Sanction for retaliation

[Tony Minoldo]

Hello all officials out there!

I have two questions for you, and I'm really looking forward to your answers.

QUESTION No. 1: What is the sanction for retaliation?

Description of what happened: Whilst the ball travels from one side to the other of the pitch, a defender (let's call him "A") blocks and puts down an opponent ("B") when "B" is running into space. Both "A" and "B" are relatively far away from the ball (10-20 metres). The referee doesn't see anything nor does he take any action if he'd seen anything, and the attack continues, Meanwhile, "B" stands up and runs straight away towards "A" who stands his ground. "B" violently hits "A" with the side of his body, sending him down legs up in the air. The referee stops the game, speaks to the players, especially with "B", cautioning him and showing him the yellow card.

At the end of the match, the official explained to me that he didn't feel a red card was necessary because "B" did hit "A" "shoulder to shoulder".

I think the decision was wrong because retaliation should be considered 'Violent conduct', therefore according to Law 12 "B" should have been sent off. I fail to see any cautionable offence in Law 12 that can be applied in the case I describe.

To add insult to injury, player "B" went on to score a goal minutes later, setting the score 2-1 for his team although the final score was 2-2.

QUESTION 2: If the above mentioned decision was wrong, this is a case of technical mistake. Should then the match be repeated?

Thank you for your answers and comments, I'm really looking forward to read them.

Tony

[whatever]

QI It's impossible to say without actuallly seeing the incident. If in the opinion of the referee it wasn't violent conduct then it's only a yellow.

Q2 Absolutely not because it's a decision made on opinion and not a 'technical' error.

[Tony Minoldo]

QI It's impossible to say without actuallly seeing the incident. If in the opinion of the referee it wasn't violent conduct then it's only a yellow. .

Blimey, that's why I spent all that time describing it!!!

My point is that there are seven cases when a yellow card must be shown, and none of them covers running straight towards another player and pushing him to the ground. If that is not called "violent conduct" what would you call it?

[whatever]

Sounds to me that 'A' could have got out of the way instead of standing his ground. He probably went down far too easily?

[Tony Minoldo]

Sounds to me that 'A' could have got out of the way instead of standing his ground. He probably went down far too easily?

That is not the point, going dopwn easily or not, nobody should run into somebody else when they're away from the ball. But believe me, no, "B" ran into "A" quite violently and all happened away from the ball: Indeed from the dugout we all realised what was going on...Honestly, I missed what "A" did to "B"; all I saw was "A" running away from "B" to cover in defence ("B's" team was attacking) and "B" stood up quite upsep and as soon as he got up ran to put "A" down. I thought, watching "B" reaction, that he was going to punch "A", and maybe he didn't do it because "A" stood his ground? I don't know, because only "B" knows what was in his mind at the moment. Hoverwer, I have to say that "B" had not taken ANY kind of dive or being involved in ANY suspect behaviour before this incident). I respect "B" for that and he's also a very good player for this level (Oh, "B" isn' t in my team, by the way. Also, "B" and I discussed about the incident after the match and I told him my opinion and although I could see he wasn't pleased with my opinion that he deserved a red card (and probably "A" deserved it as well) he accepted it without trying to justify himself, saying that "A" had put him down without the ball. .

A natural human reaction, I'd say. My questionning is: Is that a red card or not? To me, it is, whatever why I read the Laws? In my opinion, the referee should have stopped the match, check with the linesman to see what have happened and the maybe issue 2 red cars, for both "A" and "B".



PS: I'm not sure that if "A" had ran away, "B" wouldn't have taken any worse action? If that was pro football, "A" would've stayed in the ground for 5 minutes yelling and holding his face like he'd been hit by Mike Tyson in his prime! Or, and I've seen this many times, especially in the old times when goiung down yelling was considered as no "manly" "A" would have tried to punch "B", seeing the way "B" was running at him

[whatever]

As you have confirmed, it's just a matter of opinion. In yours' it was red in the referees' it was yellow.

[Tony Minoldo]

As you have confirmed, it's just a matter of opinion. In yours' it was red in the referees' it was yellow.

Hahaha, no, I wrote that in my opinion the ref should've asked the linesman -in case the ref himself had not seen what happened. But the law is no matter of opinion: the more I read it, the more it seems to me that is a sending off for violent conduct, I wanted to check with some refs, but nobody cares to comment apart from you

[whatever]

I'ts noticeable that very few referees put comments on this site any more.

I wonder why?

[Tony Minoldo]

I'ts noticeable that very few referees put comments on this site any more.

I wonder why?

Yes, I miss that, where are bakeref, fatref and all the rest? This used to be a very active and interesting part of the forum!

BTW, I asked the question to a ref today, and he replied: yellow card, then he changed to red card!

[scflfan]

Red Card if deliberate.

No replay of the match though.

[stringz]

HI Tony
thought I would put my tuppence worth in. It is very difficult to comment on wheter a red or yellow card should be issued but clearly one or the other should have been issued, in this case yellow. What you consider in this case to be violent is purely subjective and only the referee on the day can make a judgement in this respect. Quite clearly there are levels of violent conduct that are cut and dried. The problem here is that we were not there and trying to base a decision even on your eloquent post are at best difficult but at least the ref applied some sanction if he had not then I would be questioning his judgement.

also this is taken from the laws of the game 'A player is guilty of violent conduct if he uses excessive force or brutality
against an opponent when not challenging for the ball'. Now if you consider this to be the case then red it is. However, the ref has to be absolutely certain that this is the case and if he is not then a caution is the least a player can expect. Herein lies the difficulty in answering this question!

[Tony Minoldo]

Hello Stringz and thank you, very good reply! Where have you been though (in the forum, I mean, you were a lot more active in the past?)

Regards,

Tony

[stringz]

Tony, I find the forums still quite useful but the level of debate, in my opinion has diminished. I still browse frequently and stick my oar in now and again but as a ref we are on to a hiding for nothing anyway! Also, I think that this section is down in the basement now and people don't go looking for it so much. If it were in the main forum perhaps it would be better used and you would get more refs come back on!

[Tony Minoldo]

Tony, I find the forums still quite useful but the level of debate, in my opinion has diminished. I still browse frequently and stick my oar in now and again but as a ref we are on to a hiding for nothing anyway! Also, I think that this section is down in the basement now and people don't go looking for it so much. If it were in the main forum perhaps it would be better used and you would get more refs come back on!

Geoff, Gareth D, Fingers et al. have you read that? I think Stringz has a good point here!

[been there done it]

Tony, I find the forums still quite useful but the level of debate, in my opinion has diminished. I still browse frequently and stick my oar in now and again but as a ref we are on to a hiding for nothing anyway! Also, I think that this section is down in the basement now and people don't go looking for it so much. If it were in the main forum perhaps it would be better used and you would get more refs come back on!

Geoff, Gareth D, Fingers et al. have you read that? I think Stringz has a good point here!

Players don't listen to refs during the 90mins on the park. I doubt they would be interested in what they write.