Watson on the use of yellow cards

André Watson, South Africa's refereeing boss, has sent a letter to referees on the difficult matter of yellow cards which can have such an big effect on a match and its outcome. The communication to his match officials is below.

A lot is said by people regarding the effect yellow cards have on a game.

Comments include:

Those critical:

* The team with a player in the sin bin concedes an average of 10 points during that period.
* The outcome of the game is changed when a player is sent to the bin.
* Referees play cards and as in a card game they make a lottery of the game.

Opposing above school of thought is:

* If a player plays 'dirty' or negatively affect the game, he needs to be yellow carded.
* Players transgress the laws, not the referee. The latter simply has to apply the law.

Above remarks in short would represent the two different schools of thought. Now, both viewpoints cannot be correct in all cases, and so let's see if we can get somewhere by debating the matter as follows:

* Current developments are that SANZAR is considering keeping 15 players per team on the field at all times.
* This will mean that should a player be sent off by the referee, the player will be replaced by a player from the bench in order to ensure 15 against 15 at all times.

Yippee, some people will shout, but what about negative play, for example?

++ The coach says to his second best flanker to go onto the field and late-tackle the opposition star flyhalf and 'write him off'.
++ The referee will order him off but we will then send our best flanker on and will have a better chance of winning the game as their star flyhalf will be off the field because of injury.
++ Is this what we want when we say we need 15 against 15?
++ To curb above, the idea is to heavily - and I mean heavily - punish the player that was sent off in an attempt to 'scare' players and coaches off not to be negative.

Opposing above:

* There is a school of thought that says that it is equally the coach's and player's responsibility to ensure fairness.
* Not only to point fingers at the referee but to apportion blame where it belongs - mostly with the player that played dirty/unfairly, etc.
* To accept when referees make errors as one should when the referee misses a forward pass or does not see a player infringing.  In other words, to leave the game on the field and pay less attention to autopsies and 'if only' arguments and debates.

Now, I am not able to - or in the least interested in - changing peoples' minds on this matter, except stating that both school of thoughts mentioned above have valid points. But what I want to do is to address the family of match officials of which I am a proud member.

The referee (match official) should:

* Protect the ethos of the game as it is bigger than any coach, player, administrator, referee or supporter.
* Ensure a fair contest, never an equal one as the players determine the latter.
* Apply the laws according to the game in front of you - not the law book!

This brings me to the matter of yellow cards.

We have had almost the same number of yellow cards this year compared with last year yet some of the cards issued this season created confusion, anxiety and even anger. In my opinion, some were even ridiculous.

I notice that my view is shared by the Chairman of the Western Province Referees' Society, Dan de Villiers, a top Currie Cup referee in the 1990s. I quote part of the article herewith:

"Don't get me wrong: foul or dangerous play must not be tolerated and those players intent on ruining the game as a sport must be removed from the field and dealt with through the correct channels. But I'm concerned that some referees use the yellow card to control players instead of brushing up on their people-management skills.

"What it comes down to is communication. Within the laws, it's our job as referees to keep everyone on the field playing within the bounds of a fair contest. The action of removing one player from the field is severe and in many instances can swing the game completely to the advantage of the non-offending team. This is fine if the sanction is warranted; let's just ensure we've done our part before the card is used."

I could not put it better Dan, well said. my friend and colleague!

So, what can we do about this?

Whilst understanding and accepting that the man with the whistle - and his assistants on the side - will make human errors from time to time, we all need to attempt to do and refrain from the following regarding the issue of cards:

* Do not enforce, rather adjudicate.
* Do not issue a card when you feel you need to take control - you probably have already lost it in the game.
* Do not issue cards by taking the infringements personal, meaning that if they don't listen, they need to feel.
* Do not issue card for repeated infringements too quickly. It is part of the game that players will infringe. They do not always infringe in order to spoil, but in desperation to defend for example. Simply penalise the infringement.
* Do not be scared or hesitant to remove players from the field that make themselves guilty of foul and dangerous play. The game does not need it and no-one will blame a referee that is hard on foul and dangerous play.
* Do not always nail the retaliator harder than the instigator. Why not nail both equally?
* Do not be a bean counter and keep score of the number of infringements. It will colour your water and in fact paint a picture in your mind that it is unacceptable, while it might just be desperateness by defenders which is as much a part of the game as missing a short putt is part of golf.
* Do not get involved in debates on the field of play.
* Please, do use downtime communication in letting the teams know - use the captain - when a negative tendency develops. Note that I say tendency and not a one-off incident!
* Do manage and communicate to an offender when he is 'silly'.
* Do distinguish between blatant intent to spoil (deliberate infringement) as opposed to overeagerness.
* Do ask yourself the question whether the game of the day actually deserves it or not.
* Do distinguish between a blatant infringement for negative play as opposed to a technical infringement.
* Do realise that the players and spectators are looking to see a contest and do not spoil this contest unless the infringement leaves you no option.

I know it is not easy, but like advantage application, I believe that the excellent refereeing performance separates itself from the average performance when a referee manages the game and does not use cards to manage the game.

Happy reffing!

André Watson