I personally feel this is an interesting point because I'm a little bit confused about the Yellow/Red card policy at the moment. I've just been watching the Newcastle v Man City game and I've noticed that Cabaye is already on a yellow card for a previous foul and I've just seen him go in twice that for me both deserved bookings in my opinion. He cleanly takes out Navas by throwing his body into him sand leaving him on the ground and the other was a similar challenge as well. So in theory, I would have given him a yellow card for his first challenge on Navas regardless of his current cautions. But you can't let the same challenge go unpunished twice, can you?
What needs clearing up is, what actually classes as a yellow card/red card offence? It was once a warning for a foul, yellow card for persistent fouling (twice) and then a final/2nd warning if already on a yellow card and then off again. But I feel these days are long gone now. For me, someone who gets a booking should have committed a "reckless" tackle. Reckless meaning he doesn't have control of the outcome and is showing no regard to the consequences of his actions, usually done out of frustration. So tackles like that should be a booking straight off, I think we all know when there is a reckless tackle and just a simple foul, I'm sure we can tell the difference. A straight red card should be a tackle that is "harmful/dangerous" meaning the challenge is under no control from the player and the player doesn't understand the risk of this tackle and is likely to cause a serious injury. These tackles are sometimes hard to justify because it is just a matter of opinion really, but that's what I think.
What I don't seem to understand now is, when I mentioned Cabaye's challenges earlier when on a booking, those are tackles I would class as reckless in my opinion (others may disagree/agree). So why has he not been sent off for his foul on Navas or the one moments after? Is it that referee's seem to back out a little more now? But I've always thought, if a player is on a yellow card, if he commits a foul that is worthy of a yellow card, regardless of the tackle, who it is against etc, he should be sent off, no questions. But this doesn't seem to be the case with referee's. It is almost like giving them the "benefit of the doubt". Which I don't agree with. Referee's need to toughen up a little bit now and explain that a player has committed a yellow card offence whilst on a booking, he is sent off. Simple. But it's not the case. Then again, if this was to happen then I'd have thought in the majority of weekends their would end up being a red card in at least one game. But after all, that is the harsh but fair law in football, that is how it should be IMO. It will then test the limits of teams' squads as well.
Thoughts?
Yellow/Red Cards
posted on 12/1/14
Yep, officiating system is pants
posted on 12/1/14
And in some cases (like this) a lack of an officiating 'system'
posted on 12/1/14
What needs clearing up is, what actually classes as a yellow card/red card offence? It was once a warning for a foul, yellow card for persistent fouling (twice) and then a final/2nd warning if already on a yellow card and then off again. But I feel these days are long gone now.
---------------------
Honestly I don't think that was ever the case.
It's always been about the type of foul. It's all laid out in the rule book.
posted on 12/1/14
Newcastle should have had 2 players sent off - Sissoko and Cabaye.
The reason they stayed on was because the ref felt guilty for disallowing a perfectly legitimate goal and so was trying to even out his decisions.
Hopefully he gets relegated to a lower league for a couple of weeks.
posted on 12/1/14
Mbia should have walked for crocking Nasri as well
posted on 12/1/14
The system actually works pretty much as you describe it in the original article. A 'careless' challenge is a foul, 'reckless' is a yellow card and 'using excessive force' (aka 'dangerous' is a straight red; plus you can give a yellow for 'persistent flouting of the Laws of the Game'.
The problem with this setup is that there's not really much attempt to define any of those terms, so everything comes entirely down to a referee's own discretion. What one ref might deem merely 'careless', another might consider 'reckless', and because there's no definition to guide them either decision would technically be correct - all the justification that's needed was that the referee considered it to be that way. Same goes for 'persistent fouling' - how many fouls does that require? Some refs might have it as two or three, some might make it five or six, and some might vary it depending on how serious they perceived each foul to be.
Obviously it's difficult to give a clear-cut definition of what should be a red/yellow card, given the huge variety of forms of contact and amounts of force used in fouls, but the current system makes it a little too easy for refs to justify strange decisions and doesn't encourage consistency at all.
posted on 12/1/14
Agreed ^^