Blue Cards for Sin-Bins

[Wolfox]

Everyone one appear to be starting from the premise that all refs are shite 

 

Thats patently not the case…

[Foxmeister]

10 hours ago, Jordan said:

 

What’s a little ironic about these opinions are while they are certainly fair in general, they may not completely apply in this case as the blue card trial was originally something rolled out on a grassroots level.

 

There does seem to be a problem with dissent and abuse in amateur football and until recently, there were few solid platforms and tools for protecting referees. 
 

Whether or not this is a crisis in top level senior professional football is probably a subjective opinion, but I can’t stand how often the way players often react to every decision (especially when the “big clubs” play). On top of that, you have managers haranguing fourth officials and I don’t think I need to explain just how absurd that is.

 

The yellow card is a tool that refs should perhaps use more to counter dissent, but I feel like the yellow card’s weight (for dissent and for discouraging “professional fouls”) has dropped a little in recent years in professional football now that teams can make 5 subs per match.

 

My preferred idea (which was suggested to the England and Wales FAs + IFAB but not taken up) is to only allow captains to discuss decisions with referees. I’m not sold on the blue card idea for cynical fouls (much like I’m rarely sold on anything IFAB recommend) but at least in this case I can’t fault them for trying to think creatively to improve the game.

Good post IMO,.

 

I was replying to a post about having a time keeper that couldn't be done at grassroots btw.

[MPH]

To be fair, I think he’s got this spot on…

 

 

[Stinkenzo]

I like it for dissent, not for the actual football aspect of things though

[Stinkenzo]

12 hours ago, MPH said:

To be fair, I think he’s got this spot on…

 

 

Could just not abuse the ref then??? As said above though I don't agree with blue cards for tactical fouls 

[whoareyaaa]

19 hours ago, SecretPro said:

All modern football ever really needed was goal line technology and off-side technology. Everything else is simply down to rule clarity and implementation of them. 

100% get rid of VAR and go back to 3 subs and use goal line and offside technology.

[Lillehamring]

On 09/02/2024 at 00:14, Chelmofox said:

This can be done already. And we could introduce retrospective measures in the event incidents were missed on field. 

Sure - but it doesn't happen because the refs don't even enforce the rules they currently have - how many times have we seen a ref bottle a second yellow for example...

[Lillehamring]

On 09/02/2024 at 10:29, Les-TA-Jon said:

To be fair the top levels of the game do have an increasing problem of dissent, cynical fouls, shirt pulling and time wasting. 

 

We've all seen it, how teams look to commit fouls in just the 'right' area of the pitch to stop a transition/counter but not get a yellow. Or when players commit a cynical foul to stop a break and either don't get carded because they're a 'nice' player (Winks...) or they do but then another player takes the mantle for performing that kind of foul. 

 

But I don't think Blue cards and sin bins are the solution.

 

Why not just ask Refs to actually implement the existing rules?

 

Dissent? Yellow

Cynical foul on the transition? Yellow - regardless of who's doing it or where it is on the pitch

Time wasting? Yellow

 

And I wish Refs would stop giving 2nd yellows as if it's a red. If it's a yellow, it's a yellow and its the player's fault, not the refs, if they get sent off 

A second yellow really should be checked by VAR anyway, seeing as VAR is supposed to check red cards - this would prevent someone getting sent off for an undeserved 2nd yellow, but give refs more confidence to issue them in the first place.

[Lillehamring]

17 hours ago, PhillippaT said:

I can see a sin-bin punishment as a replacement for a red after two/multiple yellows, leaving the red for purely dangerous incidents.

Well, gosh, that's just about the most sensible thing in this entire thread!

 

Bravo, Miss/Mrs

[Lillehamring]

17 hours ago, Super_horns said:

Most of the reasoning for not having it seems to be what would players do in the side lines.

 

Well how do they cope in rugby and hockey?

 

Sure they just aren't sitting there getting cold...

