Red Card Given to a Substitute

[Lurker]

Hey all. Quick question.

Last night in my game a substitute (off the field) as given a red card for dissent. There was a lot of confusion over whether or not the team had to remove a player from the field as well.

As it turns out the ref said that the team didn't have to play a man down because the offence was committed by a player not on the pitch.

Does this make sense? Everyone seemed 50-50 last night about the situation.

----

I remember in the Gold Cup when the Mexican coach tripped the Panamian player on the side line he was given a red and I thought Mexico was reduced a player, but maybe I misunderstood the situation.

[loyola]

No, if a player on the bench is red carded you don't have to play with a man down. That was the correct decision.

There's no way a player who hasn't done anything wrong on the pitch should be remove from the field because of a red card to a bench player or a coach.

[Lurker]

Cool, thanks for the quick reply.

[The Ref]

Loyola is correct. A problem I see on your question Lurker is that the offense of dissent is only a caution (yellow card) not red.

[loyola]

quote:Originally posted by The Ref

Loyola is correct. A problem I see on your question Lurker is that the offense of dissent is only a caution (yellow card) not red.

Probably not "dissent" but "violent conduct". I doubt a ref will allow a player who just told him "I'll kill you" to get away with a yellow.

I guess we need Lurker to tell us more about the incident.

[Lurker]

Well, there was a minor dust up on the field that resulted in one of our players being shoved. From the bench the player demanded a red card for the actions (the push) and essentially badgered the ref with in profanity laced tirade that probably last 5 seconds. He didn't threaten the referee physically, he just questioned his call (ex: you're friggin blind, how the frigg is that not a red, etc...).

Edit: I'm probably off on the call being 'dissent', it was likely unsportsmanlike behaviour, which I assume can warrant a straight red.

[Bates]

The player should have been ejected for "foul and abusive language". A player not on the playing field can be red carded but the team does not play a man short. As per Laws of the Game:

A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off if he commits any of the

following seven offences:

• serious foul play

• violent conduct

• spitting at an opponent or any other person

• denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goal-scoring opportunity

by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within

his own penalty area)

• denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity to an opponent moving

towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a

penalty kick

• using offensive, insulting or abusive language and/or gestures

• receiving a second caution in the same match

A player, substitute or substituted player who has been sent off must leave the

vicinity of the fi eld of play and the technical area.

[CanadianSoccerFan]

I immediately thought of the Stalteri water bottle toss against Honduras in 2004 in Edmonton.

[The Ref]

quote:Originally posted by Lurker

Well, there was a minor dust up on the field that resulted in one of our players being shoved. From the bench the player demanded a red card for the actions (the push) and essentially badgered the ref with in profanity laced tirade that probably last 5 seconds. He didn't threaten the referee physically, he just questioned his call (ex: you're friggin blind, how the frigg is that not a red, etc...).

Edit: I'm probably off on the call being 'dissent', it was likely unsportsmanlike behaviour, which I assume can warrant a straight red.

From your description I seems the ejected player used some offensive, insulting or abusive language or gestures. Hence he was deserving of a red card. The referee's red card report which is filed with the appropriate association would indicate what was said.

By the way unsportsmanlike behavior is now called unsporting behavior and is only a yellow card.

[canucklefan]

I remember I watched highlights of a Brazilian futsal final and in this kind of game the keeper tends to participate in the attack. That's when the defending team took ball possession and did shot to the empty net and the substitute keeper entered the field saving a certain goal and having a red card of course. Also the team continued to play with the same number of players. It was an odd situation and also a funny one.

[redhat]

quote:Originally posted by CanadianSoccerFan

I immediately thought of the Stalteri water bottle toss against Honduras in 2004 in Edmonton.

I was thinking of the same exact thing. Stalteri throws a water bottle while on the sidelines, gets a red and is ejected off the field. But no, we did not lose another player.