mates will all shout as one "Hugh Juan-Carr, Eric!"
NET - Twine mesh surrounding the back of the goal. Reminds the keeper which way he should be facing.
FOUL THROW - Chucking the dressing room keys at the manager, just as he's bent down to tie up his laces. *************************************************
Ooooops! The most famous Kop song is, of course, You'll Never Walk Alone. But when Leeds 'keeper Gary Sprake threw the ball into his own net at the Kop end, they taunted him with a rendition of Careless Hands.
Rule Changes Difficult to Implement
This season the time allowed for team sheets to be handed to the referee has been reduced from 30 to 15 minutes before Kick Off. But as Mike Jacobs maintains, in most games it is not possible to comply with the laws to fulfil one's duties in the time now allotted. So he contacted the FA in support of a change back to the original timing. After an abortive exchange of phone-calls with the FA, Mike e-mailed the FA. He wrote: "Consider, two team sheets are handed in, usually at the very last minute. They have to be checked to ensure players are correctly numbered, the captain designated, team colours checked (not too similar), ditto keepers, check sheets are signed and first aid men named, Names of those illegibly written have to be checked. It is not unknown for scratching outs and "bits re-done" are required whilst the referee has to wait. After all that, a word of advice to the mangers as to what is expected of them and the team's conduct. Then, have we checked the match balls - including the rush back to get them by the home manager. Finally the referee is able to advance to the pitch, sometimes 300 yards away. Fortunately, most referees have already checked the pitch beforehand, so that's out of the way UNLESS the goals are put up later but in time (fingers crossed) - so they have to be checked. Then a 22 studs check, undershorts check, jewellery check, a word with the bench to remain seated etc, and a word with the club linesmen (It all takes time even if you see them in the officials room. Captains to the middle and tell them what is expected, toss up, ends
change of course. last call to the keepers and the linos and PHEEP we're off .... ALL IN 15 mins !!! It's just not possible. The tone of the match and discipline is set from the beginning. If the referee cannot fulfil their duties at the off, we're already struggling. So please, put it back to 30 minutes, pleeeeeeeeeeeeeese! Thus far, no reply has been received to Mike's e-mail. I wonder if any other referees have found this requirement difficult to deal with. Is Mike the only one to experience problems? Does the new timing compromise any of the pre-match duties of the referee? What is your experience - please let us know.
Mike Jacobs, Brian Richards
***********************************************************
The Referee Failed to Turn Up
We heard recently that a Disciplinary Meeting of a certain County FA was unable to reach an appropriate decision for one important reason. Despite several requests for his attendance, the referee failed to make contact with his County FA and failed to turn up on the night of the hearing. Under these circumstances the main witness (the referee) was absent and the player effectively "got off". All referees should be thoroughly aware: if one of their disciplinary reports results in a personal hearing, they have an obligation to attend the hearing. If the referee cannot possibly attend then he must contact the County FA as soon as possible for alternative, suitable, dates.
Coventry's Corner 155
WELL READ DAVE
During my brief sojourn as Secretary at Kent RA Ashford & Weald Branch I was constantly on the look-out for guest speakers. Amongst others I found Chas Morrison, Gary Willard, Ray Lewis, Martin Yerby and Ian Blanchard (who dropped out, April 2007). I wrote to David Elleray and didn’t get a reply. I have only recently forgiven him. There has to be a reason for said pardon and that is that it’s clear he has been eyeballing a copy or two of The Chiltern Referee, perhaps, in particular, those featuring Coventry’s Corner 79 (February 2014) and/or 113 (March 2015). How do I know this? Read on. The January Magazine tells us under ‘Laws of the Game to be completely rewritten’ in a paragraph entitled Offside Inconsistency, where ‘indirect’ did not find a place in the text, (quote) Part of the law (Law 11) says when players commit an offside offence, you give a free kick where the offence occurred. The other part of the law book (Guidelines) says you give a free kick where the player was when he was in the offside position …….. in future the free kick will always be given where he commits the offside offence. You’ve guessed it – the very issue that CC’s 79/113 correctly argued, the law needing to have ‘at’ read ‘from’ and ‘is’ read ‘becomes’ and consistency rules – am I good, or am I good (except at County RA quizzes!)? Well done Mike. So there’s one correction of Law that sits well, but what of the ‘new guidance’ that was intended to finesse said law for the
upper echelons and further distance the parks referee? Will it be withdrawn? Don’t hold your breath.
Mike Coventry
Coventry's Corner
156
WHAT'S THE POINT
I’m going to have a gentle jibe at Uncle Len. He doesn’t object to the ‘grass-cutting’ signal and would be impressed by ‘hands clasped behind the back’ as a no-foul indication. The latter I personally recommend to referees who place their hands on their hips when the ball is not in play – it’s far better body language. But our kind logo designer doesn’t approve of pointing at the ball, and makes a
reasonable case. However, surely such an action after a player moans for a free kick is perhaps somewhat more acceptable than “shut your mouth you stupid pillock, your mates got the ball!”
Mike Coventry
*************************************************
Coventry's Corner
157
THOUGHTS ON REWRITTEN LAW
KICKOFF: The law is being changed (better late than never) to allow the ball to go in any direction – as long as it moves. Somewhat superfluous those last five words unless attempting to kick and missing is to be cautionable!! I jest, of course. PRE-MATCH RED CARDS: Referee will be able to punish red-card offences at any time after the pre-match inspection. Players fighting would be banned from playing and replaced by named substitutes so that both teams could start with eleven players (but lose a substitute). Works a treat I should imagine, but less so for the grass roots teams where one side has three substitutes the other has one – and the referee loses an assistant!! LEAVING FIELD AFTER TREATMENT: A players injured by a yellow/red card challenge can have quick treatment on the FoP without having to leave ‘cos it’s unfair that the victim team should be one short. If it’s only a ‘yellow tackle’ the guilty party presumably goes in the sin bin until the
injured player is fit to return – this is not clear in the Elleray comment. QUICK RETURN: Player leaving FoP to change boots could return immediately after inspection by AR or 4th official – not available at grass roots of course. GRABBING OPPONENTS: Two players go off FoP. One tries to return but other grabs him off FoP. The dropped ball restart is to be replaced with free kick on touch/goal line – how long before we see the first dive from outside the FoP? So why aren’t we going to have the 15secs law (for goalkeepers), the 15yd law for wandering throw-in takers, and the ‘anything-will-do’ law for flicked throw-ins? Have I missed anything?
