yellow cards red cards

[4time]

can someone explain why tssaa interpretation of cursing in basketball is a lesser foul than the same offense in soccer.

cursing in basketball- one tech. cursing in soccer -ejection

double standard

[soccerpro1]

Not a double standard - a higher standard!

[gate]

thank you. good answer.

[4time]

you are quite correct. that however is not my point. the point is if it is a higher standard then the tssaa in your statement must view soccer in a higher moral light. you must agree that soccer is not viewed that way by the tssaa.

the policy must be uniform across the board. soccer is played on a field much greater in size than a basketball court so not everything is always heard by spectators. however, in basketball you are feet away. club ball gives far more leeway in this area. same refs. different standard

lets make this policy apply to all sports not just the non- revenue generating ones

[KeithHamilton]

If I am correct, in Basketball when a player receives two technical fouls they are ejected. In soccer when a player receives their second yellow card they are ejected. Whether a player receives a yellow or red card for cursing depends on the situation. If it is just incidental cursing, then I give the player a yellow card. If they are cursing at someone, that can be interpreted as trying to start a fight and I might give the player a yellow/red. Meaning they are ejected and can be replaced. However, if they curse someone and throw in a racial slur, then they are going to get a red card. Meaning they will be ejected and cannot be replaced.

 

Having reffed in Tennessee for several years, I do not believe that soccer officiating is at the "higher standard" that previous posters have suggested. I wish that it was and that soccer refs would be as consistent in dealing with poor behaviour as Basketball refs are. I have complained in our referee meetings, to our assignor, and to the State that the soccer refs let the kids get away with too much garbage and too much mouth. Basketball officials do not tolerate the whining and dissent that is tolerated by too many soccer officials. Consequently, I get flack from some coaches and complaints to the assignor because I do not and will not tolerate dissent out of the players. That "higher standard" begins and ends with each official that steps onto the pitch. Soccer officials need to start dressing, acting, behaving, and holding the players to the "higher standard" that many want to brag about. My two cents for what it is worth.

[AllAmerican912]

it really depends on the referee. most cursing is incidental and usually earns a yellow card at most...if the problem persisted or was directed at another player (like hamilton explained) then a red card or yellow/red would be given. however, there is a definate need for more consistancy among referees, especially at the high school level here in TN. for the most part i think the officials do a good job and have no complaints...double standards or not.

[stevscarb]

I agree that there is serious discrepancy between sports as governed by TSSAA. I wonder if all refs are familiar with the school actions required by TSSAA for a red card. It requires a meeting with the principal and a letter describing subsequent action among other things.

this can be due to serious misbehavior or simply fouling out of a game. In basketball if a player were to let an opponent go unfouled to the basket in a close game he would likely be pulled out of the game or at least yelled at by his coach and, conversely, given a pat on the back for a hard foul that sent the opponent to the foul line. In soccer a legitimate challenge that results in a foul on a scoring opportunity gets the defensive player a red card, a suspension for the next game, and a trip to the principal's office. I think the school can also be fined but someone check me on this.

I would like to see some consistant code established by TSSAA that addresses discipline across all activities evenly. Soccer is being punished unfairly at this point. Can anyone imagine the outraged football coaches if they and their players got ejected for the same level of behavior that sends soccer players and coaches off the field? For profanity and dissent alone, there would not be enough players left on the field to finish a game!

 

Also, what is the problem with polite dissent? A player has the right to know why a foul was called and ref's, although I realize it is extremely rare and only happens in other states, have bad games too. The idea that refs are to be unquestioned is not correct. We have to understand that "dissent" as a foul is not the same as questioning a call. It is easy to tell a player to call for his captain when necessary and to explain how to have a respectful discussion.

[chxian]

Stevscarb

 

I agree with all but your last paragraph. If polite dissent is allowed in soccer you will extend the match from 90 minutes to 120 or 150 and besides, most polite dissent is only used by players and coaches to posture with the mistaken belief that they will not receive the next "bad" call that comes along. There isn't a referee that is going to call an infraction for no reason and if two players are going for the ball and the ref gets the call wrong that is part of the game and the players need to move on and understand they can't control referee decisions.

[soccerCoach]

SteveCarb,

We are talking about two sports that are played and governed by different rule. Soccer unlike basketball is much more difficult to score in. In soccer the rules states that if you are the last defender and you trip, hold,etc. an attacker to prevent a goal from being scored, you should be ejected. It is not a TSSAA rule, it is a FIFA rule(www.FIFA.com). I as a coach and former player do not think coaches and players should challenge an official's decision on the pitch right or wrong. I have yet to see a ref changes his decision in my 30 some odds years of playing and coaching experiences, and plus I think it is a CLASSLESS act. There are ways to protest a ref after the game, if one feel so strong that the ref is the reason you lost a game you should file a protest with the governing body..

[Edited by soccerCoach on 2-19-03 10:09A]

 

[Hoya]

I read stevescard's post as raising slightly different points than the focus of the last two posts.

