Round One Local Thread

[WELL INFORMED]

Blow up as much as you like but remember the people involved are only volunteers!!!!!

 

[hilly1981]

Blow up as much as you like but remember the people involved are only volunteers!!!!!

Yes this is true but you dont volunteer to do a lousy job do you?
I think this is just a case where the club may have not appointed a fixtures officer and now the club has been whacked with a couple of forfeit fees.

I think a player who has just forked out $200+ of their hard earned cash to register for the year is entitled to feel pretty cranky at how this had been handled.

Lets just hope that the club has learned from this and implements measures to prevent this situation from occuring again. Even if they cannot find a permanent fixtures officer, they could share the load and communicate with each other on whom will check the inbox for any updates, otherwise it will just cost the club more $$$.

Anyway all of the volunteers who put in the hard yards for their clubs day in and day out deserve a pat on the back.

 

[Omni]

(and given most captains don't wear armbands I'm not going to know who it was an hour down the track).

wild stab in the dark here Chris but wouldn't the captains be the guys that you do the toss with at the start and don't you write their numbers in your little book?

1st part yes, 2nd part no. I don't care who the captain is after that point, it's pretty rare that I'd need to know who the captain is apart from that time.

 

[Ted]

(and given most captains don't wear armbands I'm not going to know who it was an hour down the track).

wild stab in the dark here Chris but wouldn't the captains be the guys that you do the toss with at the start and don't you write their numbers in your little book?

1st part yes, 2nd part no. I don't care who the captain is after that point, it's pretty rare that I'd need to know who the captain is apart from that time.

So why even bother having a captain if he is unable to approach the ref to converse his concerns?

 

[Kareem]

(and given most captains don't wear armbands I'm not going to know who it was an hour down the track).

wild stab in the dark here Chris but wouldn't the captains be the guys that you do the toss with at the start and don't you write their numbers in your little book?

1st part yes, 2nd part no. I don't care who the captain is after that point, it's pretty rare that I'd need to know who the captain is apart from that time.

i was reading somewhere in a book (about football ofcourse)- that the captain is becoming an outdated thing. That they dont have nearly as much power as what they used to...
its sad but true
So why even bother having a captain if he is unable to approach the ref to converse his concerns?

 

[Omni]

(and given most captains don't wear armbands I'm not going to know who it was an hour down the track).

wild stab in the dark here Chris but wouldn't the captains be the guys that you do the toss with at the start and don't you write their numbers in your little book?

1st part yes, 2nd part no. I don't care who the captain is after that point, it's pretty rare that I'd need to know who the captain is apart from that time.

So why even bother having a captain if he is unable to approach the ref to converse his concerns?

Someone has to decide heads or tails and which way to run. I'm not saying he's unable to, I'm just saying he doesn't have any special rights to (at least not in the FIFA laws of the game I've read), too many captains think they're allowed to go absolutely insane at a referee and that's just not on. Mind you I would rather just have to sanction one guy for constant dissent than 11.

Having said that, I do believe that the captain has a role to play in the team, I'm surprised you think the captains only role is to "converse his concerns", clearly there's more to it than that.

 

[Ted]

(and given most captains don't wear armbands I'm not going to know who it was an hour down the track).

wild stab in the dark here Chris but wouldn't the captains be the guys that you do the toss with at the start and don't you write their numbers in your little book?

1st part yes, 2nd part no. I don't care who the captain is after that point, it's pretty rare that I'd need to know who the captain is apart from that time.

So why even bother having a captain if he is unable to approach the ref to converse his concerns?

Someone has to decide heads or tails and which way to run. I'm not saying he's unable to, I'm just saying he doesn't have any special rights to (at least not in the FIFA laws of the game I've read), too many captains think they're allowed to go absolutely insane at a referee and that's just not on. Mind you I would rather just have to sanction one guy for constant dissent than 11.

Having said that, I do believe that the captain has a role to play in the team, I'm surprised you think the captains only role is to "converse his concerns", clearly there's more to it than that.

Of course there is more to it than that. But one does not need a captains 'arm band' to rally the team does he? from  the keeper up to the striker, all have an obligation to direct play accordingly both vocally and physically. Any knob can call a coin toss.

 

[masmariner]

(and given most captains don't wear armbands I'm not going to know who it was an hour down the track).

wild stab in the dark here Chris but wouldn't the captains be the guys that you do the toss with at the start and don't you write their numbers in your little book?