Mike Coventry
POSTSCRIPT
The constant throughout my entire career is my love of the game and my amazement at its grip on the lives of people from every nationality, every creed, every colour, every
section of society, the very rich and the very poor. Football is a phenomenon and
the people have made it that.
Question : Who wrote that?
Mike Coventry
A Brain Teaser from Mike
How can a player score three consecutive goals without any other
player touching the ball?
(answer - page 27)
Out of Touch Yes, we all know it is the whole of the ball over the line (well, at least it was when I finally retired from refereeing in 2005). It has been far too long since I attended a meeting of CDRS and much has changed. I thought the format of the meeting was very good, using video clips from Premiership and Football League games.
The first clip saw an Assistant Referee (AR) signal for a foul by a defender inside the penalty area. What happened next was something that caused much discussion. The AR ran to the corner flag, made the signal for what I knew as a corner and then immediately followed it up with a signal that looked to me like a substitution. What we did not see was the two minutes altercation with the referee and AR at the centre of it all. Eventually the penalty was awarded and a goal was scored.
We, of course, do not know the briefing given to the AR by the referee. My immediate reaction was, why did the AR not put his flag clearly across his chest? Apparently we were the only country to use that signal and thus we stopped it to fit in with the rest of the world. But the proof was in the pudding that it would have worked!
We then watched the well publicised 'Terry's offside goal!' for Chelsea. From the AR's viewpoint he may not have been able to ascertain who played the ball through to Terry. Did it come off a defender or not? I do not know the [current FA's] briefing but in my day if I stood still and did not proceed to the half-way line, I wanted confirmation from the referee. Nowadays the officials are mic'd up. But what was said between these two officials I do not know. If neither official could see then a goal should be allowed.
A great deal has changed in the past 10 years, and don't get me talking about all the extra assistants behind the goal at UEFA and FIFA games. Luckily the Football Association, Football League and PGMOL have not taken it up. If they did there would be very few referees and ARs to cover National League games. One bit of common sense I did see, was that PGMOL ARs are going to be given the chance to register as permanent ARs. We would then get rid of the farce when it was touch and go every year if Phil Sharpe got enough marks for his refereeing to continue as a Premiership Assistant. For those youngsters who have not heard of Phil, here is a quick bio:
Philip Sharp (born 5 April 1964) is a former English Premier League AR and one of only 10 match officials from the United Kingdom to have officiated in a FIFA World Cup Final. Sharp first played football for East Barnet School but became a referee via the Due of Edinburgh Award Scheme in order to fulfil the Service in the Community component of the course. He gained his apprenticeship through the Hertfordshire County League before gaining promotion to the Southern Football League middle. From there he was elevated to Panel Referee for two seasons, and thence as an AR to the Football League and, finally the Premier League. He was selected to run the line at the 1999 FA Challenge Cup Final, and currently referees on the national Contributory List of match referees.
Sharp was promoted to the FIFA list of match officials in 1 January 1997, being appointed having his first international in Budapest in the summer of that year. His progression, internationally, was exceptional being appointed to hold the flag in both the opening game of his first senior tournament (EURO 2000) and the semi-final of the same tournament. In the 2002 FIFA World Cup Sharp was appointed to five games in total, including the Croatia v Italy match and the 2002 FIFA World Cup Final between Germany and Brazil. As such he was England's second successive match official at a Final
match; Mark Warren having been the AR at the 1998 FIFA World Cup Final. Phil Sharp was selected to represent Great Britain at the 2004 Olympic Games football tournament and represented England at the 2006 FIFA World Cup in Germany.
On 18 October 2008, Sharp was hit by an object thrown from the crowd in the game between Aston Villa and Portsmouth. It resulted in a cut to his face, and he was eventually fit to continue till the end of the game. He now works for the Herts FA.
When I retired from refereeing in 2005 I chose to sever all links with refereeing, with the exception of some friendships. Why was that? Well, I was an Instructor, an assessor, a mentor as well as a referee and it was my belief that you need credibility to do all those important facets of refereeing. To my mind if you can't do it you should not teach it and even more you should not assess it! Have I missed refereeing? Well, yes, but like all retired men I have found plenty of new things to do with my time. But despite what Alf Field told me (why we have dropped the AR's flag for a penalty), I still think it was a useful addition to our armoury.
Graham Laurie (Ed. It was great to welcome Graham to the January meeting. As a Vice-President of the Society for ten years, we thank him for the above comments and encourage him to pen further thoughts)
Fake pitches 'gave my son cancer'
A teenager developed cancer as a result of playing football on artificial pitches, his father claimed yesterday. Goalkeeper Lewis MaGuire, now 18, developed Hodgkin lymphoma during a trial with Leeds United two years ago. His father Nigel, 52, the former chief executive of NHS Cumbria, believes the disease was triggered by Lewis coming into contact with toxic chemicals used on synthetic pitches. He says schools and clubs should stop installing the plastic surfaces. surfaces while more research is carried out. Mr MaGuire spoke out after a US study suggested that crumb rubber - granules made from recycled tyres which are sprinkled across artificial turf to protect the surface - contains traces of toxic chemicals which could cause cancer. 'Lewis used to come home with his kit covered in the stuff', he said. 'Goalkeepers dive dozens of times in training so they breathe it in or swallow it and it gets into their grazes.' The artificial pitch industry insists there is no evidence to support his claims.
