Yellow Isn't Mellow, Any More

Now, the whole concept regarding the article you are about to read makes sense, and at the same time, makes no sense.

If a player intentionally is desirous of being booked with a yellow card, but not to intentionally injure anyone, just to say, waste time, he (she) now gets slapped with a fine of $3,270 AND has to sit out the next two games; but if the player really wasn't trying to get a yellow card, but fouls and injures an opponent and receives a yellow card just the same, he (she)won't be fined and won't have to sit out two games.

It all has to do with the problem of accumulating yellows.

Go figure! Does this make sense? Is it fair to have two classes of yellow cards? And how do referees discern under which classification the yellow should be issued?

Its more rule problems, more confusion ... more to give fans stuff to talk about!

http://sports.yahoo.com/soccer/news?slug=afp-fbl_wc2014_asia_uzb_20120217

Wow I think you extrapolated too much from this article.

Players were alreday carrying a yellow card (caution). Next caution would result in a one game suspension.

Their next match was a meaninglss one and if they had to sit out it would be no big deal.

They followed the rules and got themselves each another caution figuring they would take a meaningless sit out and then have their record cleared.

Pretty smart move...they were following the disciplinary rules as per FIFA.

Howevere....FIFA came back and said "No, No"...the following of the rules like this is cheating so too bad so sad, now you get fined and an additional game for this particular singular case.

Referees and the LOTG have nothing to do with this....the team and players were following administrative/disciplinary rules as per FIFA.

Seems like the folks at FIFA need to think things through a bit more

I understood the article and realize its not the referees who are the problem, its FIFA.

The laws of the game are just that ... if a player wants to take a "strategic yellow" I don't buy FIFA's imposing a more severe punishment than the rules already permit.

Several years ago Sepp Blatter chewed out David Beckham for picking up a strategic foul for England several years ago.

Is there any difference when a QB quickly drops to his knee in the NFL to strategically stop the clock? Should the QB get hit with a fine, and maybe the team lose 15 yards?

Or, in the NBA when a player intentionally fouls so an opponent goes to the foul line to shot in order to stop the clock?

Here, you have a player(s) who are carded for time wasting ... for which, in actuality, the time is anyway added back into the play, and the player receives a yellow card ... and in my book, that's all the player should receive.

It appears we are in agreement. FIFA cannot "make up" rules for each situation...well I can they "can" but "shouldn't"

They need to think about what they do and potential repercussions

Well Dave this is different from football and basketball in this respect: When those players purposely get the yellow cards in order to not have to play the consolation game or whatever they are "gaming" the system. They are "cheating" the fans of the game they intended to miss. I actually think that FIFA did the right thing by suspending them for the more meaningful next game. These players were gaming the system and shortchanging the next game which the competition authority has a right to sanction. So in effect FIFA has taught them that while they merit a suspension they cannot decide which game they are suspended for. This is the reason that just about all tournaments are of the round robin format becuase if you had a lot of consolation games for 3rd place many teams would drop out and deny a team a chance to play another game. This is dishonest in that they are playing their second tier because of suspensions that were premeditated, not because the manager chose to start another group of players. If you have less than your best team on the pitch and especially because of this premeditated action then you are affecting th competition. Any team that steps on the pitch not wanting to win is being dishonest with their fans and with the competition.

While we totally disagree on the issue, I think you would agree with me that FIFA can't (I mean shouldn't ... they obviously do as they damn please)after the fact fashion a new punishment, whether they apply this punishment in the future, or not.

Play the game within the rules, don't make up new rules after a game and then apply them to the game already played.

The FIFA Ex Post Facto Laws of the Game!!!!

Yes FIFA shouldn't do a lot of things I agree with that. But the competition authority always comes up with a solution that makes some people unhappy. The bottom line for me is that the players are in effect also breaking the rules by purposely getting a yellow card for the sole purpose of sitting out the next game. I believe players from Real Madrid did the same thing with Mourinho's permission for a similar reason. They were also sanctioned so the prcedent has been set in the past. Not that FIFA can preach but I believe that it's about the integrity of the competition for that next game that they were trying to get suspended from. I think about the players. Their next opponents deserve to be played with the full squad. What about their countrymen that didn't make the team and these guys are getting cards so that they can sit out the next game. When there are players that want to be on that pitch representing their team? It's not about the laws of the game it's about the spirit of competition.

LIRef77/ NJRef ... I had a chance to discuss your "FIFA Ex Post Facto Doctrine" comments with Paul (Gardner) who has a long-standing objection as to how the FIFA/FAB group decides on the rules of the game.

We differ ... Paul feels it is unsporting to intentionally pick up a yellow card in order to sit out the next match which the offender considers a meaningless next game. Paul says that it violates whatever is left of "the spirit of the game."

I don't agree for the reasons I stated earlier ... for me, its a strategic choice, not an opportunity for officials to heap on extra punishment.

We do agree, however, that there should not be any retrospective punishment.

Paul believes that this particular offense will now have to be specifically spelled out in the rules,which NJRef mentioned.

Paul adds, which is the point I was trying to make,"that sort of thing is always going to be problematical in a set of rules that - deliberately - leaves much to the referee's judgment."

Let me elaborate.

If a player in the opinion of a referee is delaying a game, how can that official, or a rules committee after the match, determine if the player was deliberately trying to pick up a yellow, or simply delaying the game?

In other words, will we now have two different standards for yellows?

A standard run-of-the-mill yellow which will require a player to sit out the next match because of an accumulation of yellow cards, or ... for lack of a better term which I call ... a SUPER yellow ... where a referee, or a rules committee post match, determines that the player not only committed an offense requiring a yellow card be issued, but that the player actually committed the offense so that he would intentionally be carded with a yellow and therefore have to sit out not just the next game, but the game after that as well, plus be fined.

Maybe referees will need to start carrying around three different cards ... Yellow, Super Yellow and Red!

Maybe Sepp Blatter will refer to the new card as an Uber Yellow.

Good Stuff Dave! Well funny I agree with Paul and in fact had commented on "the spirit of the game" theme. But I disagree with both of you in this respect. Any competition authority could never anticipate some of the things that happen in matches. Now would it hurt to make it a rule? No and it might be a good idea. But doing nothing would send the wrong message.

As far as the referee's involvement, the referee can only call what he sees, not what a certain action (like showing yellow) will result in for the next match in a tournament. We do have guidance on calling tactical fouls and showing a yellow card in such a case of persistent infringement of the LOTG. So if a team is always fouling as the attack approaches the penalty area, that can be considered a tactical foul. What the situation is here is really a Strategic type of foul that affects the next game and is a specific tournament strategy. Referees can only call what they see on the pitch for that particular match. They can't be concerned with how it affects the next game. Once the match is done, the referee's job is done. The referee's report will state the facts. In this situation only the competition authority can decide what if any action they would take.