Question Number: 14062

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 10/7/2006

RE: High School

sue of Daly City, CA USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 777

The referee calls a penalty that is deserving of a yellow card and asks the player, "Would you like to take a break or receive a card?" The player elects to "take the break" and leaves the field for a sub. Why no card?

Answer provided by Referee Ben Mueller

Referee wimped out.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

I suppose somewhere in this referee's head he has rationalized that he has done a good thing by not issueing a card when one was warranted. This is neither good for game control nor for the referee.

Answer provided by Referee Nathan Lacy

In a number of ways I agree with my colleagues. However, in a match that might be described as well-natured in that the players have come to play and not beat on each other, the referee might feel that issuing the card could buy more trouble than it is worth. Is the yellow deserved? Apparently so. Would the referee be justified? Absolutely. Might the overall integrity of the match in some way get compromised? Perhaps the ref felt so and that by "managing" the situation wherein the player was removed and therefore no longer a negative issue the matter was dealt with and the amicable nature of the match retained. One question that we should ask ourselves as refs prior to issuing a card is "What will it do for the game?" Or, phrased another way, "What will this card buy me in terms of match control?" If the answer is "nothing" then why give it - even though it might well be "deserved" in some people's minds. Just some food for thought. All the best,