Orange Cards

Not a bad idea personally. It's about time we saw football use the technology to develop a little bit more, much more useful to the game. It would help out so much. Read more on the BBC.

I have never heard about an orange card. But I support technology being used in football as long is it doesn't delay the match much and change the continuous nature of the game. Offsides calls in particular are extremely difficult to get right a high percentage of the time.

I've read a little bit. But it doesn't seem like these will be close to coming into play until at least the end of next season as an election for Fifa president isn't decided until June 2015 I believe. Baring in mind, this person would have to get the job in the first place anyway. It is almost like Rugby, the sin bin. That is all you can really point out. 10 minutes on the sidelines, or 5 minutes whatever the sanction may be.

But, it will work just like the yellow/red card system, although, I'm perplexed to see just how a 'orange' card would work really. How do they deem what type of tackles are orange cards and reds? Doesn't it just put more pressure on referee's to make the exact correct call as the majority of neutrals would say? They'd have to agree to it. So it will only make the referee's feel more pressure to get the decision exact.

But then again, the same could be said about a lot of tackles. Look at Vidic's yesterday. Was it a red card? I can see why he has given it, because it was reckless, but I have seen far worse not given before. The same game, Rafael only got booked for his 2 footed lunge. It was reckless, out of control and damaging to the opposition player. So Vidic's tackle may be a good example or description of an orange card.

FootballLight wrote:I've read a little bit. But it doesn't seem like these will be close to coming into play until at least the end of next season as an election for Fifa president isn't decided until June 2015 I believe. Baring in mind, this person would have to get the job in the first place anyway. It is almost like Rugby, the sin bin. That is all you can really point out. 10 minutes on the sidelines, or 5 minutes whatever the sanction may be.

But, it will work just like the yellow/red card system, although, I'm perplexed to see just how a 'orange' card would work really. How do they deem what type of tackles are orange cards and reds? Doesn't it just put more pressure on referee's to make the exact correct call as the majority of neutrals would say? They'd have to agree to it. So it will only make the referee's feel more pressure to get the decision exact.

But then again, the same could be said about a lot of tackles. Look at Vidic's yesterday. Was it a red card? I can see why he has given it, because it was reckless, but I have seen far worse not given before. The same game, Rafael only got booked for his 2 footed lunge. It was reckless, out of control and damaging to the opposition player. So Vidic's tackle may be a good example or description of an orange card.

I think they shouldn't bring in a new color, they should send the player to the sin bin for a yellow for whatever minutes are decided 10-15 as opposed to having the player suspended against another team. That being said if I had one thing to change in football it would be the offsides call. The technology is out there right now to keep a guy with a yellow flag asked to do an impossible job from deciding football matches. I don't really want a change to the card system as much as I would like a change to the offsides rule and to have an instanteous video review system for the officials maybe a mini IPAD attached to the refs arm that he could review for one minute. One minute is not a big break in action every foul close to the box stops the match for at least that long.

The sin bin is a stupid stupid idea put forward by stupid people.

Football is a low scoring game and most games are decided by one goal so granting a team a man advantage for a period of time is ridiculous.

Rugby has 2 methods of scoring and any points deficit accumulated whilst a man down can be clawed back by various methods, it is also very difficult to get sent off in rugby- so all the red card rules would need reviewed.

The rules by in large are fine, they just need to be implemented properly and people need to realise officials are there to enforce the rules and for no other purposes. The players are paid to entertain.

Pretty nasty post Ent, i actually don't care to see the card system changed but you don't have to call people who like the idea stupid. That is their opinion and stupidity bears no correlation to liking or not liking the idea. A stupid idea is jumping off a 10 story building or electing a Bush as your president, this is just a matter of taste.

Football - Something perfected by the British, and ruined by the foreigners.

Just like everything really.

Orange cards?

I wish football would come back to this little island, to its natural birthplace and to its natural home. Where it should be.

socal1976 wrote:I have never heard about an orange card. But I support technology being used in football as long is it doesn't delay the match much and change the continuous nature of the game. Offsides calls in particular are extremely difficult to get right a high percentage of the time.

It's just taken the FA 7 years (slightly less) to decide whether or not Anelka made an offensive gesture....don't hold your breath waiting for technology to improve the game significantly

DAVE667 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:I have never heard about an orange card. But I support technology being used in football as long is it doesn't delay the match much and change the continuous nature of the game. Offsides calls in particular are extremely difficult to get right a high percentage of the time.