(Daily Mail 16.2.16)
" I'm glad to see you've got your coaching badgers"
What Would You Do?
Question 1. During the half time interval a group of substitutes who have been warming up have started fighting. When you step on the field of play one of them is on the ground with an arm injury. A TV producer approaches you and says he filmed the entire incident. What would you do?
Question 2 During play within the penalty area, a Blue defender inadvertently slips, gifting a Red striker with an easy scoring opportunity. As the striker shoots, the defender puts his hand between the boot and the ball. The striker kicks the hand on to the ball, and the shot goes wide. As the defender screams in agony, both sides protest. What would you do? Question 3 The Blues keeper parries a direct free kick to a Red striker who was standing in the defensive wall. But when the striker scores, your Assistant flags for offside. The striker
tells you he was only offside because the wall edged forwards over your foam line as the ball was hit. He is correct!. What would you do? Question 4 With the ball in play, a Blue defender on the field of play, throws an object (mainly a clod of earth) with excessive force at a barracking spectator standing three metres behind the touchline. What would you do? Question 5 You award a free kick to Blues in the 8th minute of the game for a foul just outside the Reds penalty area. You signal for the kick to be taken. The kicker strikes the ball; it hits a post and rebounds unto play and strikes a dog that just ran onto the field of play after the kick was taken. What would you do? Question 6. A Blue Number 3 defender, while correctly taking a throw-in, intentionally throws the ball on to a Red opponent's back, not in a careless nor a reckless manner nor using excessive force. As the ball rebounds to the Blue taker he kicks the ball low and hard into the opponent's goal. The red player, annoyed at having the ball throw at his back, spits at the Blue player, but misses. What would you do? Question 7 To evade an Red opponents tackle, a Blue attacker kicks the ball past the opponent, the ball remaining in the field of play. He, the attacker runs over the touchline into the opponents technical area and without provocation, brutally strikes the physio. What would you do? (Ed. Questions 1-3 were taken from the Eccles RA magazine. Questions 4-7 were taken from the National RA Quiz Final 2015 thanks to Colin Morris.).
What Would You Do? (answers to February issue)
Q1 You play advantage planning to caution a Blue player at the next stoppage But the same player then commits a second cautionable offence. The Red opponents howl for a red card, but the Blue player protests saying he would never have made such a risky second tackle had he known you were going to caution him for the first tackle. What would you do?
A1. Show two yellow cards then a red card. But it is poor game management - it is always a risk to play advantage after a cautionable offence. Q2. The home team runs out in skin-tight lycra tops and shorts, the colours of which conform with those shown in the league handbook. The manager explains that the kit is designed to stop the opposition grabbing his players. What would you do?
A2. There is no reason to intervene - lycra is not a dangerous material. Snug-fitting shorts are common. Q3. You award an indirect free kick to Reds. The kick is aimed at the Red's star striker. He misses the header - but the tip of his pony-tail brushes the ball as it flies into the net. What would you do?
A3. Award a goal, since the pony-tail is considered as part of his person and not an outside agent; there is nothing in the laws regarding the length of hair.
Q4 A Blue player standing outside the FoP throws a shin guard at the Red
Number 10, standing inside the Blue penalty area. The shin guard strikes the Red No. 10 on the knee. What do you do?
A4. Award a penalty kick i.e. a direct free kick where the infringement occurred (or would have). Dismiss the Blue player. Q 5 With 2 mins remaining and the Blues losing by one goal, the Blue keeper takes a throw-in close to his penalty area. He throws it legitimately into his penalty area, runs after it, picks it up and fly kicks it deep into his opponents' half where a team mate (not in an offside position) heads it directly into the opponents' goal. What do you do?
A5. Award an indirect free kick to Reds - the keeper handled the ball before it had touched another player. Q6 With the ball in play you see a Blue player, off the field of play without your permission, spit at your assistant referee? You have no idea why. What do you do?
A6. Stop play; dismiss the Blue player. Restart with a dropped ball from the position of the ball when play was stopped. Q7 A Blue player takes a throw-in conforming with the law in all aspects. He throws the ball deliberately at the back of a Red opponent neither in a careless nor a reckless manner, and not using excessive force. From the rebound he kicks the ball towards his own keeper. However, he over-does the kick, and the ball goes directly over the cross bar into the spectators behind the goal. What would you do?
A7. The referee must allow play to continue. Award a simple corner kick - there is no infringement ((Ed. Questions 1-3 were taken from "You Are The Ref" by Keith Hackett and Paul Trevillion. Questions 4-7 were taken from the National RA Quiz final 2015, thanks to Colin Morris)
Letter to the Editor Dear Brian Good morning. Have you ensured you get some material for the March magazine by publishing a controversial answer to “What would you do” No.1? [Ed. To help readers follow Len's argument, the question and its answer as presented in the March magazine are reproduced here: Q1. In the 80th minute, a Blue substitute enters the FoP without your permission and prevents a goal by catching the ball with his hands. He is positioned between his own team's goalposts. What do you do?
A1. Stop play; award indirect free kick where the ball was when play was stopped] Len continues:
*NO mention of disciplinary action!!!
It all depends on the circumstances – was he a 12th player or did he replace another without the referee’s knowledge, keeping it to 11?
If the latter: caution for entering the FoP, send-off for DOGSO and penalty kick looks like justice!
If the former, a caution but you can red card a substitute even when he is still on the bench e.g. for violent conduct so why not for a DOGSO when he is still meant to be seated?
Further, if he was ‘between the posts’, an IFK would be taken on the edge of the goal area, nearest to where the incident occurred.
Extra persons on the field of play
Outside agents
Anyone not indicated on the team list as a player, substitute or team official is
deemed to be an outside agent, as is a player who has been sent off.
