# Booking (soccer/football)



## Hoax

Could you please tell me if it means "yellow card" only? 
As far as I understand "booking" = yellow card and "red card" = sending off.
Please, correct me if I'm wrong


----------



## ewie

Yellow card = 'a caution'; red card = 'a sending-off'.

I didn't find this terribly difficult to find, Hoax


----------



## Hoax

ewie said:


> Yellow card = 'a caution'; red card = 'a sending-off'.
> 
> I didn't find this terribly difficult to find, Hoax



ewie, thanks, but the word I'm asking about is "booking"


----------



## morzh

Ewie

Hoax is asking because someone whose native is English came to Russian forumasking for translation of football (sorry, fellow Yankees - soccer) terminology, and "booking" was one of the terms.

Do you know what it is?


----------



## Hoax

I'm sure that "booking" means yellow card only, but I need some proves from the native speakers for those who don't believe and say it may mean both "red" and "yellow".


----------



## morzh

Hoax said:


> I'm sure that "booking" means yellow card only, but I need some proves from the native speakers for those who don't believe and say it may mean both "red" and "yellow".



From WIkipedia:

>>


*Booking* : the act of noting the offender in a cautionable offence, which results in either a yellow card, or in the case of a "second booking", a red card.[40]


----------



## Hoax

morzh said:


> From WIkipedia:
> 
> >>
> 
> *Booking* : the act of noting the offender in a cautionable offence, which results in either a yellow card, or in the case of a "second booking", a red card.[40]



Yes, but it means in the case of a second yellow card the player gets a red card. Again "booking" means "yellow card" here.


----------



## morzh

Hoax

I am not here to construe, I am merely quoting a source of some authority.

It is my opinion that either this or Ewie's suggestion is OK to use, and they are probably used interchangeably.
It may be that one is more of a lay speak, and another is a formal one, akin to the Russian difference between the two names for "goalkeeper" we have (cannot say anything in Russian anymore - it will be deleted  ), in English you can say "goalkeeper" or "goalie" , but the idea is, a language is allowed to have more than one name for a category, even if it is a sports terminology one.


----------



## cycloneviv

Hoax said:


> Yes, but it means in the case of a second yellow card the player gets a red card. Again "booking" means "yellow card" here.



I disagree. A booking means the player's name is written in the little book that the referee carries. If the player has been booked once, he or she is shown a yellow card. When booked a second time, the red card is shown. Both events involving "bookings". "Yellow card" and "red card" define the consequences of the booking, depending on whether it is a first or second offence.


----------



## Hoax

morzh said:


> Hoax
> 
> I am not here to construe, I am merely quoting a source of some authority.
> 
> It is my opinion that either this or Ewie's suggestion is OK to use, and they are probably used interchangeably.
> It may be that one is more of a lay speak, and another is a formal one, akin to the Russian difference between the two names for "goalkeeper" we have (cannot say anything in Russian anymore - it will be deleted  ) , but the idea is, a language is allowed to have more than one name for a category, even if it is a sports terminology one.



I know, but I though it may be useful for others to understand my point of view and the doubts I have.
That is the question, can "booking" be a synonym for "red card" or not. From the texts suggested it is not possible to understand, it is obvious that "booking" means "yellow card", the rest is not clear.


----------



## morzh

I think Cycloneviv explained it very well.

Booking is the process of declaring the offense committed. The cards, yellow and red, are the results of booking, the actual punishement (well, the actual actual punishement is what those cards stand for).

I understand your trouble too. You have to translate it in Russian, and *we do not separate the Booking from the Card*. Is this what the problem seems to be?


----------



## PaulQ

As cycloneviv says at #9: 





> A *booking *means the player's name is written in the little *book *that the referee carries.


Yellow and red card incidents all go in the book - so both are bookings.


----------



## sound shift

As others have implied, it all depends on whether it's a first booking (= first yellow card), in which case the player stays on the pitch, or a second booking (= second yellow card), in which case the player is sent off. If the text says "He got a second booking" or "He got a second yellow", it implies that the referee flourished his red card and the player had to withdraw.


----------



## Hoax

PaulQ said:


> As cycloneviv says at #9: Yellow and red card incidents all go in the book - so both are bookings.[/COLOR]



thanks, i'll keep it in mind.



sound shift said:


> As others have implied, it all depends on whether it's a first booking (= first yellow card), in which case the player stays on the pitch, or a second booking (= second yellow card), in which case the player is sent off. If the text says "He got a second booking" or "He got a second yellow", it implies that the referee flourished his red card and the player had to withdraw.



i'm afraid I feel lack of words even in my own language to express my thoughts  the idea is that mix of yellow and red doesn't mean orange 
we can even say that he got the yellow card and was send off. and we would know that it means that he got the second yellow card which means the red card. but if we say just "he got a booking" and don't have any other information, what does it mean? as far as i understand it means "he got a yellow card", doesn't it?


----------



## sound shift

Yes. If we just say "He got a booking" and there is no other information, we can assume that it was a "first yellow" and he stayed on the pitch.


----------



## football_

Hello, please take a look here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/jan/20/roberto-mancini-imaginary-red-cards. In the comments to the article, the ideas of booking (giving a yellow card) and sending off (giving a red card) are clearly distinguished and opposed to each other. 

Note that usually, the referee gives a red card after giving a second yellow card (so he indeed "books" a player on this event, and in principle, he should look up the name of the player in his book to make sure the player was or was not already booked — though I'm sure referees remember who were booked during the game), but sometimes a referee may send off a player (by giving him a red card) immediately, without any previous booking (= "caution"; = "giving a yellow card"; as ewie pointed). So there's a real need to distinguish the concepts.