It's just taken the FA 7 years (slightly less) to decide whether or not Anelka made an offensive gesture....don't hold your breath waiting for technology to improve the game significantly

I agree that is what is so frustrating that the technology is there if Fifa/uefa/and the FA, whatever governing body actually seemed to want to get these decisions right. In every other team and many individual sports technology is being used and generally it has improved the game. But football for whatever reason is happy with the guy with a yellow flag being asked to do an impossible job.

Duty281 wrote:Football - Something perfected by the British, and ruined by the foreigners.

Just like everything really.

Orange cards?

I wish football would come back to this little island, to its natural birthplace and to its natural home. Where it should be.

What a bizarre post. Yes all those foreigners like pele, maradonna, cruyff, van basten, guillit,messi, Zico, Ronaldo, and Zidane ruined the game. And when did football leave your island?

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Football - Something perfected by the British, and ruined by the foreigners.

Just like everything really.

Orange cards?

I wish football would come back to this little island, to its natural birthplace and to its natural home. Where it should be.

What a bizarre post. Yes all those foreigners like pele, maradonna, cruyff, van basten, guillit,messi, Zico, Ronaldo, and Zidane ruined the game. And when did football leave your island?

They are participators of the game. When I refer to the game of football here, I refer to the rules and suchlike.

And football left this lovely land whenever central power crossed over to one of those foreign lands.

A crying shame. My darling, my dearest, football should be forever British.

Duty, have you been drinking, my little one? Did your job interview/phase II of the stalk-a-thon not go as planned?

Noooo, not drinking at all Dave. Promise.

But I have been to an employability course at the job centre today, which probably gives you a fair estimate as to how I'm faring. Ta for asking.

Keep smilin' hon. It's always darkest before the dawn...or some other twee, trite bullsh!t that people spew out in an effort to feign compassion for their fellow man.

How'm I doin'?

Keep feigning compassion David, it shall never fail to raise a smile to one's lips. Bless you, sir.

for me the only thing orange cards would work for is professional fouls, sometimes i find it extremely harsh that a good bit of attacking play or a defensive mistake causes a player to be sent off changing the whole game and he also misses the next game. especially considering how players "win" fouls these days. so 10 minutes in the sin bin for a professional foul if that players gets another like in rugby he is sent off.

enough of a discouragement to stop players from doing it but also enables players to feel like they can actually touch a player when there attacking the goal.

I like the idea of sending a player off for 10 minutes or so for hard foul (yellow/orange etc) is that the punishment is instantaneous and the team that theoretically has been aggrieved actually gets the benefit, as opposed to a player getting a yellow in one game and being suspended the next match. In hockey, I am not a fan of that sport, but what I have seen is that a lot of the goals get scored when one team or another is short handed. In football with 11 or 10 players the advantage would not be that much to ruin a teams chance of competing, but it would discourage persistent and dangerous fouling and probably increase goal scoring. That being said the current card system is not my biggest beef with modern football.

I want to see technology for offsides and possibly for penalties and red cards. How about a minipad hooked up to the ref's arm which he has 60 seconds to review. I mean there are a lot of breaks for 60 or seconds in a match as is. Set pieces around the box, hard fouls, injuries etc.

And a second instantaneous system for offisides can be arranged with sensors in the ball and on the players. This system wouldn't even require a sixty second lag. Simply let the play go and after the goal a red light above the goal would indicate whether it was on or off. Or the linesmen could get the signal sent to him. Many other sports have made use of technology to clean up blown calls.

Just what referees need to make their live more easier, more complicated rules.

On technology, I am all for having a video assistant but don't feel the play should be stopped to look at decisions. In most cases of major incidents the play stops anyway while the referee talks to the linesman. The video assistant would just be the same but with a different view of the game.

One thing I definitely don't like is managers having challenges or a team having team challenges per game. Forget that. Nobody else but the refereeing team should have a say. Plus what if a team has used its challenges and then there is a dubious call?

Duty281 wrote:Football - Something perfected by the British, and ruined by the foreigners.

Just like everything really.

Orange cards?

I wish football would come back to this little island, to its natural birthplace and to its natural home. Where it should be.

Oh, deary, deary me.  

Rather, football was something created by the British and perfected by foreigners.  

How about a little lesson for the less aware of football's history.  Let's go back to the early 1970's and a referee by the name of Jack Taylor (who, incidentally, refereed the 1974  world cup final between West Germany and Holland).

