Blue card

[BroadstairsR 2,185]

for sin bin in football now being seriously considered:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-13061707/Football-set-hand-referees-BLUE-CARD-new-colour-card-widely-used-50-years-revolutionary-new-rules.html

Good move. The gap between yellow and red is often too great.

Players get a yellow "for the team" apparently with few consequences  .... a sin bin might mitigate so-called "professional fouls" so admired by many pundits, but still cheating, imo

[OnDaBall 137]

The same pundits will probably moan about the game being ruined by having so many players off the pitch, making a mockery of the sport. Remember how they were all crying out for VAR only for them now to whine about it constantly.

 

[Greavsy 2,417]

https://x.com/footballontnt/status/1755620956419043348?s=48&t=qNMqI10LsrWTmTzfsR0t5A

Further report here

Sin bins for dissent has been in use in lower (Sunday leagues for sure) for a few years. 

Will there be a report button too ? 😉 

Edited February 8 by Greavsy

[BroadstairsR 2,185]

16 minutes ago, OnDaBall said:

The same pundits will probably moan about the game being ruined by having so many players off the pitch, making a mockery of the sport. Remember how they were all crying out for VAR only for them now to whine about it constantly.

 

It could take a while for it to sink in, but I quite like the idea.

I'm in favour of VAR in general too, although the 'thickness of a sheet of paper decisions' for off-side are ludicrous. There should be a wider margin .... perhaps about half a player width for it to be off-side and not the tip of a player's boot being deemed interfering with play. 

It is excellent in cricket and never disputed (except by India in the last test) and there is a margin for error allowed.

It seems to work in RU too.

Edited February 8 by BroadstairsR

[shefcanary 2,435]

For a blue card, will there be reviews in the bunker just to check it should be a red? So, could we get a situation where five minutes are spent on VAR asking the ref to check the possibility of foul play, the ref decides on review that it was probably only worthy of a Blue, not a red, then during the 10 minutes in the sin bin, the bunker reviews and decides it is a red after all? Oh boy, this could be fun ....

[canarydan23 4,060]

29 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

https://x.com/footballontnt/status/1755620956419043348?s=48&t=qNMqI10LsrWTmTzfsR0t5A

Further report here

Sin bins for dissent has been in use in lower (Sunday leagues for sure) for a few years. 

Will there be a report button too ? 😉 

Whatever happened to McReporter? I assume he got banned for that horrendous comment he made, but for a while he was hanging around reacting to people's posts.

[Mason 47 1,388]

25 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

It could take a while for it to sink in, but I quite like the idea.

I'm in favour of VAR in general too, although the 'thickness of a sheet of paper decisions' for off-side are ludicrous. There should be a wider margin .... perhaps about half a player width for it to be off-side and not the tip of a player's boot being deemed interfering with play. 

It is excellent in cricket and never disputed (except by India in the last test) and there is a margin for error allowed.

It seems to work in RU too.

If used as a tool to help the on-field officials rather than replace them, I'm all for it. 

I always thought VAR was only to intervene if there was a very clearly incorrect decision. The second they started looking at offsides as a matter of centimetres, they went the wrong way with it

[It's Character Forming 1,164]

51 minutes ago, Mason 47 said:

If used as a tool to help the on-field officials rather than replace them, I'm all for it. 

I always thought VAR was only to intervene if there was a very clearly incorrect decision. The second they started looking at offsides as a matter of centimetres, they went the wrong way with it

I agree 100%, VAR is good for some aspects but it's the offside when they're looking at players elbows etc that makes it a nonsense.

 

A middle ground between a yellow and a red would be great, far better to have a player removed for a period rather than have them gone for the whole game which always radically changes the entire match.  Then keep the red for genuinely bad challenges or handball on the line etc.

[JonnyJonnyRowe 451]

Danny Murphy thinks this will wreck the game as teams will just work in the training now to park the bus and kill the game for 10 minutes while down to 10 men and transition back to default when going back to 11. 

Then again it is Talk Sport and they always have two people with opposing views because listening to people agreeing with eachother is boring and doesn't attract the listeners.

[hogesar 9,705]

Ugh. We already have so many poor refs proven to be poor both on field and then when resigned to VAR room with hundreds of replays. Why not invest more time and resources into the training and coaching of these refs as opposed to giving them more power that they can misuse?

[RobJames 883]

This once again skirts round the problem. Players time at clubs is far less than what it once was - so bans do not impact on them as much. That can be addressed by levying substantial fines on players, making them personally accountable. Fines based on their income.  "Taking one for the team" might not seem the same if it means a £30,000 fine. If a taxi driver speeds etc it is him/her who pays, not the company they are working for.

