too many players on field

[lakeview]

Now that the u19 rosters allow 22 players on the roster, and teams are subbing en mass (?) at times to allow the players some time, I saw a game where one team had 12 on the field. The ref carded the captain. Correct call?

And 2 players wore the # 10. He asked the two players who wanted the card.

[PutMeInCoach2]

lakeview said:

Now that the u19 rosters allow 22 players on the roster, and teams are subbing en mass (?) at times to allow the players some time, I saw a game where one team had 12 on the field. The ref carded the captain. Correct call?

And 2 players wore the # 10. He asked the two players who wanted the card.

The referee has a choice to choose whomever he wants on the field to card. Naturally he should not choose a player who already has a yellow. He could of asked the captain to indentify the player who does not belong, if he cannot identify them, he can recieve the yellow. In this case you should have your captain point out the weakest link and keep your captain on the safe side.

Two players wearing a #10 isnt that big of a deal, and should have been caught before the game. There are plenty of times where I have ref-ed and coaches teams who had duplicate numbers. Most coaches will agree just to let the kids play. However, if you want be strict, give the yellow. Just seems harsh and will depend on the ref.

I have a problem with this situation. The Laws are clear in that a player entering the field without the referee's permsision is shown a caution (Laws 3 and 12). In this case, the player entered with the referee's permission. The referee crew screwed up in the management of the substitutions. Why should a player be penalized for the referee's mismanagement? The crew needs to be very aware of mass subs and manage it. There are various techniques for doing this. And in this case, before the restart, a quick player count is appropriate. It is likely that if multiple players were sent to the line, one player on the field did not understand that they were coming off. Make sure if 6 players are coming on and standing at the line, that 6 players come off.

And to cautions themselves....Bob Evans, former FIFA referee used to teach the 3 B's. Bollock, Book and Bath. Meaning a warning (butt chewing), then a booking, then a send off. Yes, sometimes, the warning will NOT suffice. But the purpose of a caution is ultimately to change a behavour. If a player can be managed with a butt chewing, why not? As an assessor, it bothers me when a caution is shown and there is no return on the investment.

Sometimes that caution is shown to send a stronger message than the chewing out but it can also serve to protect an offending player. If players know the referee will take care of them against bad fouls, they will be less likely to retaliate against that player to obtain "justice".

Just my opinion.

[lakeview]

I chalk this up to referee fatigue. Huge field 75 x 130. Players being subbed by both coaches 4-5 at a time every 10 - 12 minutes to get all 22 to play. The incident happened about midway through the second half. You are right, one player on the other side of the field did not hear his name called, and the A/R thought he had stepped off. The A/R indicated that the sub was complete.

I agree with the 3 B's!

[misltek]

This situation can be easily avoided. The team/players are not intending to deceive the referees/other team. IMO the AR (or 4th) should always ensure a player comes off before sending one on. Referee error. No caution.