Whilst sitting in his car one day, with the traffic light on red, it occurred to him that football would do well to have a similar system in place for football.   His original plan was that players who committed fouls would be initially be shown a green card (warning), a yellow card, (final warning) and ultimately a dismissal (red card).   Each card was shaped so that the colour blind would understand them.  The green card was triangular, the yellow card rectangular and the red card circular.   No mistaking that, then.

A green card would be issued as a warning without other sanction.  If the player took the hint, and behaved himself thereafter, no further action was taken.  However, if he transgressed further, the yellow card would be shown and this would then be official, with all the ramifications for suspensions, etc.


The FA accepted the idea, but dispensed with the green card.   Stangely, the green card was taken up by field hockey and it worked amazingly well.  I believe it is still in force today in that sport.

Unfortunately, with only two options available to referees, once a yellow card is issued, the red is the only further sanction available to them.  It isn't the referees' fault.... the player on a yellow should be more circumspect.   But how many are..?   Not many.

If the green card was in force, players would have a buffer that gives a bit more flexibility.   That doesn't mean that some could not pick up a straight yellow or red.   This is not a cop out from strong disciplinary action.  Those who deserve the full sanction of the laws should get it, tout suite.

But a green card gives a gentle warning early on and lets the player know he has been noticed.  

I think it would be a good compromise.

not sure the green card is needed fourth, communication between refs and players is better than it once was, and quite often you can clearly see refs giving players final warnings for persistent fouling etc. same thing as the green card really

compelling and rich wrote:not sure the green card is needed fourth, communication between refs and players is better than it once was, and quite often you can clearly see refs giving players final warnings for persistent fouling etc. same thing as the green card really

Yes, I see where you're coming from and to an extent I agree with you. A little word in the shell-like can have the desired effect, but there are two problems with this.

Firstly, as can easily be seen on TV transmissions, some players are clearly not listening to the referee. They're sulkily looking over his shoulder, deliberately not paying attention and, in a way, they're demonstrating to the crowd that they don't give a damn what he's saying. Frankly, they just ignore it. The green card would be a form of communication that can't be ignored. There is no discourse for the player to argue with. The referee shows it, it is seen by all and everybody knows where they stand. End of.

Secondly, for players of foreign origin for whom English is not a first language, the referee talking to them is of limited value. We often see referees making extravagant hand gestures to illustrate their point. It seems clear to me that if the referee has to resort to those, then why not obviate the problem with the green card..? Again, it's easy and would be understood by everybody.

We all know how some referees can be put under pressure by managers claiming that their superstar is a "target" and is being treated unfairly. This is quickly latched onto by players, fans and media, and used as a stick to beat the referee with. It can make them too lenient. We see it in some matches where the referee give a warning..... and then a final warning..... and then a "No, really, I mean it this time, this is your final, final warning" warning.

It is only a personal opinion of mine, and I don't think it's got a hope in hell of ever happening, but I've thought for many years, going back to when I refereed, that a green card would be an effective way of issuing a non-sanction warning to a player in a way that is less confrontational, easily understood and leaves the player in no doubt that whatever it is he has been up to, has been noticed.

Perhaps it's far too sensible, which is probably why the FA would never adopt it.

compelling and rich wrote:for me the only thing orange cards would work for is professional fouls, sometimes i find it extremely harsh that a good bit of attacking play or a defensive mistake causes a player to be sent off changing the whole game and  he also misses the next game. especially considering how players "win" fouls these days. so 10 minutes in the sin bin for a professional foul if that players gets another like in rugby he is sent off.

enough of a discouragement to stop players from doing it but also enables players to feel like they can actually touch a player when there attacking the goal.

see the governing bodies are considering the rules for the "triple punishment" after the last two games, cant see how they can change them other than above and see the introduction of a sin bin for these circumstances. you cant simply get rid of the rule because everybody would just bring them down every time and it would totally ruin the game even more so than the current red card rule.

at least with a sin bin its enough of a deterrent to stop them fouling players on purpose

I think if we had a sin bin in place the MC and Arsenal European ties could have been saved as contests. These were two cracking matchups that basically were ruined by the redcards, which took all doubt out of the contest for the entire second half of the match. Maybe if the official in those two contests had the option of sending a player off for 10, or 15, or 20 minutes that this would be punishment enough for the conduct in question while not killing the contest as a competitive affair. I hate watching matches as a neutral when one side gets a red card. I know that there have been great winning performances with 10 men. But usually what it means is that one side will have the ball and the other side will simply defend relentlessly for the rest of the match with little threat of scoring. I would reserve red cards for blatantly reckless and dangerous challenges with a very high likelihood of injury or that actually resulted in serious injury.