[Google Bot 3,298]

Wonder why they went with blue for a card signifying that you should go sit in a bin?

[FenwayFrank 2,460]

2 hours ago, OnDaBall said:

The same pundits will probably moan about the game being ruined by having so many players off the pitch, making a mockery of the sport. Remember how they were all crying out for VAR only for them now to whine about it constantly.

 

Like this bloke ? 

 

[Google Bot 3,298]

10 minutes ago, RobJames said:

That can be addressed by levying substantial fines on players, making them personally accountable. Fines based on their income.  "Taking one for the team" might not seem the same if it means a £30,000 fine.

The NCP would probably consider buying in to the world of officiating if that were to happen.

[The Raptor 1,221]

Is there a physical 'sin bin'? An area where the offenders have to sit. Or are they allowed to warm up with the subs? Sitting there and just resuming play without a warm up will surely increase injury risk?

What happens if it's a keeper? Will there be a delay while a substitute keeper warms up? How is it decided which player goes off instead?  Or is it tough, stick someone else in goal for 10 minutes?

Did Norwich have prior knowledge of these plans? Is that why they've been putting 2 keepers on the bench

[Capt. Pants 4,262]

Like rugby you'd need a way of stopping the clock so 10 mins means that. Otherwise it wll get extremely subjective and open up abuse for time wasting, feigned injuries and substitutions.

If a player gets injured because they haven't 'warmed up' it's just a risk associated with commiting the offence in the first place.

You just know it would be a balls up if football tried it, but it seems to work fine for rugby.

[Fen Canary 849]

4 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

It could take a while for it to sink in, but I quite like the idea.

I'm in favour of VAR in general too, although the 'thickness of a sheet of paper decisions' for off-side are ludicrous. There should be a wider margin .... perhaps about half a player width for it to be off-side and not the tip of a player's boot being deemed interfering with play. 

It is excellent in cricket and never disputed (except by India in the last test) and there is a margin for error allowed.

It seems to work in RU too.

I disagree, Rugby is actively looking at decreasing the amount of time spent using the video ref as it’s killing the game, and I hate the fact in cricket now whenever the umpires finger goes up you’re never sure if it’s actually out. Like in football it kills the spontaneous excitement you used to feel when a goal went in.

The fact everybody still argues over decisions to me implies the video refs are pointless, just play the game and accept and moan about the refs/umpires decisions afterwards 

[RobJames 883]

4 hours ago, BroadstairsR said:

It could take a while for it to sink in, but I quite like the idea.

I'm in favour of VAR in general too, although the 'thickness of a sheet of paper decisions' for off-side are ludicrous. There should be a wider margin .... perhaps about half a player width for it to be off-side and not the tip of a player's boot being deemed interfering with play. 

It is excellent in cricket and never disputed (except by India in the last test) and there is a margin for error allowed.

It seems to work in RU too.

In cricket, it is either in or out NOTHING subjective. Whereas with football almost all is subjective. A foul committed in the first few minutes will probably not merit a card, but the same type  of foul after 30 mins committed numerous times by the same player may well attract a card.

VAR is therefore utter nonsense, as you point out. The offside rule was not about penalising a player for a hair breadths 'offside' but to discourage 'goal hanging'. And if VAR is so integral why is it not used to ensure the ten yard rule is not riotously enforced. I am sure that if checked you would find far more than a boot tip less or more difference.

VAR was brought in to counter television being able to use technology to measure to the nearest quarter f an inch whether a player was offside, or not. The idea being to remove the thought that there could be any bias or incompetence by the referee. The same referee who is given a free hand when it comes to red/yellow cards. Awarding free kicks, throw ins. Why is there no VAR on throw ins ?

 

[BroadstairsR 2,185]

RE: Fen Canary

Wouldn't know about its impact in RU, but it seems ok to me as an aid to a game with very complicated rules. 

As far as the cricket systems of technology usage go I agree with Dominic Reeve's assessment when it was first introduced and when he considered the whole package, fourth umpire, big screen, appeals and the crowd involvement added to spectator enjoyment and was therefore an asset to the game.