 

TBH i just think people are fed up of constant changes and having delays in the game.

 

And how would keepers be dealt with?

If they can be idle in other sports with sinbins, not to mention sports like american football, i'm sure they can cope with ten minutes inactivity here.

[Lillehamring]

14 hours ago, MPH said:

To be fair, I think he’s got this spot on…

 

 

And then he ruined it by going all 'jumpers for goalposts' on us....

[MPH]

1 hour ago, Stinkenzo said:

Could just not abuse the ref then??? As said above though I don't agree with blue cards for tactical fouls 

 

well, yes, but his response is more to do with how a sin bin will effect the enjoyment for the spectator. And he’s right. Any kind of sin bin will mean a team will just slow the game down  and play defensive football for 10 minutes. There will be time wasting, ect..

[Fear Of The Fox]

Even if someone agrees with the concept/rule of blue cards my other concern is that it can be easily manipulated. We'll see players arguing with each other for tactical reasons. As a footballer I can start a fake heated argument with KDB for example resulting in both of us receiving a blue card. I'm a crap footballer and KDB is world class. 

[CPepFox]

On 08/02/2024 at 14:40, rugbyblue said:

Leave the game alone.  We don't need Var, we don't need 5 subs, we dont need an elbow being offside due to a line drawn on the screen, we don't need balls with chips in them, we don't need a 48 team world cup in different countries, we don't need European super leagues and we dont need sin bins....the players know the rules.  If you are on a yellow, don't dive in.  

The beauty of football used to be it was the same game for kids on Sunday parks, dust pitches in Africa or a makeshift wasteground pitch in rio as it was in the world cup final and it became the most popular game on earth.  

I may be a dinosaur but the only change I think has improved the game was bringing in the back pass rule. UEFA, FIFA f*#k off and leave OUR game alone.  

Can't like this statement enough! 

[Les-TA-Jon]

1 hour ago, Lillehamring said:

A second yellow really should be checked by VAR anyway, seeing as VAR is supposed to check red cards - this would prevent someone getting sent off for an undeserved 2nd yellow, but give refs more confidence to issue them in the first place.

This doesn't quite work in practice though because then you'd need to VAR check every single yellow card. The 1st yellow is just as importance as the 2nd in a sending off

[Stinkenzo]

1 hour ago, MPH said:

 

well, yes, but his response is more to do with how a sin bin will effect the enjoyment for the spectator. And he’s right. Any kind of sin bin will mean a team will just slow the game down  and play defensive football for 10 minutes. There will be time wasting, ect..

In my mind it still just comes down to just not getting sin binned it will only dampen the experience for fans of the team who are a player down. Doubt the other fans would care. I do get what he means but again, a player gets a traditional red card and generally that team goes defensive, no one moans about that?

[MPH]

1 minute ago, Stinkenzo said:

In my mind it still just comes down to just not getting sin binned it will only dampen the experience for fans of the team who are a player down. Doubt the other fans would care. I do get what he means but again, a player gets a traditional red card and generally that team goes defensive, no one moans about that?

 

but it’s adding MORE ways to slow the game down, to change a game.. more ways to complicate it..

[Sly]

We could just Yellow card people for these things? 
 

And actually Yellow Card them; not this let them off thing. 

[KingsX]

21 minutes ago, orangecity23 said:

Special shoutout to Porteous, who got away with a horrible tackle in the first half, then spent the rest iof the game continually fouling Daka, before finally being booked for hacking down Doyle, and the immediately turned around and dissented the ref to his face. Then turned away. Then came back and dissented in his face a second time without picking up a second yellow.

 

15 minutes ago, jayfox26 said:

Every team we play (especially at this level) always has a total bell end playing for them. That award today goes to Ryan Porteous. How on earth he remained on the pitch when he spent the whole 90 screaming in the refs face is unbelievable.

