Sin-bin over yellow cards

Bold Tone

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25235277
Blimey!
For once i agree with a football administrator as i've always thought it unfair that the team, fouled against, did not directly gain from the offence.

Captain

Not too hot on the goalie comment though.

Volante

Platini is so fucking useless.

Klaus

He believes a sin-bin would be a fairer punishment because "that way, the benefit goes to the team he is playing against, in the same match, instead of a sanction by cards which is carried out against a third team, the next on the calendar".

That's so stupid. They're already getting a freekick (or penalty, depending on the situation). The cards aren't for the opponents anyway, their function is to encourage discipline. The first one is a warning. The second is a sending off. I don't know how much clearer it can be.

lorddulaarsenal

It ain't broke

Rex

I'd much prefer the sin-bin, and I have always thought it too hard a punishment to award a penalty AND a red card for goalkeepers. Quite like the idea of 1 CL spot to go to the cup champions too. In short - I agree completely with Platini on this.
Pushing the FFP into practice already puts Platini in high regard for me. These are just icing on the cake.

Bold Tone

He didn't say it will happen, leaving the issue open to debate.
The article states that he believes a sin-bin would be a fairer punishment.
I think we are all familiar with the advantage of the professional foul which benefits the offending team in that particular instant. Klaus intepretation of the rule is correct but this particular loophole is now such common practice for niggly fouls that only garner yellow cards. They are even celebrated as "taking one for the team", knowing only too well that his replacement, if he eventually, gets banned (4 yellow cards and 3 months later) is probably almost as good as him. The team he has probably cheated out of a goal gains next to nothing from the resultant free kick 40 or 50 yards out.
I do not see much wrong with Platini saying
"that way, the benefit goes to the team he is playing against, in the same match, instead of a sanction by cards which is carried out against a third team, the next on the calendar".
and
"It is an idea. Now it needs to mature and see if it really is good for the game. It is a proposal to be explored."

Biggus

Sin Bins are a stupid idea, football is not rugby where being a man up is a huge advantage, in football a team can and will just park the bus for 15 minutes,it will ruin games.
Red cards for fouls in the penalty area are wrong since the goal scoring opportunity is restored yellow is enough.
Cup holders should at least go into a qualifying round.

Rex

15 minutes sin-bin for first 'yellow card' offense, sent off just like now if the player repeats it. No reason why 5 sin-bins, or something like that, shouldn't be an automatic ban anyway. To award the team right there in the match is a good idea.
Personally, I don't think it would destroy matches at all. It would change the dynamics of the game, sure, but that doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing.

Bold Tone

Edit:@[deleted] (seeing Rex has made a similar point!)
This is the point of the comment, i think.
It is not a directive but an opinion put forward for debate.
I can see the arguments on both sides and as to your point, parking the bus means handing the initiative to the other team for the 5, 10 or 15 mins they are down a player. Ruining the spectacle, it may be but he is arguing along the lines of fairness to the team fouled against.
Not saying it is right as i am open to being convinced that it is wrong!
A side benefit of this would be no need for the "completely artificial" cards amnesty recently introduced in tournaments.

Klaus

It's stupid because it gives the fouled team an unproportional advantage. Imagine getting sent off for 15 minutes for tugging someone's shirt, or because an opponent took a dive against you. Or because you take off your shirt to celebrate a goal. Or for breaking up an early counter. It's not a rule that works in favour of sportmanship. It actively opposes it by awarding the fouled team an advantage that is much bigger than the crime committed against them. Cards are handed out for breaking the rules. They are penalties, not favours to the team that is being fouled. And they already exist on a sliding scale that is relative to the severity of the foul itself. The closer a player gets to goal the more likely he is to be robbed of a goalscoring opportunity, hence why we have a penalty area. The more vicious the tackle the more likely you are to get a straight red.

Biggus

I like to see as much responsibility given to the ref as possible and incidents left to his interpretation.
If there is one change that I think would benefit everyone is to allow the ref to explain their decisions or even mic them up (as in rugby).

Bold Tone

TBF, Klaus, you do make solid points but Biggus' post answers one of them.
There are no clear answers and even in games with multiple refs and video replays, there are still issues so ...

Burnwinter

Sin bins are a stupid idea. We already have the red card, and to have a defensive player on a yellow is a significant hindrance by itself.

Retroactive punishments by tribunal are the go to fix disciplinary issues. And just get rid of all the stuff about whether the ref saw it, which is irrelevant.

Bold Tone

I do not think the yellow card is a significant hindrance as refs are less likely to send off players on yellow cards unless they have absolutely no choice and we regularly see players blatantly give themselves yellow cards after scoring and removing their shirts as they know the probability of a second yellow is somewhere between slim and non-existent.
Maybe we should approach this from a different angle by asking what the pros and cons of sin-binning are, versus the status quo?

Biggus

Totally against retroactive punishments by tribunal unless the officials didn't see it (ie the way it is now), it should be left up to the ref as I say.

Bold Tone wrote:
I do not think the yellow card is a significant hindrance as refs are less likely to send off players on yellow cards unless they have absolutely no choice

And thats exactly how it should be

Bold Tone wrote:
we regularly see players blatantly give themselves yellow cards after scoring and removing their shirts as they know the probability of a second yellow is somewhere between slim and non-existent.

Can't say I can ever recall noticing this Tone, that would be stupid behaviour on behalf of a player and if he did get sent off would get a right rollocking from his coach.
Anyway yellow cards for "over celebration" is stupid and wrong but refs have no choice.

Bold Tone wrote:
Maybe we should approach this from a different angle by asking what the pros and cons of sin-binning are, versus the status quo?

Pro's:
None.
Con's:

Not suited to football as it is a more fluid game, would cause more stops and starts and disruption of the flow.
Playing with a man down is quite common in football and teams adjust their tactics to adapt, they are well capable of "shutting up shop" for the short limited time they are down a player, and this will be taken to a higher degree with specialist training and tactics developed.
A whole new understanding of the code of ethics would have to be adopted by officials players coaches and fans, we all know exactly when lines are crossed we'd have to be expected to work out what was "worth a binning".

Burnwinter

A striker taking his shirt off for a yellow is a far cry from Jenkinson having a bad day on a yellow.

Sin-binning pros:

Material penalty for offences, on the day, that still isn't as bad as a sending-off

Sin-binning cons:

More complex
Controversy magnet for referee's decisions
Different impacts for different players and stages of the game
Not fine-grained enough to reflect spectrum of severity of offences
Might be used in lieu of multiple match bans for genuinely serious offences
Won't stop professional fouling when a goal is at stake
Change for change's sake

Biggus

UEFA fines Euro2012: £45,000 Spain 2004 (racism); £16,500 Serbia 2007 (racism); £10,000 Croatia 2008 (racism). €100,000 Bendtner (exposing underpants).

This is what you get when punished by tribunal, make sure you offend a black player and not an official sponsor.

Lets face it none of us were shocked at seeing Nik's nicks, not as if we haven't seen 'em before.

Burnwinter

Tribunal punishments should generally be suspensions - much more meaningful.

Routine two match bans for obvious diving (theatrical, no contact, wins penalty or free kick) would be a good start.

goon

Can of worms. Can you imagine how many players are wrongly given yellow cards? Not a big deal at the moment but if sin bins are brought in and the oppositions scores with a man advantage we will get uproar every week.

Shit idea in general too, will completely change the dynamics of the game.