1st part yes, 2nd part no. I don't care who the captain is after that point, it's pretty rare that I'd need to know who the captain is apart from that time.

So why even bother having a captain if he is unable to approach the ref to converse his concerns?

He certainly can but it is up to the referee to determine if he is interested in what the captain has to say, it's the ref's perogative to allow/dissallow the captain any special powers.
But conversely you'll find most ref's will ask the captain to calm their team down before they issue cards or warnings etc.

 

[Ted]

(and given most captains don't wear armbands I'm not going to know who it was an hour down the track).

wild stab in the dark here Chris but wouldn't the captains be the guys that you do the toss with at the start and don't you write their numbers in your little book?

1st part yes, 2nd part no. I don't care who the captain is after that point, it's pretty rare that I'd need to know who the captain is apart from that time.

So why even bother having a captain if he is unable to approach the ref to converse his concerns?

He certainly can but it is up to the referee to determine if he is interested in what the captain has to say, it's the ref's perogative to allow/dissallow the captain any special powers.
But conversely you'll find most ref's will ask the captain to calm their team down before they issue cards or warnings etc.

A ref not on a power trip should do exactly that. A ref who thinks that 2 teams are there for his benefit and not the other way around will be very unlikely to give a 2nd thought about showing cards.

 

[Kareem]

(and given most captains don't wear armbands I'm not going to know who it was an hour down the track).

wild stab in the dark here Chris but wouldn't the captains be the guys that you do the toss with at the start and don't you write their numbers in your little book?

1st part yes, 2nd part no. I don't care who the captain is after that point, it's pretty rare that I'd need to know who the captain is apart from that time.

So why even bother having a captain if he is unable to approach the ref to converse his concerns?

Someone has to decide heads or tails and which way to run. I'm not saying he's unable to, I'm just saying he doesn't have any special rights to (at least not in the FIFA laws of the game I've read), too many captains think they're allowed to go absolutely insane at a referee and that's just not on. Mind you I would rather just have to sanction one guy for constant dissent than 11.

Having said that, I do believe that the captain has a role to play in the team, I'm surprised you think the captains only role is to "converse his concerns", clearly there's more to it than that.

not just that
random but oh well
another very little unknown relevence regarding the captain.
In the event of a goalkeeper being sent off, the team needs to replace the goalkeeper (every1 knows that).
In the event of noone wanting to go goalkeeper (lol), the captain has to go gk.
Oh and if he doesnt then he can get in trouble.
So for all amaeture players out there- if this ever happens, you know how to screw ur captain!
I was actually taught that by some ref...just thought I would educate everyone!

 

[voice of reason]

not just that
random but oh well
another very little unknown relevence regarding the captain.
In the event of a goalkeeper being sent off, the team needs to replace the goalkeeper (every1 knows that).
In the event of noone wanting to go goalkeeper (lol), the captain has to go gk.
Oh and if he doesnt then he can get in trouble.
So for all amaeture players out there- if this ever happens, you know how to screw ur captain!
I was actually taught that by some ref...just thought I would educate everyone!

Kareem

You can take my word for it that this is a footballing myth.  Quite how it started, I don't know and I still hear it repeated by some referees who should know better.  But it is bullshit....and please don't ever act on it if ever you find yourself in the unlikely position.  If no-one is willing to go into goals, the referee would simply abandon the game, as it is a requirement for a team to have a goalkeeper.

 

[Bear]

Iv got a dvd in storage somewhere, Nick Hancocks football nightmares. In it, there is a team from a world cup (i think) who played some of their group games without a goalkeeper in protest at their keeper being sent off. It was quite some time ago, so unless the rules have changes (which they may very well have), no its not a requirement.

 

[dibo]

Laws of the game

In LAW 3 THE NUMBER OF PLAYERS, under the heading 'Players':

A match is played by two teams, each consisting of not more than eleven players, one of whom is the goalkeeper. A match may not start if either team consists of fewer than seven players.

(FIFA LoTG p.15)

So teams must have a goalkeeper.


In other news, in LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT, under 'Showing dissent by word or action'

A player who is guilty of dissent by protesting (verbally or non-verbally) against a referees decision must be cautioned.

The captain of a team has no special status or privileges under the Laws of the Game but he has a degree of responsibility for the behaviour of his team.

So under the LoTG (and this overrides any supposed convention or custom) a player must be cautioned if they show dissent.