If an outside agent enters the field of play:
• the referee must stop play (although not immediately if the outside agent does not interfere with play) • the referee must have him removed from the field of play and its immediate surroundings • if the referee stops the match, he must restart play with a dropped ball from the position of the ball when the match was stopped, unless play was stopped inside the goal area, in which case the referee drops the ball on the goal area line parallel to the goal line at the point nearest to where the ball was located when play was stopped
Substitute or substituted player
If a substitute or a substituted player enters the field of play without permission:
• the referee must stop play (although not immediately if the player in question does not interfere with play or if the advantage can be applied)
• the referee must caution him for unsporting behaviour
• the player must leave the field of play
If the referee stops play, it must be restarted with an indirect free kick for the opposing team from the position of the ball when play was stopped (see Law 13 – Position of free kick).
This is the clincher when everybody starts arguing: In the event of any other infringements of this Law:
• the players concerned are cautioned • the match is restarted with an indirect
free kick, to be taken by a player of the opposing team from the position of the ball at the time of the stoppage (see Law 13 – Position of free kick)
Len Randall
Murphy’s Meanderings 159
It was a Sunday League game played on Peckham Rye in the sixties. The teams were in complete contrast to each other. The reds were teenagers in their first season of adult football, the blues an experienced team in their thirties. From the outset it was clear that the reds were the better team. Faster and more skilful, they overran a slow and lumbering blues team and were soon two goals in front. However, the blues had been around a bit and they weren’t prepared to give in that easily. They adopted aggressive, spoiling tactics. Tough, hard, sometimes reckless tackling, strong physical challenges in the air, niggly trips and sly pushes, hustling their opponents, anything to break up their rhythm and get under their skin. The reds were not used to this kind of physical football and started appealing to the referee for free kicks and protection. The referee for his part was not interested, after all this was Sunday football. He gave free kicks and talked to players when he thought necessary but for most part allowed the game to continue. The blues accepted decisions against them with a shrug and got on with it, the reds showed their immaturity and moaned, whined and shouted at the referee and their opponents. They committed silly retaliatory fouls, went to pieces and their game fell apart. The blues took control and by midway in the second half were leading by seven goals to two and cruising. Playing on the left wing for the reds was the best player on the pitch, head and shoulders above the rest. Slight of build he had been instrumental in both reds’ goals and as such had received more than his
share of rough treatment from the blues. Though he never complained he had gradually faded from the game. This annoyed one of his colleagues who urged him on several occasions to “stand up for himself and get in the game”. Midway through the second half he was again fouled and knocked to the ground but said nothing. His colleague, however, lost control and, sprinting twenty yards, raced up to the blue player as he walked away, kicking his legs from underneath him sending him crashing to the ground. As the blue player lay looking up, the red player leaned over him and quietly and meaningfully said, “Touch him again and I’ll f------ break your legs and that’s a promise”. At this point the referee arrived and cautioned the red player. When the game restarted the dynamics had changed. Inspired by their colleague the reds started to play forcibly and aggressively taking the game to the blues who themselves went to pieces. The blues left the red winger alone and he revelled in the space he got. It produced a tense finish but, unfortunately for the reds, the resurgence was too late and the final score was a win for the blues by seven goals to six.
Tony Murphy
"Quick, here come the kids. Sound the retreat
Players and coaches: Show
respect for referees Over recent days, whether buying fuel at my local garage or shopping at Meadowhall, people have kept wanting to talk to me about referees. No, not those on the English Premier League but those officiating at the Rugby World Cup 2015. There is no doubt that the public has witnessed some excellent officiating from the group of World Cup referees. You cannot fail to be impressed with the quality of their communication, keeping both sets of players informed as well as the television audience through the privilege of hearing what is being said. Rugby is a very physical contact sport and you can see on regular occasions hugely-built players moving at speed suddenly coming to an abrupt halt following a bone-crunching tackle. It amazes me how players recover so quickly and get on with the game. On the odd occasion when foul play takes place, the offending player is called over and he responds immediately, keeping quiet and showing a huge amount of respect while being spoken to by the referee. The one major feature that we have all witnessed at this World Cup is the outstanding behaviour of the players; their discipline and self-control are to be admired. They show referees a high level of respect and it is evident to me that this is the cultural thread that runs throughout the game of rugby. The people who run this sport should be congratulated for the way that they have accepted and use
technology to assist the referee's decision-making process. The administrators should take note and, rather than manage our great game in a Victorian fashion, they should capture the spirit of it and assist our referees by introducing a change of culture. - start by punishing managers/coaches who publicly berate match officials - more club officials who offend in the technical area should be sent to the stands (however, the game should get rid of the technical area! It is a joke and a source of dissent to referees and opponents) - introduce the video referee into our game - referees should get tougher and apply the law correctly - issue appropriate sanctions for foul play - be prepared to issue a yellow and a red card for dissent by players Referees, you are the key holders of our great sport and you need to change the culture of players at all levels. The Football Association needs to be more supportive of our match officials at all levels of the game. If players cannot control their behaviour then punish them accordingly. We have all become accustomed to the culture of dissent and cheating in our game. Parents, when your child goes out to play a game, encourage them to play in a fair manner and to accept the role of the referee. Referees, learn to enjoy your role and communicate with all stakeholders in the game with a smile on your face. For thousands of officials it is a hobby that we should enjoy - and not accept the culture of being berated by the club officials and players. (Ed. This was written by Keith Hackett for his column/website "You-are-the-ref", October 14, 2015
footballers, but it is a vital part of creating the right environment for the game.
By talking about positive aspects of the game (especially support rather than criticism of their team mates) and seeking their co-operation in avoiding negative aspects (bad tackles, abuse, loud swearing) it allows them to get some idea of you as a person and the way you want the game to be played. In the build up to the game we should aim to be polite, calm, confident and professional.
