French Red Card

[SimonSmith]

Both avenues are available.

If an event is missed by the referee, a team may cite.
A Citing Officer may cite any event he or she thinks RC-worthy, even if seen by the referee.

 

[Rich_NL]

@ Biking bud. I'm wondering if you've ever played sir. You look up and your team mate is surrounded by 4 players from the opposition, you go and help them. Or you're team mate will not trust you. So you'd be as well moving onto a different team. Keep doing that and you'll soon run out of teams.

If you're experienced, you'll probably have noticed that in such situations it's generally the player running in who escalates things from jostling, and that it's quite standard for that player to be carded. WB mentioned it in the discussion at the time, the commentators on the stream I was watching observed it, and I think Richie was very lucky to get away without a card. It's not even particularly controversial.

As a general tip for managing things - you don't have to card for handbags, but if you can spot the player running in and warn them off it's often a good way to prevent a situation where you do have to show cards.

 

[Arabcheif]

If you're experienced, you'll probably have noticed that in such situations it's generally the player running in who escalates things from jostling, and that it's quite standard for that player to be carded. WB mentioned it in the discussion at the time, the commentators on the stream I was watching observed it, and I think Richie was very lucky to get away without a card. It's not even particularly controversial.

As a general tip for managing things - you don't have to card for handbags, but if you can spot the player running in and warn them off it's often a good way to prevent a situation where you do have to show cards.

I agree and that's what happened here. The 3 other French players inserted themselves into the 1 on 1 scuffle, which was handbags. Which escalated the situation to the points that Ritchie and another 2 Scottish player got involved. So what should've happened is the red card for blue 3. and 6 YCs. 3 for the 3 French Players and 3 for the 3 Scottish Players. And then YCs for everyone else that got involved after that too. I suspect we'd have ended up with 3 a side for 10 mins.

 

[Rich_NL]

I suspect watching the match with two eyes would lead you to different conclusions...

I'm not going to bother trying to convince you of anything other than that the French are nefarious bullyboys and the Scottish angels were only bravely sticking up for their mates. But my advice about managing the situation in your own games stands, it's served me well.

 

[Arabcheif]

I suspect watching the match with two eyes would lead you to different conclusions...

I'm not going to bother trying to convince you of anything other than that the French are nefarious bullyboys and the Scottish angels were only bravely sticking up for their mates. But my advice about managing the situation in your own games stands, it's served me well.

I suspect watching the match with two eyes would lead you to different conclusions...

Nope, I've merely presented what occurred.

1 - There was a disagreement between White 8 and Blue 3.
2 - Blue 1, 2 and 5 join Blue 3 surrounding White 8
3 -This seems to me to be the point of escalation until then Ritchie was not moving toward the area until he noticed Blue 1, 2 and 5 join in.
4 - Things did escalate once Ritchie joined the scuffle but the key area was the punch. This was the point that escalated he situation most.

Yes there is an argument that if Ritchie hadn't went in it may not have escalated as such. However the first point of escalation is when Blue 1,2 and 5 joined.

Both eyes saw this, these are just the facts. Watch the video. Ritchie is talking Brown (White 2) when the Hainings and Blue 3 start. He then looks over and sees Blue 1, 2 and 5 heading to join in. Sam Johnson reacts first from an extra meter or so farther away. Then Fargerson follows suit.

The point is that the facts are. 3 Blue players joined and this is what caused the escalation initially. Again, not sure how this can be interpreted any other way.

 

[Rich_NL]

And if we look at the first page, you're the only ref not to think Richie earned a card for running in. You may choose to reflect on why this is, and why the nearby French players didn't, or you may not. It's entirely up to you.

 

[Arabcheif]

And if we look at the first page, you're the only ref not to think Richie earned a card for running in. You may choose to reflect on why this is, and why the nearby French players didn't, or you may not. It's entirely up to you.

I beg to differ. There are at least 4 refs that seemingly agree with me. That's the Match Offical, 2 ARs and a TMO who reviewed the incident, noticed and talked about all the events and decided that no YC was needed. Again, if you YC Ritchie, you need to YC Blue 1,2 and 5. Then Blue 11, along with White 12 and 2. Not to mention any other player who joins in after that too.