Talking to the captain about the conduct of his team is the Referee's prerogative. It is *not* the captain's prerogative to talk to the Referee about the conduct of the game. It is also obviously not necessary to talk to the captain before a player can be cautioned for dissent.

Other than the toss of the coin, the captain is only mentioned in the LoTG in reference to deciding matches by kicks from the penalty mark.

 

[Ted]

Laws of the game

In LAW 3 THE NUMBER OF PLAYERS, under the heading 'Players':

A match is played by two teams, each consisting of not more than eleven players, one of whom is the goalkeeper. A match may not start if either team consists of fewer than seven players.

(FIFA LoTG p.15)

So teams must have a goalkeeper.


In other news, in LAW 12 FOULS AND MISCONDUCT, under 'Showing dissent by word or action'

A player who is guilty of dissent by protesting (verbally or non-verbally) against a referees decision must be cautioned.

The captain of a team has no special status or privileges under the Laws of the Game but he has a degree of responsibility for the behaviour of his team.

So under the LoTG (and this overrides any supposed convention or custom) a player must be cautioned if they show dissent.

Talking to the captain about the conduct of his team is the Referee's prerogative. It is *not* the captain's prerogative to talk to the Referee about the conduct of the game. It is also obviously not necessary to talk to the captain before a player can be cautioned for dissent.

Other than the toss of the coin, the captain is only mentioned in the LoTG in reference to deciding matches by kicks from the penalty mark.

Dissent is a differing of opinion, not a questioning of decision.

dis⋅sent   /dɪˈsɛnt/  Show Spelled Pronunciation [di-sent]  Show IPA
verb  (used  without  object) 

1.  to  differ  in  sentiment  or  opinion,  esp.  from  the  majority;  withhold  assent;  disagree  (often  fol.  by  from  ): Two  of  the  justices  dissented  from  the  majority  decision. 

2.  to  disagree  with  the  methods,  goals,  etc.,  of  a  political  party  or  government;  take  an  opposing  view. 

3.  to  disagree  with  or  reject  the  doctrines  or  authority  of  an  established  church. 

noun  4.  difference  of  sentiment  or  opinion. 
5.  dissenting opinion. 

6.  disagreement  with  the  philosophy,  methods,  goals,  etc.,  of  a  political  party  or  government. 

7.  separation  from  an  established  church,  esp.  the  Church  of  England;  nonconformity. 

more http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dissent

 

[typool]

im a little interested if anyone is playing in the same grade as me? MAA4

 

[dibo]

Dissent is a differing of opinion, not a questioning of decision.

dis⋅sent   /dɪˈsɛnt/  Show Spelled Pronunciation [di-sent]  Show IPA
verb  (used  without  object) 

1.  to  differ  in  sentiment  or  opinion,  esp.  from  the  majority;  withhold  assent;  disagree  (often  fol.  by  from  ): Two  of  the  justices  dissented  from  the  majority  decision. 

2.  to  disagree  with  the  methods,  goals,  etc.,  of  a  political  party  or  government;  take  an  opposing  view. 

3.  to  disagree  with  or  reject  the  doctrines  or  authority  of  an  established  church. 

noun  4.  difference  of  sentiment  or  opinion. 
5.  dissenting opinion. 

6.  disagreement  with  the  philosophy,  methods,  goals,  etc.,  of  a  political  party  or  government. 

7.  separation  from  an  established  church,  esp.  the  Church  of  England;  nonconformity. 

more http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dissent

There's questioning and questioning:

I think a referee would be harsh to caution a player for *seeking clarification* on a decision - seeking clarification is not dissent.

I also think a player is foolhardy to actually dispute a referee's decision - that is dissent.

There's an important difference between a captain seeking clarification and disputing a decision, and nobody has the right to question the decisions of the referee, armband or not.

Going back to the original post that sparked the whole thing off - the referee should also know the difference between a direct and indirect free kick. Nevertheless, whether a referee is right or wrong it's just dumb to go disputing their decisions. No referee is going to change their decision because a player gets all bush lawyer with them on the pitch.

If a referee is making a serious error in their interpretation of the laws, *clarify* what the ruling is and make a report to the association later.

 

[voice of reason]

not just that
random but oh well
another very little unknown relevence regarding the captain.
In the event of a goalkeeper being sent off, the team needs to replace the goalkeeper (every1 knows that).
In the event of noone wanting to go goalkeeper (lol), the captain has to go gk.
Oh and if he doesnt then he can get in trouble.
So for all amaeture players out there- if this ever happens, you know how to screw ur captain!
I was actually taught that by some ref...just thought I would educate everyone!