It wasn't the red cards that ruined the contests; it was the tackles leading to the red cards that are to blame.

No need to change the rules.

Blame Demichelis for his awful challenge. Blame Szczesny for his error.

Not the rules, not the officiating. They are fine, and in place for a reason.

Duty281 wrote:It wasn't the red cards that ruined the contests; it was the tackles leading to the red cards that are to blame.

No need to change the rules.

Blame Demichelis for his awful challenge. Blame Szczesny for his error.

Not the rules, not the officiating. They are fine, and in place for a reason.

Yes but I have seen a lot of matches ruined by redcards it isn't just those two matches. Another cracking match that was ruined was United v. Real, which Nani's redcard really ended United's CL campaign and to be honest I felt that one was harsh as well. As a neutral, I feel that the redcard really takes the steam and entertainment value out of a contest nine out of 10 times. Don't get me wrong I am all for punishing dangerous fouls or fouls that are cynically meant to break up a goal chance. I think it might be worth an experiment and to see how it works and if the fans like it. Unlike you duty, I don't see the benefit of sticking to tradition for the mere sake of tradition, change is part of life and often it is positive.

As I have said though I would like to see more important changes in terms of technology before the introduction of a change to the card system. I do love the game the way it is, but frankly there are improvements that can be made with off-side technology, video replay, and sin bins that might create a fairer game that we enjoy even more. Wholesale changes all at once is not what I am calling for. But some of these ideas should be tested to see what kind of results they provide. Like all of you I think football is the greatest team sport in the world, but there are serious problems in the game and things that can be improved upon.

Well Nani shouldn't have been sent off and Sczezny deserved to be sent off so that's a poor example. He denied a clear goalscoring it has to be a red card, as Duty says the decisions of the referees aren't to the blame, the rules aren't to blame, the offending players are to blame. 

If it's a borderline call then it might hold some credence but neither were, they're about as clear a red cards as you could see.

I'm not sticking with it for tradition; I'm sticking with it because it's fine as it is.

To what point and purpose would sin-bins achieve?
Would they replace yellow cards, or are they a punishment inbetween yellow and red cards?
How long for?
What can you be sin-binned for?
What are the rules surrounding substitutions during sin-bins - can you make temporary subs during a sin-bin, or does it remain as it is now?
How do suspensions work for sin-bins?
Do two sin-bins equal a red?

What's the point of making an already difficult game for officials even more difficult?

Well the argument can be made HH that between a yellow card and red card maybe there should be a middle alternative. With a yellow card especially late in the match no real punishment occurs and then with a red card you have basically a drastic game changing punishment with no middle ground. I think Szcz foul was a 50-50 redcard, I don't see how every foul by a keeper has to automatically be a red card. I think there maybe a way to punish the conduct but to provide an option other than a straight sending off, which beyond damaging the team in question really punishes innocent neutrals who see a once competitive contest turned to a predictable contest. One side packs the bus and the other team just plays the ball around looking for the decisive goal.

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sticking with it for tradition; I'm sticking with it because it's fine as it is.

To what point and purpose would sin-bins achieve?
Would they replace yellow cards, or are they a punishment inbetween yellow and red cards?
How long for?
What can you be sin-binned for?
What are the rules surrounding substitutions during sin-bins - can you make temporary subs during a sin-bin, or does it remain as it is now?
How do suspensions work for sin-bins?
Do two sin-bins equal a red?

What's the point of making an already difficult game for officials even more difficult?

None of these questions you are posing are particularly earth shattering questions. Humanity has figured out nuclear technology no question that you pose or group of questions is any type of barrier. You work out the best solution over time just like anything else.

socal1976 wrote:Well the argument can be made HH that between a yellow card and red card maybe there should be a middle alternative. With a yellow card especially late in the match no real punishment occurs and then with a red card you have basically a drastic game changing punishment with no middle ground. I think Szcz foul was a 50-50 redcard, I don't see how every foul by a keeper has to automatically be a red card. I think there maybe a way to punish the conduct but to provide an option other than a straight sending off, which beyond damaging the team in question really punishes innocent neutrals who see a once competitive contest turned to a predictable contest. One side packs the bus and the other team just plays the ball around looking for the decisive goal.