 

First, I think he's concerned that a normal part of soccer disipline, the ejection, is misunderstood in the high school athletic system. An ejection in football would be an extraordinary event caused only by extremly egregious behavior. A football player who curses is unlikely to receive even an admonition ("boys will be boys") much less than an ejection with a minimum next game suspension and an accompanying trip to the principal and a TSSAA disipline report with a risk of a fine. If a player is tossed in most high school sports, they've done something pretty serious. In soccer, ejection is a built in part of the game's disipline system and it may occur for really bad behavior or, more often, for behavior that is inappropriate under our rules, but not, in any manner, approaching the same degree of offense that would be necessary to trigger an ejection from most other high school sports. In particular, it is inconceivable that a football or basketball player would receive an ejection for what we call "dissent", while in soccer it is one of the leading cause of carded infractions. Ejection and disqualification are a relatively common experience in soccer but few, thank goodness, are for the type of behavior that triggers TSSAA disipline for ejection from other sports. I think stevescarb is suggesting that "ordinary" or non-intentionally violent soccer ejections should not trigger full TSSAA disiplinary procedures. Our ejections are not comparable, usually, to a football, basketball or baseball ejection.

 

Second, while dissent should be discouraged, I truly believe there is an inverse correlation between referees' technical ability and the incidence of the referees' reliance on dissent suppression as a control tool. In my experience, confident upper-level refs seldom start matches with a barrage of "dissent will not be tolerated" speeches. It is the weaker, less experience referees who focus the beginning of the match on this issue, and, sometimes thereby guarantee it will become an issue. Openly confrontational and verbally aggressive dissent should and must be confronted, but I don't think experienced refs go out of their way to suppress simple banter with card-waving. A well-timed, well-crafted word (or two) directed unambiguously to an offending player usually suppresses unnecessary banter and keeps a match flowing nicely. Nothing is worse than participating in a match where a referee misses the majority of the physical calls, raises the frustration level and then concentrates, instead, on making the "easy" dissent calls to silence the field. Not all comments are dissent and a quick reply of "that's what I saw and you're stuck with my eyes" generally silences even a teenager who's worried about a refs glasses. Moreover, a passing word to a coach about a player's on-field behavior generally gains the coach's appreciative assistance in reigning in the offending mouth without the need for further confrontation. Dissent cards are often used as an easy way out.

 

Finally, someone needs to define "cursing" and its punishment. Please don't say you know it when you hear it. I've been in matches where the "f" word was common and no effort was made to address it and in other matches where the word "crap" literally earned a second yellow. If there is to be a rule, there needs to be some uniformity in its definition and its application. We are the ONLY sport where a cuss word can actually trigger an ejection (as oppossed to a penalty or a T) and this is an issue that needs some more work. There is absolutley no uniformity in this state's enforcement practices on cursing.

[Edited by hoya75 on 2-19-03 12:22P]

[Edited by hoya75 on 2-19-03 1:04P]

[Edited by hoya75 on 2-19-03 1:42P]

 

[chxian]

Howdy Hoya,

 

Because Stevscarb's example referenced a legitimate challenge that results in a foul on a scoring opportunity, either in basketball or soccer, I inferred the poster was comparing the inconsistency in how the fouls are treated in different sports. It doesn't matter which sport you watch, officials at the high school level are not going to be consistent in their application and interpretation of the law. This being the case, my point was to stink it up, deal with it and move on.

 

I have no disagreement with the fact that soccer has an undue burden with regards to TSSAA reprimands. Even red card hand balls require TSSAA notification and review since it is deemed unsportsmanlike. Seems a little harsh considering the requirements for disciplinary action in other sports is virtually unattainable.

 

I do think higher level refs can influence the game by a pre-game setting of expectations on what type of language will or won't be allowed. In fact, as you point out, there is no consistent definition for cursing so each ref should make it clear before the match want his or her definition is and what the consequences will be. The BEST refs, and you see this all the time in international matches, control things with their verbal and physical demeanor on the field. Those types are few and far between at the youth and high school levels but the ones we do have in Tennessee that are willing to step on the field knowing the type of grief they will get from coaches, parents and players have my respect.

[stevscarb]

Good discussion so far! There are two ideas we seem to be working on in this thread. One is the lack of consistant treatment of conduct across TSSAA sports. The other was in dealing with dissent.

 

As for the first, TSSAA seems to be making rules for soccer that have little to do with the game. I can't imagine where they come from unless it is from enthusiasts from other sports imposing their will on a sport they have little understanding of. It is sad to watch the TSSAA refs have to give a football offsides signal and other silly signals as required by TSSAA or face diciplinary measures.

 

After watching The Sweetwater Jamboree I feel even more srongly about TSSAA being off the mark with its referee system. USSF does not allow playing a game without a center ref. The 2 ref system seems to guarantee that the officials are out of position most of the time. Most of the refs did a great job working hard to get where they could make a certain number of calls with accuracy but it was frustrating at other times. I also have the very uneasy feeling that some of these guys are using soccer to while away the off season, if you get my drift. I would like to know how many TSSAA refs are not USSF certified.

 

As for dissent, I continue to feel that this is way over penalized. I have no sympathy for the player that gets carded for true dissent. I teach my kids the "John Stockton" method of dealing with officials which is to look innocent, accept the call, and go on with the game. Under no circumstances are they to show their palms or roll their eyes! Stockton gets away with murder by the way, but that's not the point. A player wants to fly under the radar where officials are concerned. Some officials are too touchy to risk even rational interaction with. I realize that this post can be interpreted in a bad light if that is what you want to do, but I'll stand by the opinion that Dissent does not mean that there can be no discussion regarding a call. A player has every right to ask what the call was for, and there is no reason a ref can't name the offense and restart the game with no time lost. A player needs to understand either what they did or how that ref sees the game. I have noticed that players respect a ref that tells them, "That's what I saw, but I'll keep my eyes open." The kids loose it instantly for a ref that does not understand the rules or is out of line with how the game is played. By the time you get to High School you have lots of players on most teams that are playing on club teams and have played in several states. They know good officiating and bad.