November 11, 2006
A red card to the red card for swearing
The local laws of the game that sees the dismissal of a (senior/adult) player from the field of play for swearing must be one of the most ridiculous actions by the governing body yet devised.
Ok, once again, the original intention was good; to reduce the incidence of abuse toward referees, etc. but it has now gotten ridiculously out of hand. Some players are now attempting to have opposing players red carded for using language. Crucial matches are being influenced because, for example, a player verbalises his/her frustration at a particularly over exuberant tackle or is hurt during such a tackle.
Thankfully a few referees are using their commonsense and as long as the ‘word’ isn’t heard in the next suburb or is abusive directly toward another player, the swearing player receives a verbal warning and told to cool it. On the other hand I have witnessed a player sent from the field after being repeatedly ‘hacked’ from behind then voicing his frustration by saying, “F***ing hell” that wasn’t even heard on the opponents bench 20 metres away, but because the referee was standing over the incident, the player is sent off. A plainly stupid action.
Rightly or wrongly, swearing is well ingrained part of our society. Our kids listen to music that is rife with gangsta (foul/abusive/derogatory) terminology and four letter words. We watch the English Premier League and witness the likes of Rooney, Gerrard, Ferdinand and Kewell ‘go off their tits’ directly at referees and linesmen (assistant referees) with rarely even a yellow card in sight. Our media is full or language that was once never heard outside of the public bar of the local pub. Yet, as grown men and women, once we enter the field of play we are supposed to switch off what is ‘normal’ in our society and adopt this angelic response to frustration.
I’d be the first person the show a player a red card if that player turned to me and abused me directly or made threatening remarks, but I’m not going to red card a player because he says ‘fuck’ (there, I said it!!) after a particularly hard tackle or demonstrates his frustration at his own poor pass or shot on goal. Especially when I know that at the end of the game I’m going to be standing in his club’s bar using the same language he could be send off for next week.
Enough is enough. Let’s put an end to this ridiculous situation and play the game as adults, not as a strict school masters toward naughty students.
As a player who has suffered the red from i might add a referee who well resembles your prancing referee (no names please, ed.), I wholeheartly agree with your comment .
I have no problems being sent off if i use ( how do they say ) foul and abusive language if it was directed at the referee but to be sent off for saying F**K after being kicked in the air and the guy that has kicked you getting off scott free is just not cricket!!!!
Comment by Sent off — November 12, 2006 @ 7:54 am
This is an official warning for using the “word”.
You have been banned from posting for the next 90 minutes.
You can consider it a yellow card if you wish.
Sincerely,
The Internet Police,
Blogosphere Patrol Divison.
Comment by Plebian.net Administrator — November 12, 2006 @ 4:31 pm
The red card for swearing is indeed in accordance with the laws of the game. The Laws do not require that the language be directed at anyone. Players, and their coaches would do well to read that document!
In Tasmania the Zero Tolerance to swearing was adopted as it was thought that foul language being heard y women and children watching the game was not appropriate - especially as these two groups are the ones we seek to encourage to come and watch and also become active participants.
The local ruling is that, in the event that a player uses foul or abusive language that is not aimed at another person, and that language is - in the opinion of the referee - audible on the sidelines then the player is to be shown a red card and sent from the field of play.
If the language is directed at another individual - be it player, referee, spectator - he is shown the ed acrd and sent fron the field of play REGARDLESS of whether it was audible on the sidelines.
I have no problem with it being established that the round ball football filed is a much more family friendly place to be than the local pub or park.
Comment by sj — November 12, 2006 @ 10:18 pm
Thankfully, there are some officials who apply the laws of the game with some common sense. If the law SJ quotes was applied as rigorously in any first class league around the world as it is here, the game would be totally destroyed.
SJ, let me ask you this, do you allow your children to listen to music/lyrics that contain language? Do you allow them to watch PG, M or M15+ movies? Because all of these contain language.
Look at the families that attend A-League games. Does the language put them off? Does the colourful language in the EPL put off women from attending the game. Sure, it may put some off but you can’t be everything to everybody.
Do you seriously believe you are going to attract women & children to Tasmanian football because our players don’t swear? There is no need to ’sanitise’ the game. Allow the game to grow and develop, build it with skill, passion and commitment and they will come.