Once the game starts, the first ten minutes are all-important in establishing the behaviour standards you are expecting. The players and the game will test your resolve. And you have to be strong enough to pick up on every transgression, whether with a quiet word, a more formal warning, or the first 'moment of truth' with the first yellow/reed card or penalty decision.
Watch out for low level displays of bad feeling between players and show you are watching. Stop the virus before it starts. Small individual 'spats' between players should not be allowed to smoulder and fester without the referee having a word with players involved and calling on the captains to intervene. Minor grievances are often the spark that causes the atmosphere and the game to degenerate.
And remember to say 'well done' to recognise positive behaviour - because good behaviour is the most potent antidote to the bad behaviour virus. (Ed. This novel approach was written by Patrick Morrissey as the Whistleblower's Opinion for the AFA Argus, issued August October 2015)
John's not flagging just yet!
John Clark reached 1,000 games as a United Counties League assistant referee. when he ran the line for the Division One game between Desborough Town and Harborough Town. Having started out in the Kettering Sunday League in 1973, the 61-yr-old has been a linesman for the vast majority of the games - he first picked up his flag for the UCL 41 years ago. His debut came in December 1974 when Spalding beat Stamford 3-1. The man in the middle that day was Brian Hill who later took charge of the 1988 FA Cup Final between Liverpool and Wimbledon. John says, "My most memorable game was my very first one. But it was a hair-raising experience for me. There were about 800 people there, it was a south Lincolnshire derby and we nearly got attacked as we were leaving the field at the end of the game! There was a very elderly lady, she was a Stamford supporter, dressed in black, and she tried to attack us with her umbrella. In 1974 this sort of thing was regarded as humorous! In 2015 it wouldn't be - she'd probably get a banning order." John said, "When I started in 1973 someone said to me, 'You will be amazed at the number of friends you will make in the football community'" - and I did. While he's seen many changes over the years, with Non-League clubs boasting better pitches and the pace of the game getting faster, Clark plans to keep on flagging for as long as he's fit. (Ed. I extracted this from the Non-League Paper 27.9.15, passed to me by Bryan
Yesteryear 94
One-armed Men Versus Women
(Reading, September 1917) Here was a game strange on four counts. Women played against men; the opposing teams were English and Canadian; the men played with hands behind their backs; and the final score was 8-5. Perhaps the oddest thing was that men were allowed to play against the women on a Southern League ground. After an early wave of women's soccer in the late 1809s, inspired by the Rational Dress movement and generally believed to be organised by Nettie Honeyball in England and Lady Florence Dixie in Scotland, the FA Council (on 25 August 1902) issued instructions not to permit matches against 'lady teams'. They had a policy of separation - men against men; women against women. That didn't stop women copying men. In the mid-1900s, six-a-side soccer on roller-skates was introduced for men at Brighton skating-rink, and women soon took up the sport. The goals - 6 ft high and 7 ft wide - were larger than ice-hockey goals, and a regulation-size football containing a pint of water (to keep it from rising) was used. Players were allowed two minutes for skate-repair. In World War One, with men away in the forces and women in Britain adopting male roles, there was a boom in women's soccer. Although the most lasting development of this period was the Dick-Kerr's factory team in Preston, there were spontaneous outbreaks all over the country, usually based around factories.
The standard picked up enormously. Back in 1895, "Lady Correspondent" of the Manchester Guardian had been gently scathing about how well the North and South players knocked the bal about: "They danced around the ball when they reached it as if uncertain what to do with it, much after the manner of a lapdog which has accidentally laid hold of the cat which he has made an elaborate show of pursuing." But by the end of World War One the women could play a bit. The Portsmouth Football Mail claimed the Pioneer Ladies captain Ada Anscombe was the finest women player in the country, and alleged that a male team once offered two of their men for her. The FA wouldn't have approved. The wartime games were usually for charity, and the ladies who played a team of convalescing Canadian soldiers at Elm Park in September 1917 has already handed over £161 to various charities that year. Unfortunately, on this Wednesday afternoon, the conditions were vile. The receipts were probably swallowed up by expenses. After a band from Bearwood Hospital had played, Surgeon-General Foster, director of the Canadian Medical Services, kicked off. The referee was Colonel Mayus, director of bayonet fighting and physical training. No decisions were disputed. The women won 8-5 with goals from Miss Barrell (3), Miss Small (2), Miss Wragg (2) and Miss Bentley. It was suspected that the Canadian soldiers were too gallant to win, and in any event there must have been great amusement at the sight of them playing with hands behind their backs. Whether this rule was introduced to balance the sides or make the women feel safer, I do not know. (Ed. This story was taken from the book entitled "Football's Strangest Matches" by Andrew Ward. It was brought to my attention by Mike Coventry.)
Referees must act as 'chameleons'
Football is a universal language that we speak with different accents - and the referee is the interpreter.
Some years ago, as Leonardo Gaciba collected a prize for being chosen as Brazil's best referee, he gave me an insight into his professional philosophy. The referee, he said, had to be something of a chameleon, adjusting his interpretation of the rules to suit the environment, giving the kind of decisions expected by players, fans and media.
In Brazil, for example, everyone was forever looking for fouls. Elsewhere in South America, even after some physical contact, the dispute for the ball would continue. So for a Brazilian game he would use the whistle more, while in a Copa Libertadores match he would be inclined to let the game flow.
Clearly in the first case, that of a Brazilian game, there are more decisions to be taken - and more decisions to be argued about afterwards. It is perhaps, no surprise then, that major Brazilian TV transmissions invariably have an ex-referee as part of the panel, analysing the key actions of the man in the middle.