 

[Lillehamring]

7 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

This doesn't quite work in practice though because then you'd need to VAR check every single yellow card. The 1st yellow is just as importance as the 2nd in a sending off

No not at all - because the vast majority of yellows are single, and a first yellow doesn't really affect the game, certainly not in the way a player being sent off does - effectively, the majority of yellow cards the ref can get away with a bad call.

But for a second yellow, it is far more serious, getting it wrong can totally change a game. 

 

VAR is supposed to review all red card decisions, but for some reason a red following a second yellow is not considered reviewable.

[Les-TA-Jon]

14 hours ago, Lillehamring said:

No not at all - because the vast majority of yellows are single, and a first yellow doesn't really affect the game, certainly not in the way a player being sent off does - effectively, the majority of yellow cards the ref can get away with a bad call.

But for a second yellow, it is far more serious, getting it wrong can totally change a game. 

 

VAR is supposed to review all red card decisions, but for some reason a red following a second yellow is not considered reviewable.

But what if the first yellow is the one that was ‘wrong’ and should have been VAR’d and the 2nd yellow isn’t debatable? 
 

that’s my point. You can’t review 2nd yellows without opening the can of worms of needing to review ALL yellows. Which of course would be a nonsense 

[BertFill]

16 hours ago, Lillehamring said:

VAR is supposed to review all red card decisions, but for some reason a red following a second yellow is not considered reviewable.

Because it isn't a red card decision! It's a yellow card decision.

Yes, a consequence of the decision to award a second yellow card is a red card, but the decision itself is not a red card decision.

And as others have said, the second yellow doesn't cause the red any more than the first one does, so you either review all yellow card decisions or none.

[BertFill]

1 hour ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

But what if the first yellow is the one that was ‘wrong’ and should have been VAR’d and the 2nd yellow isn’t debatable? 

From memory (which might be wrong) wasn't this what happened when Jon Moss sent Vardy off against West Ham? The second yellow was probably fair enough, but the first one was very soft.

[Lillehamring]

2 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

But what if the first yellow is the one that was ‘wrong’ and should have been VAR’d and the 2nd yellow isn’t debatable? 
 

that’s my point. You can’t review 2nd yellows without opening the can of worms of needing to review ALL yellows. Which of course would be a nonsense 

I get your point - but it's always going to be the second that is the difference between having a player less or not.  It doesn't matter if the first one is right or wrong, what matters is getting the second one right - that second card is, technically, what provokes the red card, not the first one..  Sure if the first one is a bad call it's harsh on the player, but if his second one is checked and seen to be a bad call, at least he isn't sent off for two bad calls.  It's a question of balance - checking a second yellow is the compromise between a player being incorrectly sent off and not having to review every card - and it would still have to come down to a clear and obvious error.

 

You have to accept the referee's decision on a first yellow, that's how it is and that's not the issue - the issue is when a ref makes a bad call that leads to a sending off.  Or equally, the other side of the coin, how many times does a ref not give a second yellow, because he doesn't want to risk incorrectly sending off a player -  a review gives him a safety net.

 

 

[Lillehamring]

1 hour ago, BertFill said:

Because it isn't a red card decision! It's a yellow card decision.

Yes, a consequence of the decision to award a second yellow card is a red card, but the decision itself is not a red card decision.

And as others have said, the second yellow doesn't cause the red any more than the first one does, so you either review all yellow card decisions or none.

Dude - the player is sent off - that's the point.  If the ref get's a second yellow wrong it ruins the game.  It is possible to have different review rules for different situations.  A first yellow is not reviewable because on it's own it doesn't punish a team by reducing the amount of players - a second yellow does, thus it should be checked.

 

And of course a second yellow causes a sending off more than the first does - one yellow will never be a sending off without a second; a second will always be a sending off.

 

Nothing ruins a game more than a sending off, that's why they opted for VAR to check all red cards - why should a red for a second bookable offence be any different than a straight red for a hand ball?