Kareem

You can take my word for it that this is a footballing myth.  Quite how it started, I don't know and I still hear it repeated by some referees who should know better.  But it is bullshit....and please don't ever act on it if ever you find yourself in the unlikely position.  If no-one is willing to go into goals, the referee would simply abandon the game, as it is a requirement for a team to have a goalkeeper.

oh well
another reason to be worried about refereeing on the coast
i will check it up- but as a newer version ref its stupid to be told 'myths'
other myths i know of- u have to be within 1 metre of sideline for a throw-in
or a subbed player on isnt allowed to take throwin (in trial game against Mayfield up in Newcastle we werent allowed to- but asked central coast ref's and they say its a myth) (which I aree with since I havent heard anything bout it)

Kareem

You rise above the mythology by knowing the laws of the game.  If in doubt, go back to the book.  THere is no set distance you have to be from the sideline for a throw-in, but the law says it is awarded from the point where it crossed the touch line.  Being too far back from the touchline would be the same as being too far up or down the touchline - and the throw would become a foul throw and be awarded to the opposition.  Any distance from the original point of the throw-in that you set would presumably be at your own discretion.

As for your question about the subbed player, until a substitute actually enters the field of play the substitution is not completed.  If the substitute goes straight from bench to throw-in, he is not technically a player and that is why it says in the additional instructions for referees at the back of the book: A substitute who has not completed the substitution procedure by setting foot onto the fi eld of play cannot restart play by taking a throw-in or corner kick

 

[Omni]

All the sub will have to do is tap his foot in, it's one of those Rules.

As for anti-referee comments, Kareem, you know you shouldn't be doing that.

 

[Ted]

Dissent is a differing of opinion, not a questioning of decision.

dis⋅sent   /dɪˈsɛnt/  Show Spelled Pronunciation [di-sent]  Show IPA
verb  (used  without  object) 

1.   to  differ  in  sentiment  or  opinion,  esp.  from  the  majority;  withhold  assent;  disagree  (often  fol.  by  from  ): Two  of  the  justices  dissented  from  the  majority  decision.  

2.   to  disagree  with  the  methods,  goals,  etc.,  of  a  political  party  or  government;  take  an  opposing  view.  

3.   to  disagree  with  or  reject  the  doctrines  or  authority  of  an  established  church.  

noun  4.   difference  of  sentiment  or  opinion.  
5.   dissenting opinion. 

6.   disagreement  with  the  philosophy,  methods,  goals,  etc.,  of  a  political  party  or  government.  

7.   separation  from  an  established  church,  esp.  the  Church  of  England;  nonconformity. 

more http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dissent

There's questioning and questioning:

I think a referee would be harsh to caution a player for *seeking clarification* on a decision - seeking clarification is not dissent.

I also think a player is foolhardy to actually dispute a referee's decision - that is dissent.

There's an important difference between a captain seeking clarification and disputing a decision, and nobody has the right to question the decisions of the referee, armband or not.

Going back to the original post that sparked the whole thing off - the referee should also know the difference between a direct and indirect free kick. Nevertheless, whether a referee is right or wrong it's just dumb to go disputing their decisions. No referee is going to change their decision because a player gets all bush lawyer with them on the pitch.

If a referee is making a serious error in their interpretation of the laws, *clarify* what the ruling is and make a report to the association later.

yeah agreed, also a players 'attitude' will play a strong part in how the ref calls the game. The player in question copped a yellow for asking the ref the difference between a direct and indirect kick. The way he asked was likely confrontational and sarcasticly delivered, hence the 1st yellow. The fact he got a 2nd yellow less than 2 minutes later for a 'dangerous' tackle even though the opposing team also implied to the ref it was not worthy of a yellow and did not make contact was a bit harsh though.

 

[Gopher of Pern]

I'm sure every player is worried about refereeing, as the ref always goes the other way!

On a different note, in our game last weekend, the referee awarded a corner, saying the ball came off me, when I know i did not touch it. How far am I allowed to argue this? The Ref clearly made a wrong call, even the opposition was surprised, but being the gentlemen they are, they didn't tell the ref he was wrong. I ended up standing there with a stupid look on my face because I was nowhere near the ball...


By the way, no one in the game got a yellow for asking if it was indirect or direct. That was a completely seperate incident. It just took the ref some time to respond to our question. The first yellow was for blowing up about what the player thought was an unfair challenge on him.