Dissent - what's dissent and what isn't?

 The Field Hockey Forum is the resource for players, coaches and umpires of Field Hockey. Join FHF now to have full access to all that we have to offer! Don't be satisfied with lurking when you can interact with thousands of other FHF’rs, take part in Competitions, win Prizes, download Coaching Papers, discover our vast Photo library and get rid of this message - Register Now!

[justin]

QUOTE:"It still seems as though each umpire has a different opinion about dissent."

Yes, we do, because 'acceptability' is a subjective judgement and we have differing 'tolerance levels'.

What the players should do, basically, is to assess and keep below the tolerance levels of the umpires they have TODAY!
If they keep their opinions to themselves and get on with playing, they will have no problems in this respect

'Implied criticism', of the "Bad Luck!" and "He's not blowing those today!" kind, are simply pushing your luck and asking for trouble.
Ask yourself what you gain by this , apart from venting your frustration..... very few NO umpire do his/her job BETTER as a result of being hassled..... on the contrary, (s)he may get irritated and lose concentration ... and you could also get carded.

It's just not a clever way to play ....players should 'make the best' of the umpires they have on the day, not make them worse  

For the umpires, an early word to captains, requesting less 'chirping', helps to set the standard of acceptability.

[Goalie64]

Waxxed, I think you'll find we are pretty much agreed as to what (the definition of) dissent is.

What differs (naturally) is how much of it each individual umpire will accept, and the way each individual umpire will deal with it.
And that depends on the specific circumstances in any game.

There are very rarely any black and white situations.

[Snoody]

When whistling, I try to be lenient when encountering dissent / 'foul' language, but there are limits.

Two scenarios from last season:

1: Defender makes hash of a simple, first-time clearance, ball strikes his foot denying forward of what otherwise would have been good possession, I blow for PC. Defender: (quite loud and right in front of me, but not at me) "OFFS...". Me: no cards, just a simple "Not so loud, fella" - his comment wasn't aimed at me, was solely a self-criticism of his mistake (his body language confirmed that), no one was offended. I've since been told by an over-officious colleague that *any* foul language should be a yellow, which IMHO is just unworkable and doesn't take into account the pressures of playing flat-out hockey.  

2: Skipper of one team doesn't agree with me not giving his side a FH, which resulted in his side losing possession, eventually giving away a PC and a goal. Captain: (quite loud) "Gotta work hard today, fellas - we're playing against 12." Me: yellow card. No "foul" language as such, not aimed at me, but loud enough for most people on the pitch to hear, and intended to undermine my authority as an umpire. Plus he basically called me a cheat.

Dissent is content + action + delivery + atmosphere + target audience + various other imponderables.
So, pretty much like porn.

[MK]

Deleted by Moderator

[Richie]

Yeah that would be pushing it a little!

We had a umpire a year or so back.  When he gave a FH that I just couldn't fathom what it was for, I asked "what was that for please umps?" (I was the team skipper AND I even said please ffs).  He ignored me blatently.  So I said "are you not going to tell me?".  FH moved 10 yards and a GC for my troubles.  My opinion?  Arsehole.  You need to give umpires respect, yes.  But for gods sake there's no need to go that far, plus for me, by doing that he instantly lost my respect for being an arsehole.  Did I mention that he was an arsehole btw?

[Hacker]

Deleted by Moderator

[Grumpy]

In my experience dissent is individual to each umpire, what others call dissent I will accept and ignore and what others ignore I may decide in my opinion is dissent.

Guidelines are written by those in authority and continually ignored by umpires as it is their individual interpretation that counts.

I do not care if I am shouted at or or people use what can be  called offensive language I ignored this as it a normal for many people to swear all the time in everyday convedrsation so i see no point in taking offence if the swear at me.

[MK]

There are ways of handling swearing which resonate with a lot of players. Brooksy was the best example.
In a league game a player questioned a decision by Brooksy with a "Youre f*cking joking arent you?" (or something similar!)

Brooksy sprinted across to the player so he was 1 yd away with a real look of anger in his eyes, screaming "Dont you f*cking swear at me", stopped, big grin shoots across his face, and brandished a yellow card!