If it was late in the match, wouldn't a sin-bin have near-enough the same effect as a red?

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sticking with it for tradition; I'm sticking with it because it's fine as it is.

To what point and purpose would sin-bins achieve?
Would they replace yellow cards, or are they a punishment inbetween yellow and red cards?
How long for?
What can you be sin-binned for?
What are the rules surrounding substitutions during sin-bins - can you make temporary subs during a sin-bin, or does it remain as it is now?
How do suspensions work for sin-bins?
Do two sin-bins equal a red?

What's the point of making an already difficult game for officials even more difficult?

None of these questions you are posing are particularly earth shattering questions. Humanity has figured out nuclear technology no question that you pose or group of questions is any type of barrier. You work out the best solution over time just like anything else.

So I'll take that as..no, you don't have an answer.

Hence, it's not a well-thought out idea.

And that equals...a poor idea.

Thanks for playing.  

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Well the argument can be made HH that between a yellow card and red card maybe there should be a middle alternative. With a yellow card especially late in the match no real punishment occurs and then with a red card you have basically a drastic game changing punishment with no middle ground. I think Szcz foul was a 50-50 redcard, I don't see how every foul by a keeper has to automatically be a red card. I think there maybe a way to punish the conduct but to provide an option other than a straight sending off, which beyond damaging the team in question really punishes innocent neutrals who see a once competitive contest turned to a predictable contest. One side packs the bus and the other team just plays the ball around looking for the decisive goal.

If it was late in the match, wouldn't a sin-bin have near-enough the same effect as a red?

Yes but basically we are talking about a variety of situations. Rarely does a redcard in the match make for an intriguing contest and it off ends that contest. Even a yellow card early in the match doesn't really immediately punish a player for what has been deemed a harsh or cynical foul. The only other alternative is to basically send the player off. There were two mouth watering ties from a neutral's perspective that were basically turned into duds. And both sending offs were within the rules that isn't really my beef. Maybe a middle ground between just a warning and sending off would be a good idea to try.

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sticking with it for tradition; I'm sticking with it because it's fine as it is.

To what point and purpose would sin-bins achieve?
Would they replace yellow cards, or are they a punishment inbetween yellow and red cards?
How long for?
What can you be sin-binned for?
What are the rules surrounding substitutions during sin-bins - can you make temporary subs during a sin-bin, or does it remain as it is now?
How do suspensions work for sin-bins?
Do two sin-bins equal a red?

What's the point of making an already difficult game for officials even more difficult?

None of these questions you are posing are particularly earth shattering questions. Humanity has figured out nuclear technology no question that you pose or group of questions is any type of barrier. You work out the best solution over time just like anything else.

So I'll take that as..no, you don't have an answer.

Hence, it's not a well-thought out idea.

And that equals...a poor idea.

Thanks for playing.  

Take it and characterize it however you like, I reiterate that your questions are hardly big deals. Just making mountains out of mole hills.

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Well the argument can be made HH that between a yellow card and red card maybe there should be a middle alternative. With a yellow card especially late in the match no real punishment occurs and then with a red card you have basically a drastic game changing punishment with no middle ground. I think Szcz foul was a 50-50 redcard, I don't see how every foul by a keeper has to automatically be a red card. I think there maybe a way to punish the conduct but to provide an option other than a straight sending off, which beyond damaging the team in question really punishes innocent neutrals who see a once competitive contest turned to a predictable contest. One side packs the bus and the other team just plays the ball around looking for the decisive goal.

If it was late in the match, wouldn't a sin-bin have near-enough the same effect as a red?

Yes but basically we are talking about a variety of situations. Rarely does a redcard in the match make for an intriguing contest and it off ends that contest. Even a yellow card early in the match doesn't really immediately punish a player for what has been deemed a harsh or cynical foul. The only other alternative is to basically send the player off. There were two mouth watering ties from a neutral's perspective that were basically turned into duds. And both sending offs were within the rules that isn't really my beef. Maybe a middle ground between just a warning and sending off would be a good idea to try.

Wouldn't a sin bin, in replacement of a yellow card early on in the example you mentioned, just turn the game into a time-wasting, men-behind-the-ball exercise for ten or fifteen minutes from the defending side, whilst the attacking team tried to probe their way through, thusly making the situation you're trying to avoid a far more common occurence?

After all, red cards are rare, and sin-bins would be more common.

