Congratulations (2)

[Wader]

Well done Beaconsfield SYCOB. Champions of the SSML Premier and duly promoted. Well done also to Dennis and all at Chalfont St Peter as runners up. A good campaign throughout with a bit of tooing and froing. I bet the SYCOB lads have a bit of a hangover today - well done fella's.

 

Commiserations to Brimsdown Rovers who were real contenders for so long and Aylesbury Vale for their early campaign table lead.

 

We've all had our highs and lows - for me the former being some excellent goals witnessed and seeing a good team come together at Bigg Town after last seasons last day relegation escape. Some of the match day banter has been excellent and I've met some genuine and good people.

 

I hope next season can go one better and hopefully we at Bigg Town can once again contend for an improved position.

 

In the meantime all eyes are on Division 1 and the final throws of the dice. Good luck one and all at Kentish, Hoddy and Haringey, your luck to be involved in a fascinating finale has been self made by hard work. It all now just needs finishing off.

 

Not forgetting finally, good luck to Ruislip Manor, Holmer Green and London Colney.

 

One final note before the back slapping and bon-ami reverts back to everyone for themselves - I hope all clubs will back an ammendment to the rules at the AGM that will see the end of the nonsense of 1 standing only in the technical area. A truly dreadful rule that clubs need to see off once and for good. The rule is not in anyones interest, it's divisive and distracting and not equitable with other levels of senior football.

 

 

[Hurryup Harry]

Wader I was told by the ref at our game at Hoddesdon that the rule was, and I'm not sure of it, that no-one is allowed to stand but in fact you are meant to give your instructions and sit down again, and that to be done by one person only!

Other levels, and I'm thinking pro but still obviously under FA regs, have someone on their feet permanently. Whatever it is you are spot on.

[Krooner]

In the CCL you can stand up to deliver instructions and then sit down again. As many different people can do that as long as they are named as in the technical area on the teamsheet. Fairly certain that will change at the CCL AGM.

[Wader]

The current rules & proposed rule changes are set out below:-

 

Proposed changes to the Spartan South Midlands League rules (technical area).

Proposer

[Horace]

While I support the proposals Wader, surely these are standard FA Rules, and cannot be changed by an individual league?

[Wader]

But the rules do vary on this issue from league to league. I'll rake out the Ryman one to check.

[Football Man]

Don't think it's the rules that change, but rather the instructions given to the referees. In the Ryman last season, almost every referee's instruction was "no more than two standing at any one time". The Rules on this, however, have always stated differently (i.e. one person to stand and give their instruction, then sit down again).

 

As I understand the current system, in the light of having standardised FA Rules, your proposed changes will be submitted to the FA ahead of the SSML AGM and they will guide the SSML as to whether they can be put forward to the vote or not.

[Wader]

You're right about the FA deciding first if the rule is tenable. Leverstock Greens suggested rule change on this has already been rejected by them I believe.

 

I've checked the Ryman rules and now The Conference. I'll make a couple of ammendements and then put it forward for consideration.

[petethegreek]

Originally Posted By: ICU JImmy

Wader I was told by the ref at our game at Hoddesdon that the rule was, and I'm not sure of it, that no-one is allowed to stand but in fact you are meant to give your instructions and sit down again, and that to be done by one person only!
Other levels, and I'm thinking pro but still obviously under FA regs, have someone on their feet permanently. Whatever it is you are spot on.

If a manager is continuesly giving instructions he does not need to sit down!

This was my advice to a manager earlier in the season when he asked if there was anyway he could remain standing without being in Breach of Rule.

[Wader]

I instructed our manager to do the same, but it just proves how loony the rule is.

 

A lot of clubs have a manager and a coach and both wish to remain standing most of the time. That is the crunch issue. Moving to the edge of the technical area to deliver instructions is tempered in the new rule by asking them to stand at the back of the technical area when not. It is a reasonable and more equitable way of doing it.

 

Respect of officials is rightly demanded, but the '1 only standing rule' has often lead to zero respect for manager and coach trying to do their jobs. That doesn't breed good relations twixt bench and officials and that is what the ammendment is seeking to redress.

 

I would hope that such an ammendment would also be welcomed and supported by the officials themselves. It is currently a totally unnecessary point of conflict.

[Special1]

Does the '1 only standing rule' address or even improve good relations between bench and officials? I don't believe so.

 

I personally don't think that '2 only standing' would make a difference.

 

What it boils down to is discipline within the team and the manager should be accountable. If a referee/official brings it to the attention of the manager that their bench is not acting in a proper manner, and nothing is done, I see no reason why the club is not dealt with and referees should have the balls to red card the offender.

 

I agree with Wader that the team staff can sometimes be criticised for not doing their jobs because of this rule. Certainly my bench tend to leave the officials to get on with their job. However, it is hard not to feel undermined when we see other teams benefiting badgering the referee with needless comments. I can honestly say that decisions have gone against us because of undue influence from the opposition.

