Truro City Res v Perranporth Result / ref mess up or not??

[Jamie C]

Truro city res 1 (1) - (0) 0 Perranporth

Andy Miles og 20.

I have a query for people on here. The ref sent a perranporth player at halftime, he was on the bench. Perran had more than 3 subs. however the ref then only allowed 2 subs from perran to be made. am i right in saying this was a mistake by the ref?? he said you can only have 2 subs due to 1 player getting sent off. leaving another lad unable to get a game.

did he make a huge mistake or was he right??

[B Manning]

If he was a named substitute then the referee was correct having sent off one sub then only two subs remain to be used. the same applies if a player is sent off before the start of the game the team still start the game with 11 players but will then only have two subs available. Hope that helps.

[Jamie C]

I was just wondering really as people in ground and others had same opinion on they still get 3 subs 2 be used.

[No Idea]

It's an interesting one this, and one of those obscure situations.

I've spoken to several people about it including a couple of different refs and there has been a differing of interpretation all round, some saying the ref was spot on, others thinking he has made a bit of a boo boo

[bighairydave]

The Laws of the Game only say that a substitute/ substituted player can be sent off, but not that the amount of substitutes are reduced so I feel the referee may have got this wrong.

[SteveM]

I'm pretty sure the referee is correct in this case. Unused substitutes are considered to have been uninvolved in the match, however the substitute sent off would have been deemed to have participated in the game. This would count as his appearance and leave only two potential substitutes available.

[Soccer Follower]

In answer to the question,the referee did not mess up

[Cornish-Ref]

in the current addition of LOAF (2012), it doesn't state the number of substitues that a team can use should a substitute be issued a red card. One for FIFA I believe to get the correct answer???

[Soccer Follower]

If a substitute is given a red card during a match,you cannot add another name of a substitute after the match has commenced.

[Jamie C]

the game had commenced at was at half time with 4 subs named. non of which had been used. the player was sent off at half time. then the ref only allowed 2 subs to be made. Ive been asking alot of refs who all have different opinions and ive searched the web and have found no answers on this topic.

the player was sent off for foul and abusive language however calderon of whatever his name is for truro then used it after coming on as a sub towards the ref and only recieved a yellow after going on for about 5 minutes, this isnt comsitancy. which is all players and managers ask for.

[Eric Fish]

I think the ref was right.

Once the names of the subs are given to the ref they are classed as players the same as the 11 other players and if the ref deems to caution/send off before, during or after the game - (until the ref has left the changing rooms) he can do so.

If the team were allowed 1 sub from a list of 3 subs and a sub was sent off then that is it - no more subs could be used. So the same thing here 3 subs from a list of 4., then 1 gets a red card that means that only 2 subs from the remind 3 can be used. Does this make sense.

[B Manning]

Jamie, Law 3 number of players," A named substitute who has been sent off, either before the kick off or after play has started, may not be replaced". therfore he is a sub who has been sent off so that can only leave 2 more subs available. I have to admit it`s not something that happens very often so is bound to have people scratching their heads.

[andy howes]

the ref was right to take this action as the player was a named sub its never happened to me in 16 years of reffing.

[Minty]

On this occasion the referee was incorrect

The player dismissed was no longer eligible to take part in the match but the other 3 substitutes were, all 3 subs who had not been dismissed should have been allowed onto the pitch to take part as long as their names were given to the referee before the match

They had committed no offence so punishing them would be grossly unfair, if you have 7 subs and one is sent off you can still use the other 6, if you have 2 and 1 is sent off you can still use the other 1

The Law quoted above means you couldnt replace that sub, it says nothing about your remaining subs coming onto the field of play, a club are allowed to use 3 eligible substitutes in a match at step 7, you had 3 eligible substitutes

[Minty]

Also just to correct another point, if a player is an unused subsititute he is not deemed to have paritcipated in a match and is NOT classed the same as the 11 outfield players as regards appearances until he has come onto the field of play.