It is a timid newcomer in British television, but in Brazil the on-screen presence of former referees is almost as traditional as Carnaval. It has become common for high profile referees to go on the media work once they have hung up their whistles - indeed, Leonardo Gaciba has done exactly that. And the one thing that the ex-referee pundits are usually quick to condemn is
former colleagues who are weak on discipline. Last month there was a high profile clash between two Brazilian players on the other side of the Atlantic. Arsenal's Gabriel Paulista was sent off by Mike Dean after a spat with Chelsea's Diego Costa. On the BBC, Garth Crooks was not impressed.
"You need a referee that is sensible about it," said Crooks," and treats the players like men. If no one had been sent off in that situation, no one would have screamed. We all want to see 11 against 11. Don't look for excuses to send players off. That's not your job, and try your very best to keep players on the pitch." It is a fair summary of a mainstream British view, whereby the referee is expected to use the red card as a last resort. His first obligation is to show common sense.
But - and it is here that Gaciba's observation about the need to be a chameleon is so pertinent - what happens when common sense is no longer common? When all concerned do not share the same concepts of what is fair and just? One obvious example is the 2010 World Cup, when in his quest to keep everyone on the field, Howard Web surely let the Dutch get away with too much rough stuff against the Spaniards. And there were further examples in last year's World Cup, especially in the knock out rounds. Referees seemed reluctant to reach for their cards. If the idea was to preserve the spectacle by trying to be sure that players did not miss games through suspension, then it backfired in the most spectacular manner. Some games can run smoothly with this 'softly, softly' approach for trouble. This risk exists of the match turning into a free-for-all.
The warning signs were apparent in the second round tie between Brazil and Chile, which contained 51 fouls in 120 minutes. Brazil's next game, against Columbia had 54 in 90 - and no one was booked within the first hour. The hosts took advantage of refereeing laxity to kick Columbia's James
Rodriguez off his stride with a succession of fouls - but it rebounded badly on them when Neymar picked up a back injury that ruled him out of the fateful semi-final with Germany. On this occasion it seemed clear that the referee - Spain's Carlos Velasco Carbalio - was unable to establish a disciplinary framework that suited the tams involved and the needs of the spectacle. He was not enough of a chameleon. His 'common sense' approach made no sense at all. (Ed. This was originally written in "You are the Ref" by Tim Vickery. I spotted it in the Woking Warbler, December 2015). *************************************************
Re-Leaf for Romsey in Tree
Saga Romsey Town say getting to the root of their tricky tree issue will be a big worry for them next summer. The Wessex Division One club are having pitch problems after stems of a Great Oak behind one of their goals burst through the turf. The root was spotted during last Thursday's development team game with Dorchester Town - and the first team's match with Amesbury was postponed because of player safety fears on Saturday. Work was carried out to remove it last week but it is its future growth which caused the greater concern around the club. Secretary Clare Crossland is worried
that more roots will spring up and that could have huge costly financial implications. She told The NLP, "It all came as a big surprise. I suppose it was seen as a bit of fun at first - a football club has a game called off because of a tree! But in the past week we have had to have a serious think about the issue. Yes the problem root is in the process of being removed but the concern for all of us now is for if it happens again. There are a lot of trees surrounding our pitch. If one has come through, why would you not think more will follow? If they do we are in trouble and it's a worry. "In the summer there needs to be some analysis carried out. That is really costly, and even though we are working to help try and stabilise the situation, stage two is the big one. It's not just about digging the thing up and getting rid of it, roots are a big problem as you can see with structures all the time." Mid-tale Romsey may need some outside support if their investigation uncovers the issues run deep. We are a volunteer-run club like most others at this level," she added. "We have got everything crossed that there isn't a big chance of more roots coming through. If it's not the news we want to hear we may need some support. (Ed. This was written by Sam Elliott for the Non-League Paper, 13.12.15, and was spotted by Bryan Hardy. Ed. Older members will recall that during the 70's and 80's, we had similar problems with the Polish Club pitch down Raans Road, Amersham, playing in the Chesham Sunday League. In our case the situation was exacerbated by some oak trees overhanging the pitch. Players seemed to take it all in their stride, with no real issues or injuries, and if there were linesmen they just ignored it. Nowadays, of course, Health and Safety concerns would close the pitch).
To Talk OR Not to
Talk – That is the
Question Having been a referee (and Assistant) for a great many years my philosophy over the past few years is not to talk to players during a game (unless, of course, it is to talk to them with regards to a foul or dissent etc). I dislike referees who continually smile and talk to players throughout the game. It is, in my opinion, a false friendship because players don’t admire you for it and what happens when you have to caution one of these players whom a few minutes earlier you have been having a laugh and a joke with? A referee should be impartial and should be seen to treat all players the same. Friendship does not enter into it.
Having been able to watch a large number of senior local games this season, I have come across the referee who not only likes to talk to the players, but the spectators (few as they often are) as well. Is this really advisable and what do other referees feel? The other Saturday afternoon, I was standing near the corner flag under the stand, when after a few minutes of play the referee awarded a free kick against the home side. He was immediately greeted with abuse by 3 or 4 middle aged men nearby. One of them shouted, “You must be blind referee. That was never a foul. You’re a disgrace to the badge you’re wearing”. Much to my amazement the referee turned round to him and shouted back, “If anyone is blind, it must be you. Look at me, I’m mot even wearing a
badge!” (I must add that he was not wearing a County badge). What could the spectator say? He had been put in his place and was lost for words. In the second half, I moved to the other end of the field and sure enough the referee awarded another free kick against the home side, and yet another middle aged spectator, this time rushed down from the top of the stand to the boundary fence and shouted at the referee, “You are rubbish referee. That was never a foul. I went to watch you at Leatherhead and you were rubbish then as well!”
As far as I am concerned, such remarks are trivial and should be disregarded. Not to this referee. He turned to the spectator and replied, “Well if you thought I was rubbish at Leatherhead, and you paid money to come and see me again today, you must be a bigger fool than you look. Now pull that silly woollen hat you are wearing over your eyes and go back to sleep.” The spectators crept back up to the stand and the referee, smiling throughout the incident, carried on with the game.