 

However, it is down to all officials commanding that respect by not taking any flak from either team. Officials should be respected and the treatment of Team Staff universal.

 

I would say it is difficult to police '1 only standing':

- You have a manager who wants to instruct his players.

- You have a coach who wants to give his input too.

- You have a physio that is up and down like a yo-yo dealing with players well-being.

- You have a maximum of 3 players getting up to warm-up.

- You have some dug-outs that really aren't made to hold the number of allowed in the dug-out - maybe a junior team.

- You have players acting as ball boys getting balls that have gone over the fence.

Common sense should prevail but I think 2 standing is much more manageable than just the 1.

[petethegreek]

I

[Wader]

The BTFC sponsored proposed rule change would essentially allow both manager and coach to stand. To issue instructions they would be allowed to use all parts of the technical area to do so, but are asked to return to the back of the technical area (and remain standing if they wish) when not issuing instructions.

 

It allows both manager and coach to remain standing - thus alleviating the current point of main conflict twixt bench and match officials. The current harrassment of benches by match officials because manager and coach may be standing at the same time is ludicrous and leads to conflict that is unnecessary. Match officials are being instructed to enforce this daft rule and that is the catalyst that is leading to problems. Amend the current rule as suggested and this particular problem and reason for conflict should go away.

 

 

[petethegreek]

Originally Posted By: Wader

The BTFC sponsored proposed rule change would essentially allow both manager and coach to stand. To issue instructions they would be allowed to use all parts of the technical area to do so, but are asked to return to the back of the technical area (and remain standing if they wish) when not issuing instructions.

It allows both manager and coach to remain standing - thus alleviating the current point of main conflict twixt bench and match officials. The current harrassment of benches by match officials because manager and coach may be standing at the same time is ludicrous and leads to conflict that is unnecessary. Match officials are being instructed to enforce this daft rule and that is the catalyst that is leading to problems. Amend the current rule as suggested and this particular problem and reason for conflict should go away.

[Hurryup Harry]

It all comes down to individual Refs and their interpretation and/or patience. If the bench, as most do, continually abuse and swear at the officials we have no chance of a bit of tolerance. Only one ref, the Hoddy game, told us to sit down unless issuing instructions. Most let one or two stand as long as you are sensible. As a coach in the dugout I am constantly aware of 'gobby' Managers who think that good management is to shout alot, especially at Referees. The rules were probably brought in to try to stop the abuse so concentrate on your players and blame them or yourselves if youre not winning.

[Wader]

You miss the point and confuse 2 issues. people who are gobby can be just as such seated as standing - and whilst officials in Div 1 may have been leniant on the one standing rule - in the Prem they have not. The inconsistency is purely a product of an untenable rule.

 

Abuse from the bench is unacceptable, but please don't confuse it with the 1 standing rule. The two are seperate issues, apart from the fact that a strict interpretation of the one only standing rule has brought match officials into unnecessary conflict with benches.

 

And Pete, your laughing smilie ignores the fact that some officials have harrassed benches this season over this daft rule.

[Hurryup Harry]

I understand the point quite clearly and no issues are confused in my mind but thank you for your patronising reply.

[petethegreek]

Originally Posted By: Wader

You miss the point and confuse 2 issues. people who are gobby can be just as such seated as standing - and whilst officials in Div 1 may have been leniant on the one standing rule - in the Prem they have not. The inconsistency is purely a product of an untenable rule.

Abuse from the bench is unacceptable, but please don't confuse it with the 1 standing rule. The two are seperate issues, apart from the fact that a strict interpretation of the one only standing rule has brought match officials into unnecessary conflict with benches.

And Pete, your laughing smilie ignores the fact that some officials have harrassed benches this season over this daft rule.

If you are told that it is 1 standing only and comply to this, why would you be harrassed?

I tend to remind the benches politely before kick-off of the rule and I have never had a problem in the last few months.

If they ignore this, I make a note of it and report it to the Referee who then reports it to the League rather than become confrontational.

You get occasions where Club Officials get excited during a game and spill out from their seats. A quick, calm word coupled with some common sense soon restores order.

If someone becomes abusive after being told to sit down then it becomes Misconduct and they are asked to leave the Technical Area.

I don't think two standing would be a problem.

[Wader]

Patronising? Oh gawd, now you're going to swear at me from your dugout.....

 

 

[Wader]

Originally Posted By: petethegreek

If you are told that it is 1 standing only and comply to this, why would you be harrassed?

Generally manager and coach will prefer to stand and view/instruct their players accordingly. I can see no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to do so - save for a half baked rule that some match officials take heed of and some do not. Even during a match that inconsistency is apparant. Hence the proposed change to the rule.

Please forgive me in advance if in any way that seemed patronising