Vocal Voices

So, that's another card for things like dissent and tactical fouls.

This will bring in more of the disaster that is VAR as players, captains and managers argue over whether it was a tactical foul or not. And each referee or linesman will have a different threshold for what they think is dissent. And why shouldn't players disagree with a decision if they think it is wrong?

What's next? Four quarters of twenty minutes each? Special teams for corners and free kicks? "Games" lasting three hours to complete? Half-time "entertainment"?

Association Football has lost its way.

The Spurs manager made a good point the other day. Football is popular because anyone can understand how to play it. A ball, two sides and you're away.
But the people who make the rules can't stop themselves fiddling and interfering with the game, cluttering it up with VAR and now a proposed new colour card, and that's before you get to them giving out a new "interpretation" of various rules every year.
I honestly think it's time for some new ruling bodies for the sport - some with a bit of sense.

One person on TV discussing this made a verty sensible suggestion.

If the side who commited te foul dis-agrees with the referees decsion, move the ball twenty yards up field.If it lands in the penalty area
it becomes a penalty.

That would soon stop a lot of the arguments withthe ref easy to administer and no need for VAR

When the 10 minute sin-bin concept for dissent was first trialled in various leagues back in 2017/18, the Dorset Premier League was one of the chosen few. From memory, I think 7 leagues in England were involved.

It was always understood that the signal for a sin-binning was going to be a blue card, but this was changed (presumably by the FA) at the last moment to a yellow card. I was present at one of the first games where a sin-bin was implimented; my game notes tell me this was on 17th August 2017 at Sherborne Town Reserves v Sturminster Newton, when the Sherborne no.6 got carded after 40m when a defensive mix-up was gleefully rocketed home by Stur's dentre-forward, and he had venting his feelings at the referee.

Everone in the crowd around me was confused by the yellow card and the Sherborne defender marching off the pitch seemingly after a single yellow. It was only clarified at half-time what had actually occured. We were surprised it hadn't been a blue card. The scuttlebutt at the time was that Dorset Referees Association were still awaiting delivery of them.

Crommers, personally, I would welcome a blue card. The use of a yellow leads to too much confusion for players and spectators.

There is some anecdotal evidence that the sin-bin system works. Players have modified their behavior, there is less back-chat, and there have been less sin-binnings issued this season than in previous years, although having said that, I have seen a couple of straight sendings off for more violent verbal abuse this season.

cruiser2 wrote:One person on TV discussing this made a verty sensible suggestion.

If the side who commited te foul dis-agrees with the referees decsion, move the ball twenty yards up field.If it lands in the penalty area
it becomes a penalty.

That would soon stop a lot of the arguments withthe ref easy to administer and no need for VAR

Cruiser, the rugby union sanction of a 10 yard forward march of a penalty if the defending side dissents from the decision has been in place for many years, but it's used quite sparingly.
That said, I've been to one game before Christmas where this happened, a moderately difficult penalty was turned into an easier one, and whilst it didn't probably affect the ultimate outcome, it was a set-back for the offending team at a time when the game was nicely poised.

All that is needed is a change to the yellow card rules

1st Yellow is ten minutes in the sin-bin; second in the same game is a sending off, as is now the case. Multiple sin-bins / yellows over time are a red and a ban: same as now.

This punishes the cheats during the game, as should be the case. If more than one gets sin-binned - hard lines.

Referring back to the Spurs manager again, it is his opinion (and mine) that the side down to ten men would try and time waste until their player was back on the pitch. If they do that are we going to have another directive that the ten minutes should be monitored and time added on to compensate for the time wasting? Yes, we are going to end up with matches that are three hours long!