Uefa is considering copying rugby's lead by allowing only captains to talk to referees during games.

In a Football Focus special report to be aired on BBC One on Saturday, Uefa's William Gaillard admits the current situation is becoming "dangerous".

He believes captains should take more liability for the game's direction.

"It's common in rugby to call both captains and say 'cut it out, the game is not taking the right course and it is up to you'," said Gaillard.

Source: BBC

Could this work?

Come and chat about it on http://www.footballfrenzy.co.uk/forum/index.php

I think it's a great idea, but there are a couple of problems, such as if the keeper is skip, he'd have to run box to box because dummies were being spat out, etc.

It works in rugby because, 1, it's a game for thugs played by gentlemen* instead of the other way round, and there's generally a different mindset, and 2, with the possible exception of the wide backs, and sometimes the full backs, everyone (so usually the skip) is involved with play so calling captains together isn't a problem.

It might well be a way of stopping the stupid squabbling on the field though. And the insistence on calling the referee 'Sir' too. You'd be surprised how much of a difference that makes; it creates that little bit of distance.

And should also call them sir.

And should also call them sir.

Verily. I've seen scrums moved back ten for not calling the referee 'Sir'. Sadly, in international rugby, though there is still respect given to the official, rarely is he called 'Sir'.

The decision maybe wrong in your eyes, but someone on the pitch has to ensure fair play, and, as I said, that bit of distance can really work.

The referee is never your friend.

That is a good idea,watching united vs wigan when the penalty was given about 6 or 7 wigan players surrounded the ref,we see this all to often & having the captains only rule is better for the game.

That is a good idea,watching united vs wigan when the penalty was given about 6 or 7 wigan players surrounded the ref,we see this all to often & having the captains only rule is better for the game.

Captains rule notwithstanding, there is ALREADY a rule on the books that deals with this problem. It's the dissent law, and if 7 players surround the referee and start arguing with him, all 7 should get booked.

The problem is not a missing law, the problem is spinelessness in enforcing an existing one. Whether that's spinelessness on the part of the referees themselves, or their employers the FA, is open to debate; if a referee actually did book all 7, and kept this attitude up through the game, it'd be abandoned after half an hour due to too few players still on the pitch. How many people would then blame the referee for not "being sensible", instead of blaming the players for showing mass dissent?

Captains rule notwithstanding, there is ALREADY a rule on the books that deals with this problem. It's the dissent law, and if 7 players surround the referee and start arguing with him, all 7 should get booked.

The problem is not a missing law, the problem is spinelessness in enforcing an existing one. Whether that's spinelessness on the part of the referees themselves, or their employers the FA, is open to debate; if a referee actually did book all 7, and kept this attitude up through the game, it'd be abandoned after half an hour due to too few players still on the pitch. How many people would then blame the referee for not "being sensible", instead of blaming the players for showing mass dissent?

I agree with you, but I'm pretty sure the ref would just be labelled 'card happy'. It's only the same as if any swear word is used, a red card should be shown.

Captains rule notwithstanding, there is ALREADY a rule on the books that deals with this problem. It's the dissent law, and if 7 players surround the referee and start arguing with him, all 7 should get booked.

The problem is not a missing law, the problem is spinelessness in enforcing an existing one. Whether that's spinelessness on the part of the referees themselves, or their employers the FA, is open to debate; if a referee actually did book all 7, and kept this attitude up through the game, it'd be abandoned after half an hour due to too few players still on the pitch. How many people would then blame the referee for not "being sensible", instead of blaming the players for showing mass dissent?
Trouble is mate the rules don't get applied enough,perhaps the ref's can't be bothered to write all the foreigners names down it would take months.

Trouble is mate the rules don't get applied enough,perhaps the ref's can't be bothered to write all the foreigners names down it would take months.


Well, yes; that's kind of my point. Bringing in a new rule is hardly likely to help when old rules are being ignored, since the new rule will probably be ignored as well.


What we need is a massive crackdown; EVERY referee be told to book EVERY player who shouts at him or argues with him during the course of a game. If it leads to 300 sendings off in one weekend and 30 games abandoned, so be it, and fine the clubs large amounts for failing to control their players.

The next weekend, there will be zero bookings for dissent, because no player will dare do it any more. Problem solved, permanently.

I used to referee up to class 2 standard, finished a few years back but if I was having a word with a player and got surrounded by players, I used to say go away I am dealing with it. If they continued I said go away or you will be booked for dissent. If they then continued they got booked. Used to work very well.

I've just started playing football again in September after playing rugby union at Abbeydale for the past 3 years. The first thing I noticed was the difference in the way players talk to the refs. This will not change in the short term as its happening at greass roots at the level I play, instead of changing the rules at the top level. Rules ought to be changed for all ages under 11 so the upcoming players can see this as teh normal way to behave on a field of play and yes sometime in the future it should be introduced at the top level so young players have role models to look up to. I totally agree that footballesr should call the referee Sir, it makes a big difference I still do it now as force of habit.

I've just started playing football again in September after playing rugby union at Abbeydale for the past 3 years. The first thing I noticed was the difference in the way players talk to the refs. This will not change in the short term as its happening at greass roots at the level I play, instead of changing the rules at the top level. Rules ought to be changed for all ages under 11 so the upcoming players can see this as teh normal way to behave on a field of play and yes sometime in the future it should be introduced at the top level so young players have role models to look up to. I totally agree that footballesr should call the referee Sir, it makes a big difference I still do it now as force of habit.

Precisely what I said.

That is a good idea,watching united vs wigan when the penalty was given about 6 or 7 wigan players surrounded the ref,we see this all to often & having the captains only rule is better for the game.

its not just wigan team that does it though EVERY team seems to be doing this its about time it was stopped

its not just wigan team that does it though EVERY team seems to be doing this its about time it was stopped

Down to the pub leagues. It's a joke.