Was Ritchie innocent? No I've never said that and I did say that his inclusion escalated the incident, but his was not the 1st escalation. That was Blue 1,2 AND 5. Ritchie, Johnson and Brown then further escalated it and Blue 3 escalated the issue most. The point is that no harm was done by Ritchie or any of the other Blue or white players who joined in. Have a word with them and deal with the punch.

 

[Zebra1922]

If you YC Ritchie I disagree you need to YC Blue 1, 2 and 5. As with most referees when a fracas occurs I concentrate on people who approach it from a distance. yes that means those close to the incident are treated differently, but those nearby don't tend to be as inflammatory as they have not charged in from a long way away.

So I'd have RC 3 Blue, YC 6 White. Restart penalty White.

 

[Arabcheif]

If you YC Ritchie I disagree you need to YC Blue 1, 2 and 5. As with most referees when a fracas occurs I concentrate on people who approach it from a distance. yes that means those close to the incident are treated differently, but those nearby don't tend to be as inflammatory as they have not charged in from a long way away.

So I'd have RC 3 Blue, YC 6 White. Restart penalty White.

Using your criteria, you'd need to RC B3, YC W6 and B11. Since he came charging in from distance too. But I think a stern word to both of those players would do.

 

[BikingBud]

@ Biking bud. I'm wondering if you've ever played sir. You look up and your team mate is surrounded by 4 players from the opposition, you go and help them. Or you're team mate will not trust you. So you'd be as well moving onto a different team. Keep doing that and you'll soon run out of teams.

My points was Richie ran in from about 10m away, he didn't sprint in and charge in like you suggest. Yes he pushed the player who had a hold of Haining, but like I said above, this is a natural reaction to defend one's team mate. He didn't run from 30-40m+ away and charge in with his shoulder. If the other 3 French Players didn't get involved I have a feeling that no-one else would've got involved. So to counter your argument, it was the 3 French players who escalated by joining in grabbing Hainings in the first place. Surely they should've stayed out of it too, that's what cause Ritchie and the other 2 Scottish players to go the the aid of their team mate. So should all 6 of those players be YC'd or just the French Players who got involved initially?

Only about 35 years but what difference does that make? When I started it was quite common for one in all in but we know that is now not acceptable.

Grabbing and handbags or running in to take someone out with a shoulder or punching there is massive difference. Chat and possibly a penalty versus :norc:

Your perspective seems out of kilter with others on here.

 

[Ian_Cook]

I have just watched this incident for the first time, and I cannot see where there is any argument.

White 6 ran in and pushed a Blue player to the ground, and Blue 11 ran in and tackled White 6 to the ground. IMO, neither of these actions is serious enough to warrant a YC.

Blue 3 threw a punch that landed in direct contact to an opponent's head, with force. That is a nailed on :norc: 24/7/365.

The rest was handbags. No-one else did anything worthy of a YC.

I think the Match Officials handled it well, and got it right.

 

[Arabcheif]

Only about 35 years but what difference does that make? When I started it was quite common for one in all in but we know that is now not acceptable.

Grabbing and handbags or running in to take someone out with a shoulder or punching there is massive difference. Chat and possibly a penalty versus :norc:

Your perspective seems out of kilter with others on here.

Respectfully, the one in all in still exists. What has changed since the days you (and I started playing), is the manner of involvement. When we started it was very common for player to go flying in fists ablaze. Now it's more pushing and shoving and grabbing to drag players out.

I didn't really say I wouldn't card anyone if it happened in one of my games. It would depend on what's happened in the melee. But I stand by as a minimum if you card Ritchie, you have to card France 11 too. He's actually ran in at a higher speed and actually charged into Ritchie. Still would be a YC.

But again, a stern word to both players and captains would suffice for that. With the RC for the punch.

 

[Arabcheif]

This with bells on. But IF you YC Ritchie, you'd then need to YC B11 at least. But yes, Ian_Cook. 100% agree with you. That makes 6 of us. You, me and the 4 match officials lol