Personally speaking, I have never entered into conversation with a spectator and what they have said about me has gone in one ear and out the other and is soon forgotten. Am I wrong in this? Do other referees “give as good as they get” not only to players, but to spectators too. What do other referees feel about this matter? (Ed. This was written by Cliff Travis in the Hounslow mag. in 1988. So, are you a talker, a smiler, a joker, or a strong silent type, or have you changed? Answers please).
Where was the shout?
English football, from top to bottom, has always been characterised by its intangible, unquantifiable (unless you count bags as suitable units of measurement) qualities of spirit, passion, grit, determination and, less notably, "talking". Talking is easy. Not talking enough is generally agreed in Sunday league to be highly counter-productive. Players are urged before kick-off for "lots of talking" especially "back there". Not talking is an accusation that can only be levelled at a whole team (or at least its rearguard), rather than an individual (unless it is the captain, who must shout indiscriminately for 90 minutes, for that is his job). To avoid this indictment, a lexicon of largely useless phrases has emerged, which can be called upon whenever it is necessary to fill a period of relative silence. Every one knows them, everybody understands what they are vaguely supposed to mean, and almost nobody questions them. Now, clichéd as they are, many bellowed phrases you hear on a football pitch - "Man on!", "Out we go!", etc - are useful instructions. Nothing wrong with those. The following set of on-pitch rallying cries, however, must not escape scrutiny. 1) "We've gone quiet!" Going quiet, as highlighted earlier, is the sign of a malfunctioning team. No one is talking, which means they all might as well go home. A period of notable quietness is ended only when the captain draws everyone's attention to it. "Come on lads, we've gone quiet!" It can, at the shouter's discretion, be bookended with ".... haven't we?", to offer the illusion of a debate where one is really not available. 2) "Straight in". A staple instruction that can be used only at a very specific moment - namely, the
opponent kicking off the game. Only the strikers need to do this, of course, and the moment quickly passes. Getting "straight in" is not a continuous requirement, but merely an opening gesture of intent, likely to be unfulfilled. It is often accompanied by a mindless, yet somehow entirely appropriate feeling, clap of the hands. 3) "Two on the edge". When a corner is awarded, it is everyone's job to pick up their man. One eagle-eyed player has the extra task of spotting a discrepancy in this marking system, in that there are two unattended opponents lumbering into the penalty area. In extreme circumstances, there may be "three on the edge" - an unthinkable catastrophe that is met with a suitably incredulous cry of "I've got three here!". The lack of concentration may be down to the defence's preoccupation with the lanky opposing centre-back/estate agent who has arrived with a look of great purpose from the back. 4) "All day". Used by smug opponents to declare your attacking efforts as weak and unlikely to succeed, even if repeated. Often said twice in quick succession - as a speculative effort flies into neighbouring allotments - to compound the humiliation. 5) "It's still 0-0. Football is an overwhelmingly childish pursuit. Much of football supporting is based on schadenfreude and suffering the taunts, in return, when your own team is humbled. To combat this threat, some employ an overly defensive stance, hoping that an audible absence of pride will pre-empt any possible fall. And so, if a Sunday League team races into an early lead, one stern-faced armband-toting try-hard will attempt to construct a parallel universe in which the game is, in fact, goalless. 6) "Box 'em in!" A cult classic, perhaps, which satisfies two fundamental criteria: 1) a laughable attempt at tactical insight, and 2) exclaimed almost instinctively, every single time. The ball goes out for an opposition throw-in, deep in their third, and it is universally
accepted that they do not have the adequate technical skills (or simply the upper-body strength) to play/hurl their way to safety. 7) "[Shirt colour] head on this!" Possibly the most pointless one of all. For the uninitiated, this cryptic commend is for your team mates to meet an imminent opposition hoof with their head before the other lot can. No accuracy is necessary but congratulations are available for heading it really, really hard, straight back where it came from. "Well up!" you are told, with your name declared in full if the game is particularly tense. More forward-thinking Sunday League players concern themselves with the second ball. which is often simply another header. 8) "Away!" Loosely translated as "Now look here team mate, I neither want nor trust you to play your way out of trouble. Please dispose of the ball as quickly and as far away as possible". Failure to do as directed leaves one open to castigation for "f***ing about with it there. 9) "Time!" The ball drops from the air and a player finds himself in acres of space. Pointing this out to him might seem a good idea. It'll calm him down, allow him to get his head up and play a pass, rather than treat the ball like an unpinned grenade. However, when 10 other players scream "Time! Time!" in unison, it tends to have quite the opposite effect. The futility of the situation is laid bare when, after giving away possession easily, the player is offered a final, withering, retrospective observation: "You had time." 10) "Who's got tape?" The gold-dust of amateur football, despite being available in any hardware shop. As the sole provider of ankle-securing tape, once you declare and dispense it you will never see it again. 11) "Ref! Ref! How long?" Usually asked by an overexcited player from the leading team, with surprising
desperation. Whatever the answer, the player will always add about 10% on before relaying the revised figure to his team mates. 12) "Watch the short!" It is considered a cardinal sin to let an opposing Sunday League team pass a goal kick out to a full-back. Precisely what sort of devastating attack an average Sunday League team are expected to be capable of, deep on their own half, with the ball at the feet of traditionally the least capable player in their ranks, is anyone's guess. Amateur-level goal kicks thumped aim-lessly as far down the pitch as possible, often aren't a job for the goalkeeper. As the designated goal kick taker, many Sunday centre-halves can confirm that fetching a distant match ball in preparation for this moment is one of the more soul-destroying aspects of life around 11 am on every Sunday between September and May. 13) "One of you!" When a Sunday League midfield is so often instructed to "get a [insert team's shirt colour] head on this", you often witness an unsightly clash of [insert team shirt colour] -clad bodies as they simultaneously attempt to perform their primary duty. It is left to a team mate to helpfully point out that only one of them was required on the scene. 14) "Don't let it bounce!" A rare example of a phenomenon that afflicts a Premier League side just as much as it does your Sunday morning rabble. Letting the ball bounce, especially "back there", is traditionally asking for trouble. 15) "Where was the shout?" The ultimate act of Sunday League buck passing. A player is unceremoniously dispossessed from behind, to howls of derision from his team mates. Accompanied by a despairing flap of the arms, the player begs pf his colleagues: Where was the shout? There wasn't one. Because they've gone quiet, haven't they? (Ed. Seen in Touchlines, the mag of Sutton RA, and the Woking Warbler, Oct 2015)
RESPECT the Abstract Concept
How long has it been going now? 5, 6, 7 seasons? Yes it is the RESPECT item I am referring to, whether you call it a campaign, initiative, plan, aim or simply an idea.
