Retaliation - when not to penalise?

[Andrew1974]

On Saturday I issued only my second red card.

32 minutes into the second half of a well fought but fair game, Green are approx 40 points up and have simply been the better side all game. White, despite loosing have kept going.

Green 10 objects to a hard but fair tackle (I was impressed with the tackle, shoulder into chest with both arms wrapping), gets up and starts swinging punches, mostly aimed at the White 15 who was not even the tackler! Swings probably 10 times connects with the head at least 2 or 3 three times. By the time everything calms down White 15 has made a single punch back, which does connnect with Green 10.

I seperate the teams, call the captains over. Then I ask for White 15, explain that retailaition is not acceptable (to which he immediately apologises) but as he was the subject of a sustained unprovoked attack I will not be taking it futher.

I then call Green 10 over and after an interesting incident where he initially can't remeber his own name and then tells me to go forth and multiply, I issue a Red card (for the punching, although he could have had one for the abuse as well!).

So, my question, should I have taken a harder stance against the retailiation, or is it accpetable to not penalise retaliation in this context?

Thanks

Andrew

 

[damo]

Spot on for mine. Once you are punched 3-4 times in the head, any you get back are self defence not retaliation.

Suspect that will be the minority view though.

 

[Chogan]

I'm with Damo too, sounds about right.

 

[Toby Warren]

Sounds ok to me.

Make sure his language and abuse is reported as well.

 

[Taff]

Once you are punched 3-4 times in the head, any you get back are self defence not retaliation.

Makes perfect sense to me.

 

[Andrew1974]

Thanks for the replys. It felt that right thing to do at the time, just wasn't sure that it was actually correct in Law - and it might not be, but at least (so far at least) we are all in agreement.

Make sure his language and abuse is reported as well.

Mentioned in detail in my Sending Off report.

Andrew

 

[Simon Thomas]

Green 10 is gone - Red Card, and if he adds abuse to that, fine it is added to the disciplinary charges and he gets an even longer ban.

White 15 lands a punch and he is off for a yellow card I am afraid.

I might have some sympathy for a referee who tells me "what retaliation by white 15" ? :biggrin:

Officially he would only have seen the punches by Green 10 I suspect.

 

[menace]

I must admit when I first read the OP my initial reaction was to give White 15 a YC for the retaliation (although I can see it was understandable to some degree) as you can't have players using punching as a form of defence. Putting your hands up to protect yourself is self defence, punching someone is not (IMO). But with the weight of those saying it was not a YC offence then perhaps I need to recalibrate my thinking?

Definitely would be adding the abuse/expletive to the RC report!

 

[Dickie E]

Green 10 is gone - Red Card, and if he adds abuse to that, fine it is added to the disciplinary charges and he gets an even longer ban.

White 15 lands a punch and he is off for a yellow card I am afraid.

I might have some sympathy for a referee who tells me "what retaliation by white 15" ? :biggrin:

Officially he would only have seen the punches by Green 10 I suspect.

plus one

 

[damo]

I must admit when I first read the OP my initial reaction was to give White 15 a YC for the retaliation (although I can see it was understandable to some degree) as you can't have players using punching as a form of defence. Putting your hands up to protect yourself is self defence, punching someone is not (IMO). But with the weight of those saying it was not a YC offence then perhaps I need to recalibrate my thinking?

Definitely would be adding the abuse/expletive to the RC report!

I think if you are being attacked, attempting to sway out of the way or putting your hands up is not a particularly good way to defend yourself. If the other guy thinks he can land punches with no thought to defence then he will. If someone punches you and moves away then throwing a punch is retaliation and normally a YC, but if you are repelling punches it is a different story.

Here is a guy who is being set to by a guy who has thrown 10 punches, connecting with the head 2-3 times. I wasn't being jocular when I said that it sounded more like self-defence than retaliation.

 

[Dixie]

Spot on for mine. Once you are punched 3-4 times in the head, any you get back are self defence not retaliation.

Suspect that will be the minority view though.

Me too. I see a significant difference between self-defence and retaliation. It's unrealistic to expect a player take blows to the head and face and calmly offer the other cheek for more of the same. Being a generous soul, I offer to demonstrate on anyone who takes a contrary view to see how long they can keep it up.

 

[OB..]

I suppose that those who say "a punch is a punch" might also say "retaliation is retaliation", but I don't think that approach is helpful. The referee needs to take each situation on its merits. A flurry of punches from the retaliator would be unacceptable. A single punch that knocked the opponent out? A single ineffective punch followed by turning his back?

 

[irishref]

I have a lot of sympathy for the lack of YC for the retaliation. I read it as self-defence after extreme provocation. Well correct to remind him that retaliation is not to be meted out on the pitch. Take each case as it comes with its mitigating or aggrovating factors.

Sounds like you did well to keep an eye on the offender, or was there no mass pushing/shoving that ensued?

 

[didds]

I don't think you'd be terribly wrong if you gave a YC for white 15. You'd certainly need to check his demeanour to see if he has any "red kist" or has come down immediately from his own punch. (I'm not condemning him for hitting the red bloke incidentally!)


The only real issue I can consider that it may bring is if later in the game he manages some technical YC and then ends up with a RC. I dunno if you guys reports to disciplinary can say things like "IMO RC sufficient given the circumstances, no ban necessary"

didds

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

I would probably have handled the situation exactly the same well done.

 

[crossref]

I dunno if you guys reports to disciplinary can say things like "IMO RC sufficient given the circumstances, no ban necessary"

didds

this is frowned upon; for instance : unbeknownst to you he might be on some sort of final warning - eg it might actually be the third red card he's had for retaliation this season -- and in that scenario a comment along those lines isn't helpful for the panel.

 

[Browner]

I would have mirrored your handling, and told white captain it was a "severe admonishment" for white 15 , & thus avoided any YC totting up ! You could have reversed the penalty to seemingly add displeasure at retaliation per se, as retaliation doesn't have to be worse than the original offence of course.......................... I'm not fooled though, this is clearly a tale of fantasy, we all know 10's punch like a vicars prepubescent daughter ! ............ nevertheless a 2-3 out of 10 hit rate suggests he's a potential hooker ! :biggrin:

 

[Mat 04]

I recall an incident not so long ago whee Wayne Barnes did not reverse the penalty despite retaliation because the original offence was far worse. I'll see if I can find the video....

My own view on this is the same as those above, although I think we can all see the difficulty of justifying it under the laws of the game.

 

[Mat 04]

Found it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cZXpcQwZ-0

 

[Browner]

Found it

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cZXpcQwZ-0

Good memory , WB didn't spot the catalyst , being Marler's Hand yanking the headguard of Ayerza, [Browner campaign to keep hands off face resurfaces!] a punch which results in a RC is clearly sufficient to reverse a PK, WB's 'more serious' assessment is wrong, what are we going to do measure the impact forces of traded punches to determine which was more serious? no!. Law 10.4[L] requires the penalty to be reversed, otherwise it wouldn't have a sanction.