Besides, umpiring decisions rely upon split second happenings (such as the tiniest nick of a ball coming at ninety miles an hour) which have to be made instantly ... technology has led to more accuracy in every aspect of the game from spotting the validity of a hit for four when the fielder makes a desperate effort on the ropes, to no-balls and of course the nickometer and hawkeye for adjudging a close run thing. I've attended many a match where decisions have resorted to VAR and thoroughly enjoyed viewing the big screen and the involvement now given out to spectators, the anticipation, the cheer when a decision goes your way. Very much part of the game and the match day experience, whatever the format.

 

Edited February 8 by BroadstairsR

[BroadstairsR 2,185]

Duplication

Edited February 8 by BroadstairsR

[RobJames 883]

9 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

Wouldn't know about its impact in RU, but it seems ok to me as an aid to a game with very complicated rules. 

As far as the cricket systems of technology usage go I agree with Dominic Reeve's assessment when it was first introduced and when he considered the whole package, fourth umpire, big screen, appeals and the crowd involvement added to spectator enjoyment and was therefore an asset to the game.

Besides, umpiring decisions rely upon split second happenings (such as the tiniest nick at a ball coming at ninety miles an hour) which have to be made instantly ... technology has led to more accuracy in every aspect of the game from spotting the validity of a hit for four when the fielder makes a desperate effort on the ropes, to no-balls and of course the nickometer and hawkeye for adjudging a close run thing. I've attended many a match where decisions have resorted to VAR and thoroughly enjoyed viewing the big screen and the involvement now given out to spectators. Very much part of the game and the match day experience, whatever the format.

 

That is taken as read. If only that cricket has a 'dead ball' after each ball bowled which affords time to check.

It s almost the opposite in football, which is there it falls flat on its ars e. Imagine cricket if only a small number of things were checked. Advocating something because it supposedly enhances the 'matchday experience' is a dangerous road to go down. As the nonsense in the US shows. Watch old footage of gridiron pre war then see what a ludicrous costume drama it has morphed into. Not so much the tail wagging the dog there but the flea wagging the tail.

Rugby shares the same position as football in as much as decisions are not binary, they are almost always subjective. That is why there is the backlash, as the arguments still continue after VAR.

[BroadstairsR 2,185]

14 minutes ago, RobJames said:

It s almost the opposite in football, which is there it falls flat on its ars e. Imagine cricket if only a small number of things were checked. Advocating something because it supposedly enhancees the 'matchday experience' is a dangerous road to go down. As the nonsense in the US shows. Watch old footage of gridiron pre war then see what a ludicrous costume drama it has morphed into. Not so much the tail wagging the dog there but the flea wagging the tail.

 

The 100 is all about match day experience. It seems extremely popular and puts valuable revenue into the game as a whole. Perhaps it is veering towards the American football scenario.

I don't much care for it personally, but have been to one and it sure was fun. 

As for Test Match and ODI, no way. The ability to drink a pint of beer or two whilst watching a game also adds to the match day experience, I suppose that can be considered "dangerous" as well.

[GenerationA47 758]

3 hours ago, FenwayFrank said:

Like this bloke ? 

 

File under “It were never like this in my day, gurn”

(Love u Hucks)

[HazzaJet 256]

I think this is a fair rule. Bad behaviour is never accidental. I think they should also make it so that two of them qualifies as a yellow, just like two yellows qualifies as a red

[Paul101 93]

we have a system for dealig with it Yellow cards

 

but the refs are to scared to use them sin bin is the worst idea I have ever heard

[Jim Smith 2,325]

I’m generally against change for changes sake when it comes to the game but as a youth coach I can see the merit in this. We do this informally at youth grass roots level anyway (ask a coach to take a player off for a few minutes if they are getting out of control) and it generally works to calm things down. 

[shefcanary 2,435]

I used to ref at youth level as well, whenever a player had lost his head I'd always speak to the manager to ask them to "rolling" sub him for 10 minutes to cool down rather than use a card (huge amount of paperwork involved in that!).  Thankfully all the parents of both sides accepted it as well, but I'm sure in some matches that could probably cause problems amongst them.

Thinking about it, where the sin bin is situated might be a problem at some grounds! 

[Ken Hairy 3,774]

Not for me thank you, and bin VAR too football needs to return to its organic authenticity.

Can see myself stop watching football in the near future. 

[Justin time 182]

Can you imagine sin bins being used in local Sunday league matches? You would need to bring out the old 10 ft school benches to accommodate all the drunken players and clumsy slow players that appear every weekend. Four aside anyone!

leave the damn game alone!

[Robert N. LiM 4,427]

Absolutely loving all these PL managers railing against the blue card idea.

"The system's working as it is. My players can commit as many cynical rotational fouls as they like with no consequences".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/68253885