To highlight this point if a player was an unused sub for club A in a cup match and moved to club B, he could play for club B in the same cup

[j1mmy_t]

Perranporth have gone from having 3 subs to 4 if it was 3 subs then the decision was correct, if they had 4 then it was the wrong decision, case closed end of topic

[Common Tater]

Jamie, Law 3 number of players," A named substitute who has been sent off, either before the kick off or after play has started, may not be replaced". therfore he is a sub who has been sent off so that can only leave 2 more subs available. I have to admit it`s not something that happens very often so is bound to have people scratching their heads.

The sent-off sub was not being replaced. There were still 3 other subs already notified to the ref. I interpret this rule to mean the team cannot then nominate a further sub to replace the sent-off one on the bench. That makes sense. However, with 4 named subs, the fact that one was sent off does not disqualify any of the remaining subs from taking part in the game, just as a player sent from the field of play does not disqualify any of the remaining 10. If Perranporth had only named 3 subs then of course having one sent off during half time would mean they could now only use 2, as the quoted rule clearly states that the sent-off sub cannot be replaced. But they had named four subs, so still had 3 eligible to play. The ref was therefore wrong. It would be interesting to see if Perranporth could successfully appeal to get the game replayed.

[B Manning]

Sorry Common Tater, it`s exactly the same as if a player is sent off before the game, you allow the player to be replaced so you start with eleven players, but it reduces the subs you have available to two even if you have prior to the start named five subs.

[bighairydave]

B Manning if a player is replaced before the game, due to a sending off, by a substitute the team can still make 3 substitutes, if available, during the game.

[B Manning]

Sorry bighairydave one sub replaces the sent off player before the game starts, (he cannot be replaced) therefore that team now have only two subs available for the game.

[Jamo]

Tricky one ! So 11 players on the pitch, none sent off, say u name 4 subs, 1 sub gets sent off, now u can only use 2? Who is to say the 1 sent off was going to b used anyway?

[bighairydave]

B Manning I'm not sure that's correct. A change before the game commences due to a sending off still means a team can make 3 changes if they have enough subs.

[No Idea]

Oh dear looks like some refs could have some red faces!!

But we all know they can never ever admit they are wrong...

[B Manning]

I will check with the FA and if I am wrong will certainly admit it . Having now checked with the FA and I was mistaken in regard to replacement of a player before the game commenced, A sent off player (before start of game is replaced by a sub) that sub if time and circumstances allow can be replaced by another named sub on the bench. Now the action taken by the referee at the Perranporth game was 100% correct in only allowing 2 named subs to be used if needed. after sending off one sub at halftime.

[bighairydave]

Having spoken to the referee yesterday evening the Match Officials Director and Referee Development Officer have confirmed he was correct.

The problem I believe is how obscure the law is and how it is upto interpretation as to where the being replaced means that the number of subs allowed is reduced or the number of subs to be used is reduced.

[kempy]

Having spoken to the referee yesterday evening the Match Officials Director and Referee Development Officer have confirmed he was correct.

The problem I believe is how obscure the law is and how it is upto interpretation as to where the being replaced means that the number of subs allowed is reduced or the number of subs to be used is reduced.

You think this is obscure ... try understanding the Rules ( not laws ) of golf !! but i don't expect the decision by the ref had anything to do with the result ! :c:

[The Professor]

I understand why everybody is focusing on the referees decision and its implications on the rest of the game in question - because it's a unique situation. However, if I was involved with Perranporth, I'd be venting my anger towards the substitute who's actions caused this situation in the first place. It's another example of poor player behaviour in local football. Jamie C attempting to justify it by adding blame to another player is laughable. It's like saying that a high 2-footed challenge is ok because you saw a professional tackling like that on the TV once. You know it's wrong, so you control YOUR OWN actions - not hide behind excuses.

[Jamie C]

Hello Mr The Professor, i would just like to take a moment with you there and state that i was just watching a game of local football and have nothing to do with either club.

I was simply pointing out other actions on the pitch that didnt have the same reactions by the ref for the matter he dealt with earlier. So i couldnt care less who or what player got the actions from the ref its just something i was pointing out as too inconsistancy.