PLayer didnt know whether to laugh or moan - needless to say everyone grinned, the message was driven home, and sin-binned player bought Brooksy a bottle of wine for his train home.

Genius!

[Goalie64]

Grumpy - can I ask what you would do (when you are umpiring) if a player ran up to you and bellowed into your face "You are an F***ing  C***" - and would your decision change if the word "cheating" were inserted between the other 2 words?

[UmpireHockey.com]

Yes, the "unlucky" is wonderfully subversive and was quite popular. I also like, "Oh. Good tackle Sam," just after I've whistled. On a penalty corner following such a comment I said to the player, "No. If it had been a good tackle, you wouldn't be defending a penalty corner." That crap out on the field I've found usually leads to a comment or two more significant in nature and when carding for that it is something I might make mention to the captain, "Look. That's enough. I make a call, someone has to say, 'good tackle'. It's got to stop." Usually helps in that game and if I see that club again.

While I understand if the umpires are not highly skilled the environment for dissent will rise, I think we have to be careful about spreading the rumor that good umpires who use preventative umpiring don't have to card for dissent (not that THAT was said but it was close). I've heard long in the tooth umpires boast how they've never had to card anyone as if that demonstrates their skill and when the aforementioned notion is put out there, it fuels their lack of vision. I just wonder, "What angels have they been umpiring?" They've never had a breakdown foul in ANY game, ever?

Keely, I like your porn analogy. For the presentations I'm about to give to school girls, though, I need something different. 

Maybe, "Dissent is like a duck." Completely boring in comparison.

Suggestions anyone?

TIA...Cris

[Waxxxed]

Knowing dissent is like a sixth sense/second nature?

I'm not very good at this...

[nerd_is_the_word]

dissent is like a duck, if weighs the same, its therefore made of wood, and a witch.

Dissent is like obstruction, i cant tell you exactly what is and isnt, but i could show you given examples???

Chris I think there is a difference between an umpire who never gives cards (aka not strong enough) to one who (almost) never has to give cards for dissent (generally considered good preventative measures). In the past 6 years or so I havent had to give cards for dissent but I have given cards for breakdown tackles, fighting etc.

[Grumpy]

Grumpy - can I ask what you would do (when you are umpiring) if a player ran up to you and bellowed into your face "You are an F***ing  C***" - and would your decision change if the word "cheating" were inserted between the other 2 words?

Not a lot because to many thats what i am especially on this forum , and I may be a cheat in their opinion. I am to apply the rules of the game not impose others morals opinions on what they think is appropriate.

[justin]

After a particularly poor, late PC decision by my colleague (who was having a bad day, despite all my attempts to be supportive), one of the defending team shouted, to the world in general (not to/at the umpire) "That's the worst f...ing decision I have ever seen!"
I called her over, as she was going to half-way, and said quietly, after she'd apologised "I have some sympathy for your view, but I can't have you shouting that",  GC. She apologised again and said "Thank you" ..... presumably for communicating my understanding of their frustration
(I wouldn't do that in every game, but it seemed appropriate in this one)

[SportBilly44]

Dissent is like bad driving?  e.g. Personal opinion of what is bad varies, in some situations it causes no problems, but should still be recognised as needing to be cut out, whereas in other situations it affects people and situations around them, and hence MUST have something done about it. (e.g. People getting points on their license)  Arguably, still the best way to stop bad driving from causing problems is to manage people away from doing it in the first place before it causes problems.

How's that?   (Still think the Porn analogy has more impact, but this is perhaps a younger person suitable version???)

On the subject of comments made to umpires, certainly as a player if an umpire blows me up for something and will not explain why, I try to politely suggest something along the lines of "Umpire, unfortunately, since I do not know what I have just done wrong, unless you let me know what it is, I will carry on doing it!"

And I totally agree with UmpireHockey's post - I have a feeling my earlier post may have been one of the ones he was referring to about good umpires not needing to give cards for dissent; I certainly can recall a couple of games where I have had to produce yellows, even though I pride myself on game management, for statements like "this is a f***ing joke" etc.  However, I have been lucky (perhaps it is something to do with being 16 stone and 6'3") in that I have never had anyone directing abuse straight at me!