That particular foul by Sczezny was a red card, i'm not sure why anybody is calling it a 50/50 call, the referee got it spot not that it was a difficult decision, without the foul Robben scores ergo red card.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:That particular foul by Sczezny was a red card, i'm not sure why anybody is calling it a 50/50 call, the referee got it spot not that it was a difficult decision, without the foul Robben scores ergo red card.

Wonder if it's because socal is an Arsenal fan?   

Clear as day for me as well.

Duty281 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:That particular foul by Sczezny was a red card, i'm not sure why anybody is calling it a 50/50 call, the referee got it spot not that it was a difficult decision, without the foul Robben scores ergo red card.

Wonder if it's because socal is an Arsenal fan?   

Clear as day for me as well.

Yes but if he is making a play on the ball and there is no recklessness involved and he is just late then maybe a red is too harsh. You assume Robben would score maybe he wouldn't have. I have seen players miss sitters, there is no sure thing even for a great player. Also why was Munich's penalty not a redcard? Ozil is not fouled and he is in one on one with the keeper with a great angle to shoot. Yes I know he missed a penalty, but that is my point you can't say for certain Robben would score. Especially since we saw two high class players miss penalties in that match.

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Well the argument can be made HH that between a yellow card and red card maybe there should be a middle alternative. With a yellow card especially late in the match no real punishment occurs and then with a red card you have basically a drastic game changing punishment with no middle ground. I think Szcz foul was a 50-50 redcard, I don't see how every foul by a keeper has to automatically be a red card. I think there maybe a way to punish the conduct but to provide an option other than a straight sending off, which beyond damaging the team in question really punishes innocent neutrals who see a once competitive contest turned to a predictable contest. One side packs the bus and the other team just plays the ball around looking for the decisive goal.

If it was late in the match, wouldn't a sin-bin have near-enough the same effect as a red?

Yes but basically we are talking about a variety of situations. Rarely does a redcard in the match make for an intriguing contest and it off ends that contest. Even a yellow card early in the match doesn't really immediately punish a player for what has been deemed a harsh or cynical foul. The only other alternative is to basically send the player off. There were two mouth watering ties from a neutral's perspective that were basically turned into duds. And both sending offs were within the rules that isn't really my beef. Maybe a middle ground between just a warning and sending off would be a good idea to try.

Wouldn't a sin bin, in replacement of a yellow card early on in the example you mentioned, just turn the game into a time-wasting, men-behind-the-ball exercise for ten or fifteen minutes from the defending side, whilst the attacking team tried to probe their way through, thusly making the situation you're trying to avoid a far more common occurence?

After all, red cards are rare, and sin-bins would be more common.

It is better than having no option between a straight sending off and a warning that basically amounts to little. We might get interesting matchups as well. For example two quick fouls we could see some 11 on 9 for a few minutes or 10 on 10 football for a short span. I think it is an interesting idea worth testing out to see how it works. Maybe in a few friendly matches early in the season.

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sticking with it for tradition; I'm sticking with it because it's fine as it is.

To what point and purpose would sin-bins achieve?
Would they replace yellow cards, or are they a punishment inbetween yellow and red cards? a punishment purely for was deemed as a professional foul where there was a attempt to play the ball
How long for? i suggest 15 mins (needs to be enough of a derrent to not make the foul on purpose)
What can you be sin-binned for? professional foul/goal scoring opportunity
What are the rules surrounding substitutions during sin-bins - can you make temporary subs during a sin-bin, or does it remain as it is now? only can make a swap with the keeper no other postion
How do suspensions work for sin-bins? dont understand that question
Do two sin-bins equal a red? yes two equal a red

What's the point of making an already difficult game for officials even more difficult?

all of these rules work perfectly fine in rugby without it being too difficult for the refs, in fact the majority of those above rules are in place such as the prop/goal keeper being a specialized postion

people said we didnt need goal line technology as the game was good enough as it was, im sure people argued they were happy with football in black and white and didnt need replays!! thats the way some people are, but all of the above have been great introductions and there are a lot of people out there who think the three step punishment is very harsh and one little mistake changes the whole course of the game or even competition

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:That particular foul by Sczezny was a red card, i'm not sure why anybody is calling it a 50/50 call, the referee got it spot not that it was a difficult decision, without the foul Robben scores ergo red card.

Wonder if it's because socal is an Arsenal fan?   

Clear as day for me as well.