I have never been able to fathom out how anyone latches on to a word or even a few words and turn them into something we should (or must) all be aiming to do something about. 'Mission statements' likewise leave me wondering who thought them up and why?
The FA does some rather strange things (but you already know that) including a once every twelve months excursion (maybe 'intrusion. would be a better word) into what is grandly called 'The FA Standard Code of Rules for Leagues' of which there must be several simply because of the varying standards needed by different 'steps' of Leagues. For 2013-14 season Rule 1, Section (F) said this:
This Competition, and its clubs shall support the FA's respect programme. As such it recognises that everyone in football has a collective responsibility to create a fair, safe, enjoyable environment in which the game can take place. A Respect League values the contribution of match officials, players and spectators, and ensures that they are treated with courtesy and fairness by opposing players, club
officials and spectators. The League and its Clubs will seek to play fixtures in a fair, competitive but not antagonistic environment.
I think we could agree that all sounds pretty satisfactory? Move on one whole year and Rule 1(F) has become Rule 2(E) and reads as follows: Clubs must comply with the provisions of any of the initiatives of the FA which are adopted by the Competition including but not limited to, Charter Standard and RESPECT programme.
I reckon that is a retrograde stop, a 'watering down' if you like of a whole paragraph that really said something and meant something. Who made that decision, and why?
As Chairman I could quote Rule 1(F) to any clubs or personnel seen to be stepping out of line, stressing that they had already agreed to conform thereto. If I try now to use Rule 2(E) it will not have 10% of the previous Respect paragraph. (Ed. I took this from the Woking Warbler, December 2015 issue. Any comments, especially how the RESPECT programme is working in your league? On the major fronts all seems very quiet viz-a-viz the RESPECT programme - I wonder why?).
How much of a problem is dissent?
Dissent is becoming a growing problem within our game, from the top level right down to the bottom, players screaming when decisions are made, making gestures when decisions don't go their way.
But the question is "How do we stop this?" First, penalise the offenders, do not let them get away with the odd comment before you clamp down on it. Otherwise it becomes like a snowball and instead of just the odd swearword it becomes the repeated swear words and screaming at the top of his voice - he's lost control.
I think one factor in controlling dissent is to make sure the players are not angry when you leave them. If players are under control when they leave they are more likely to have listened to you; if they are still moaning, groaning, swearing shouting and more they aren't calm and probably aren't ready to continue and may cause problems. Solutions may be, a chat with the captain, making sure the kick is taken when the whistle goes to give you and the player time to get into position. Player crowding of the referee is wrong and should be punished with at least a caution; you should not have people become this angry over a decision you have made against them.
Another factor causing growing dissent is players who continually protest decisions. This is something I find has grown worse in the game as it can border on whether someone is just appealing or being over the top. I feel clamping down on this early in the game will make sure that later on if they do protest and go OTT you would have this player marked and can deal with it quicker than if you had left it and marked it as just appealing.
Sometimes cautioning is the only option to someone who cannot control themselves that they have to swear of make comments which aren't necessary. I kook at the Premier League and as much as you do not get many cautions for dissent, it doesn't mean that at lower levels, if someone swears at you, or insults you, why shouldn't you caution, equally I'm not saying caution everyone who swears bit I am saying make sure you control the language produced as otherwise this could lead to problems for you later on or problems the next referee that has this team or player the next game. (Ed. I found this, by Deryll David, in the FAF Argus, issued January 2016) ************************************************
. . . . And Finally
Brian Richards
Quik Quip
The referee had a poor game, he said to his assistants, "My wife drives me to
drink". "You're lucky", said one colleague "My wife makes me walk"!
Submitted by Mike Coventry.
Answer to Postscript poser Terry Venables
Born to manage - The Autobiography
Society
Committee
2015-2016
President Brian Richards
Vice-Presidents
M A Eaton, A Kime
S M Hailey, R Halsey
G Laurie, R Leigh
R R Perry, Mrs M Revel
D H Rooney, J Simmons
T Staples, L Szulc,
W Walsh, M Wyvill
Programme Secretary
Hon Ass Secretary
Recruit & Retention Officer
Simon Parbery (01494 677465)
County RA Delegate
Vince Smith (01494 765221)
Deputy Standing CRA Rep
Alf Field (01494 773198)
Training Officer Alf Field (01494 773198)
Chairman Alf Field
Ashfield, Chesham Rd, Bellingdon,
Bucks. HP5 2XL
(01494 773198)
Vice-Chairman Vince Smith
Secretary Simon Parbery
74 Wattleton Road, Beaconsfield
Bucks. HP9 1RY (01494 677465)
Treasurer John Oxley
27 The Rise, Amersham, Bucks.
HP7 9AG (01494 433185)
Committee Member Martyn Bradshaw
Len Randall
Life Members
Alf Field John Oxley Brian Richards Vince Smith
Editor : Brian Richards, Uplands, Beech Grove, Amersham, Bucks,
HP7 0AZ (01494 727963) [email protected]