But i must of forgot this is a forum to discuss stuff about ... FOOTBALL. AND ITS RULES. so i shall let u stay on your high horse.

so to recap there. just watching a local game and wanted to know rules. I must send my deepest sorrow to u for jumping to conclusions that u thought i was a diehard perranporth fan but this i am not watched the club one in 4 years so i would say im more of a truro fan having watched them 3 times in 4 years,

yours thankfully

True die hard now a truro fan

jamie.

[Richard Chown]

Having spoken to the referee yesterday evening the Match Officials Director and Referee Development Officer have confirmed he was correct.

The problem I believe is how obscure the law is and how it is upto interpretation as to where the being replaced means that the number of subs allowed is reduced or the number of subs to be used is reduced.

There you go. Interesting question answered.

[Medium Steak]

I posed this question to about 6 different refs and they returned mixed responses. Can anyone confirm whether the ref was right with his decision? Someone from Truro, Perranporth or the FA ?

[B Manning]

Medium Steak, have you not bothered to read the post by Bighairydave ?.

[Medium Steak]

No I missed that one sorry

[The Villains]

No I missed that one sorry

Some would say you would make a good ref......... lol

[Mr.T]

Hello Mr The Professor, i would just like to take a moment with you there and state that i was just watching a game of local football and have nothing to do with either club.

I was simply pointing out other actions on the pitch that didnt have the same reactions by the ref for the matter he dealt with earlier. So i couldnt care less who or what player got the actions from the ref its just something i was pointing out as too inconsistancy.

But i must of forgot this is a forum to discuss stuff about ... FOOTBALL. AND ITS RULES. so i shall let u stay on your high horse.

so to recap there. just watching a local game and wanted to know rules. I must send my deepest sorrow to u for jumping to conclusions that u thought i was a diehard perranporth fan but this i am not watched the club one in 4 years so i would say im more of a truro fan having watched them 3 times in 4 years,

yours thankfully

True die hard now a truro fan

jamie.

I don't think the Prof got on his high horse or jumped to any conclusions,i think his sporting knowledge and educational achievements allow him to give an educated responce to any post. :thumbsup:

[Referee]

Oh, I do like this topic !

Sorry for not contributing much this season, been busy with the Marathons.

Had this a few years back in a Duchy KO Cup Match. I sent one off before the game, unknown if he was due to start or be a sub. (Abusive language at the ref and all that). I showed him he red card and told him to tell his Manager all about it.

I allowed the manager to pick his side and he then I realised that this player was listed in the starting line, so I informed him to put one of his named substitutes on in his place so that he could start with 11. I also informed him that he had officially used a substitute already and was only allowed another 2 subs.

He was furious but accepted the decision. I was only 50% sure if I had made the correct decision at the time.

In summary about Perranporth vs Truro.....

Perranporth are responsible for their players' behaviour and should have been aware of the consequences of his behaviour in advance. If in doubt, try not to abuse the Match Officials in future and avoid all the complications at the outset.

[Mclefc]

I would just like to clarify that we have received confirmation from the CCFA and SWPL that although the referee was correct to send off our player in the game in question. His interpretation of the rule regarding substitutes was incorrect and he should have allowed the third substitution to be made. At least that draws a line under it now.

Mick Lane

Perranporth AFC

[baldy]

I am going to enjoy the grovelling apology of B Manning

[B Manning]

baldy, I was only stating what i was told by the CCFA, so as far as I am concerned it was the correct answer, at least i did contact the CCFA for confirmation. So sorry to spoil your enjoyment. Also bighairydave contacted the CCFA for confirmation the same as I did and received the same answer if you read his post.

[baldy]

So the CCFA got it wrong initially and have changed their minds, sorry been corrected again. Who corrected them then? The FA? FIFA? I think we should be told.

BM, are you referring to your original post 16 mins after the thread was started? You are a very experienced ref and an assessor?

[The Smiling Assassin]

So the CCFA got it wrong initially and have changed their minds, sorry been corrected again. Who corrected them then? The FA? FIFA? I think we should be told.

BM, are you referring to your original post 16 mins after the thread was started? You are a very experienced ref and an assessor?

Why?