Yes but if he is making a play on the ball and there is no recklessness involved and he is just late then maybe a red is too harsh. You assume Robben would score maybe he wouldn't have. I have seen players miss sitters, there is no sure thing even for a great player. Also why was Munich's penalty not a redcard? Ozil is not fouled and he is in one on one with the keeper with a great angle to shoot. Yes I know he missed a penalty, but that is my point you can't say for certain Robben would score. Especially since we saw two high class players miss penalties in that match.

Doesn't matter about the fouling players intentions. A foul is a foul, and in this case a red is a red.

As for the foul on Ozil there is a player, think it's Alaba, getting back to make a possible challenge, plus if Ozil gets away from Boateng then Dante can slide to make it more difficult.

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Well the argument can be made HH that between a yellow card and red card maybe there should be a middle alternative. With a yellow card especially late in the match no real punishment occurs and then with a red card you have basically a drastic game changing punishment with no middle ground. I think Szcz foul was a 50-50 redcard, I don't see how every foul by a keeper has to automatically be a red card. I think there maybe a way to punish the conduct but to provide an option other than a straight sending off, which beyond damaging the team in question really punishes innocent neutrals who see a once competitive contest turned to a predictable contest. One side packs the bus and the other team just plays the ball around looking for the decisive goal.

If it was late in the match, wouldn't a sin-bin have near-enough the same effect as a red?

Yes but basically we are talking about a variety of situations. Rarely does a redcard in the match make for an intriguing contest and it off ends that contest. Even a yellow card early in the match doesn't really immediately punish a player for what has been deemed a harsh or cynical foul. The only other alternative is to basically send the player off. There were two mouth watering ties from a neutral's perspective that were basically turned into duds. And both sending offs were within the rules that isn't really my beef. Maybe a middle ground between just a warning and sending off would be a good idea to try.

Wouldn't a sin bin, in replacement of a yellow card early on in the example you mentioned, just turn the game into a time-wasting, men-behind-the-ball exercise for ten or fifteen minutes from the defending side, whilst the attacking team tried to probe their way through, thusly making the situation you're trying to avoid a far more common occurence?

After all, red cards are rare, and sin-bins would be more common.

It is better than having no option between a straight sending off and a warning that basically amounts to little. We might get interesting matchups as well. For example two quick fouls we could see some 11 on 9 for a few minutes or 10 on 10 football for a short span. I think it is an interesting idea worth testing out to see how it works. Maybe in a few friendly matches early in the season.

Why would 11 v 9 be interesting? You'd have two deep banks of four, winding down the clock whenever they got the oppourtunity, whilst never venturing much beyond their penalty area, and booting the ball away at every opportunity.

Such an idea could maybe be tested in lower league football. I believe one time there was an experimental change to the ruling, where players could not be offside from free-kicks, thus encouraging attacking play. It was trialled in the Conference, I think, and subsequently binned.

compelling and rich wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sticking with it for tradition; I'm sticking with it because it's fine as it is.

To what point and purpose would sin-bins achieve?
Would they replace yellow cards, or are they a punishment inbetween yellow and red cards?  a punishment purely for was deemed as a professional foul where there was a attempt to play the ball
How long for? i suggest 15 mins (needs to be enough of a derrent to not make the foul on purpose)
What can you be sin-binned for? professional foul/goal scoring opportunity
What are the rules surrounding substitutions during sin-bins - can you make temporary subs during a sin-bin, or does it remain as it is now? only can make a swap with the keeper no other postion
How do suspensions work for sin-bins? dont understand that question
Do two sin-bins equal a red? yes two equal a red

What's the point of making an already difficult game for officials even more difficult?

all of these rules work perfectly fine in rugby without it being too difficult for the refs, in fact the majority of those above rules are in place such as the prop/goal keeper being a specialized postion

people said we didnt need goal line technology as the game was good enough as it was, im sure people argued they were happy with football in black and white and didnt need replays!! thats the way some people are, but all of the above  have been great introductions and there are a lot of people out there who think the three step punishment is very harsh and one little mistake changes the whole course of the game or even competition

Sins bins only for a professional foul, then?

Some teams may feel that it's not a strong enough punishment, and it may lead to more cynical fouling.

Trying to enforce a rule that depends on knowing whether "there was an attempt to play the ball" could be quite difficult to enforce as well; it could be a bit of a gray area.

Also, we must remember that professional fouls are quite rare.

Duty281 wrote:

compelling and rich wrote:

Duty281 wrote:I'm not sticking with it for tradition; I'm sticking with it because it's fine as it is.