Comment by Blackjack — November 12, 2006 @ 11:05 pm
Since the zero-tolerance interpretation was introduced, I have witnessed:
* two people sent off for swearing at the referee (fair enough);
* two people sent of for swearing at a player who had intentionally baited them by saying some pretty unsavoury things under their breath (in this case, the interpretation has encouraged the baiter in his work);
* three people sent off as they were carried off because they swore after get badly injured by a foul tackle.
What has the positive been since the change? Not much.
Better would be zero tolerance of overt dissent (e.g. charging at the referee - instant yellow), and time-wasting tactics such as standing over a free kick (the opposition’s), kicking the ball away, walking off with the ball, etc - all things that lead to the sort of standing around and arguing that gives the game a much worse look the the odd loose word.
Something that was being trialled in the lower leagues in Britain was giving the referee the ability to advance a free kick 10m, rugby style.
I reckon it’s worth a try!
Comment by John — November 13, 2006 @ 8:29 am
does anyone watch the premier league or the a league
if so you can see the players mouthing the f word plus many other profanities quite loudly. i thought this rule was universal zero tolerance my foot.
swearing is part of the game whether you like it or not
Comment by joey — November 23, 2006 @ 12:42 pm
Ah Joey what happens in the rest of the world makes stuff all difference here , the no swearing rule was if i remember , still playing then , by the referees body McEwan and Raymond - not even sure Soccer Tas had a say , remember our coach telling us that he was told about it at a meeting .
It was supposed to stop the over the top profanity , but as with most things once written in black and white - our black - yellow -green officials ran around the park and dished reds out like confetti !!
The more sensible refs who had control and understood the game adapted , spoke to the players used the rule as it should have been , the young were given a gun to fire and they sure do fire live bullets , much easier to send off than talk to the players.
The results i am waiting to see as i am sure we must have some figures on , has it resulted in keeping referee abuse down -bringing more spectators to the games - and as such referee numbers up?
Do we really live in such an insular society that we need protective from profanity ? as some of the blogs prior have stated for or against never shall we have universal agreement.
Maybe the new appointment of the referees development officer , a move that will at last give referees a training and recruitment arm , will provide valuable input for future decisions not off the cuff decisions like the no swearing .
However it is like taxes - here to stay -..
I agree swearing is part of the game but their is also a time and place- swear wisely
Comment by Left back — November 24, 2006 @ 9:16 am
fair enough comment left back
having played on the mainland myself these rules do not apply
because the referees over there have some sort of common sense they know if a player is having a bad day cursing at himself is not a major problem. i get sworn at more of the field with people around me than i do on the field should i dish them a red card…no because it is part of society in some dictionaries the f word is now in it.
the referees in tasmania think they are what bring people to the games. this poses the question of how many people watch the matches at most about 30 - 50 people watch.
it all started when soccer tas took the ethnicity out of the league haing clubs change their name and no horns flags etc etc.
and by taking away the finals series how much revenue would have been lost my guess is a hell of a lot
the north south competition was a good idea…..yeah right
Comment by joey — November 24, 2006 @ 12:40 pm
I get sworn at more in my job as a teacher than anywhere else…
Comment by charlie white — November 28, 2006 @ 8:57 am
It would be a lot easier for players to swallow if the same ‘zero tolerance’ approach was applied to deliberatley dangerous tackles.
Yellow cards are a waste. Why not get rid of them and introduce a sin bin. At least then players have had a chance to cool down before doing too much damage.
Comment by Fabrizo — November 28, 2006 @ 3:33 pm
Joey i agree, first thing i realised was the swearing rule and the amount of swearing from supporters, p.s i reckon if a ref sent a player off in victoria for swearing he wouldnt make it out of the ground. =)
Comment by James Sherman — December 27, 2006 @ 4:52 pm
if the refs worried about the late tackles, and my biggest pet hate, i’ve been playing for over 27 years , in 5 different countries, the BLOODY foul throw! My god i learnt the rules of a throw in , in 1978, i still see week in week out young kids cheating or not knowing the right way to throw a ball back into play. who cares if someone says s–t or bol–cks. After all how come folk from other countries can speak in their tongue and get away with it, cause our ref’s can’t speak greek, italian, etc,etc. to me it’s almost discrimanation! ref’s let the game go on!
ah, if a referee recognises a word or gesture even if a foreign language, as foul or offensive in nature, he/she is obliged to take action. Blackjack
Comment by THE "BIG YIN" — March 7, 2007 @ 12:14 am