To what point and purpose would sin-bins achieve?
Would they replace yellow cards, or are they a punishment inbetween yellow and red cards?  a punishment purely for was deemed as a professional foul where there was a attempt to play the ball
How long for? i suggest 15 mins (needs to be enough of a derrent to not make the foul on purpose)
What can you be sin-binned for? professional foul/goal scoring opportunity
What are the rules surrounding substitutions during sin-bins - can you make temporary subs during a sin-bin, or does it remain as it is now? only can make a swap with the keeper no other postion
How do suspensions work for sin-bins? dont understand that question
Do two sin-bins equal a red? yes two equal a red

What's the point of making an already difficult game for officials even more difficult?

all of these rules work perfectly fine in rugby without it being too difficult for the refs, in fact the majority of those above rules are in place such as the prop/goal keeper being a specialized postion

people said we didnt need goal line technology as the game was good enough as it was, im sure people argued they were happy with football in black and white and didnt need replays!! thats the way some people are, but all of the above  have been great introductions and there are a lot of people out there who think the three step punishment is very harsh and one little mistake changes the whole course of the game or even competition

Sins bins only for a professional foul, then?

Some teams may feel that it's not a strong enough punishment, and it may lead to more cynical fouling.

Trying to enforce a rule that depends on knowing whether "there was an attempt to play the ball" could be quite difficult to enforce as well; it could be a bit of a gray area.

Also, we must remember that professional fouls are quite rare.

the attempt to play the ball can be anything, as long as he's simply not just hacked him down or rugby tackled the player. then it borders into violent conduct and a red would suffice anyway. both the tackles the other night while poor challenges they were desperate attempts to get the ball.

missing 15 minutes would have a effect but if it wasn't discouraging teams from committing fouls could always increase it

professional fouls are rare, thats why i think this rule would suit (dont want a ice hockey type bin). it wouldnt be happening all the time and if anything release pressure on the refs. how many times have we watched umpteen replays and still couldnt decide if the defender/keeper got a touch on the ball. all in a split second the ref has to make that decision and send the player off if he deemed it a foul changing the whole outcome of the game and something we cant decide on after plenty of replays.

like i said i dont want a ice hockey type bin, where players are in and out every 5 minutes.that really would change the whole concept of football, overall the game is fine with only minor tweaks needed. i think this could be a tweak that works

Scenario time!

It's the tenth minute of the World Cup quarter-final between England and Brazil. Sturridge bursts through on goal, with one touch taking him clear of the defence. From behind, David Luiz slides and gets a boot in the vague direction of the ball.. but getting none of it and cleaning out the striker in the process.

Now whilst the offence took place outside of the box, it was a professional foul as Sturridge had a clear goal-scoring opportunity with only the keeper to beat and yards of space. Under the old rules for denying this clear chance, a red card would have followed.

However, the new "sin-bin" rule has been put in place. Luiz protests his innocence to referee by claiming that he had intent to play the ball - difficult to prove otherwise, really. The referee, under this new law, agrees and brandishes a orange card - Luiz goes to the bin for fifteen minutes.

England have a free-kick, but it's nowhere near as clear cut a chance as they did have a few minutes ago. It comes to nothing.

Following fifteen minutes, a great deal of which was spent by the Brazil team taking an age over throw-ins and such like, the team in yellow are restored to a full eleven with the score remaining nil nil.

England are incensed by the injustice of it all. A late Rooney chance in extra-time smashes off the crossbar...not enough, and the tie goes to penalties. Luiz slots the winning kick. England out. It's the same old story.

Under the old rules, maybe, just maybe, England would have had a sense of justice. Maybe the powers that be should have left well alone?

The solution to that Duty is to have the clock stop every time the ball goes dead during a power play.

All a bit too American if you ask me.

CFCNick wrote:The solution to that Duty is to have the clock stop every time the ball goes dead during a power play.

dont get me started on that rule!! why there isn't a official timer who stops the clock when the balls out of play and we play purely to 90 minutes. would stop all controversy regarding time wasting and time added on. another rule that works well in rugby

Sin bins are a rubbish idea.

Plus arsenals gk would have been sent off anyway, late, hard, high.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:All a bit too American if you ask me.

That is pretty silly logic; is the internet, smartphones, and airplanes too American for you as well? If an idea is good it doesn't really matter whether it is American or Swahili it really doesn't matter. And by the way the last person I heard of pushing this was Platini, if I remember correctly. Maybe it is too french for you, Americans hardly care about soccer as we call it.