So, I think Hoax is right in his/her original post. I thought otherwise before, but after googling (the Guardian article is the Google #6, and the Wikipedia article is the Google #9 on my computer; the query was "to book with a red card football") I agree with Hoax completely.

Cheers.


----------



## JulianStuart

I think posts 6 & 9 are quite clear!


----------



## Hoax

JulianStuart said:


> Ithink posts 6 & 9 are quite clear!




Here is a silly example:

The player got the second booking but the referee was dumb and forgot to show him a red card.

It is hard to imagine such situation, I know, but I guess that the meaning of the sentence is correct and you can understand it, can't you? And doesn't it mean that "booking" and "red card" don't have the same meaning here?


----------



## football_

JulianStuart said:


> I think posts 6 & 9 are quite clear!


Sure, except for they don't answer the question, which is "what is called the event of giving a red card if it's immediate, that is, if it is not a consequence of giving two yellow cards in one game; whether this event can be called «booking»".
A referee is not constrained to send off a player only after a warning (= "a caution"), he may do so immediately, without any booking, if the misconduct is very severe.

Cheers.


----------



## sound shift

Hoax said:


> Here is a silly example:
> 
> The player got the second booking but the referee was dumb and forgot to show him a red card.
> 
> It is hard to imagine such situation, I know, but I guess that the meaning of the sentence is correct and you can understand it, can't you? And doesn't it mean that "booking" and "red card" don't have the same meaning here?


It's not so preposterous - this has happened! If the referee doesn't show him a red card it probably means that the referee has forgotten about or forgotten to record the first booking, and thinks that this is the player's first yellow.


----------



## PaulQ

And doesn't it mean that "booking" and "red card" don't have the same meaning here? *No*, it means the referee made a mistake.  A red card is still a booking regardless of what happens afterwards.


----------



## Hoax

sound shift said:


> It's not so preposterous - this has happened! If the referee doesn't show him a red card it probably means that the referee has forgotten about or forgotten to record the first booking, and thinks that this is the player's first yellow.




So, should i understand from your words that "booking" means "yellow card" and not the red card?


----------



## Hoax

PaulQ said:


> And doesn't it mean that "booking" and "red card" don't have the same meaning here? *No*, it means the referee made a mistake.  A red card is still a booking regardless of what happens afterwards.



can we say that "booking" and "sending off" are synonyms?


----------



## JulianStuart

Hoax said:


> So, should i understand from your words that "booking" means "yellow card" and not the red card?


The first booking results (if the ref does his job correctly) in the player being shown a yellow card.  The second booking results in the player being shown a red card and, again if the ref is doing his job correctly, in the player being sent off. The booking is the act of putting the player's name "in the book" and it is followed by the player being "shown a card".


----------



## PaulQ

Hoax said:


> can we say that "booking" and "sending off" are synonyms?


No, we cannot. *Bookings *_result _in a *sending off*. Kopeks are not Roubles.


----------



## morzh

Booking is akin to the "charge with the crime". Send-off is the sentence. (of course there's a difference, but the concepts are similar).


----------



## Hoax

JulianStuart said:


> The first booking results (if the ref does his job correctly) in the player being shown a yellow card.  The second booking results in the player being shown a red card and, again if the ref is doing his job correctly, in the player being sent off. The booking is the act of putting the player's name "in the book" and it is follwed by the player being "shown a card".



As far as I remember if the rules being violated for the second time the referee makes a note in his book + shows the yellow card first and the red card + sending the player off follows next. So what i mean is that the action of making a note in the book is related to the yellow card and the action of sending the player off is related to the red card (is the preposition "to" or "with" by the way?=)


----------



## Hoax

PaulQ said:


> No, we cannot. *Bookings *_result _in a *sending off*. Kopeks are not Roubles.



But if you say that "booking" is used instead of the red card and the red card means "sending off" than as result we have the idea that booking and sending off is the same. And you say it is not.


----------



## morzh

Let's say you are charged with a crime.
The charge possibly (we are talking a criminal justice) results in prosecution and then possibly results in a sentence.

However the charge and the sentence are not the same (in some countries in practice they are, but formally they are not).
In football the judge is the policeman, the prosecutor and the judge, so in practice his "charge" (booking) and his sentencing (the card / send-off) correlate, but they are two stages of the process and they are not, at least formally, the same.


----------



## PaulQ

1. A Player commits a serious foul
2. The referee shows the player a yellow card - this is simply to inform the player that his name will be written into the referee's book. i.e. The referee *yellow-cards* the player
3. The referee then enters the player's name in the book. (He *books *the player)
4. A Player commits another serious foul
4a. The referee shows the player a yellow card - this is simply to inform the player that his name will be written into the referee's book. i.e. The referee *yellow-cards* the player
5. The referee *then *shows the player a red card - this is simply to inform the player that his name will be written into the referee's book a second time. i.e. The referee *red-cards* the player
6. The referee then enters the player's name in the book. (He *books *the player)
7.The referee then *sends* the player *off*.
8. The player has been *booked *twice. If a player is *booked *twice, he is *sent off*.

The showing of the card is nothing more than informing the player that his conduct has been noted.


----------



## sound shift

No. "Sending off" = 1 x red card, without prior yellow card (booking) ; _or
_a _second _yellow card (second booking).


----------



## Hoax

Ok, I guess now I know the better translation for this word that is not related to cards at all. Thanks


----------



## JulianStuart

Hoax said:


> As far as I remember if the rules being violated for the second time the referee makes a note in his book + shows the yellow card first and the red card + sending the player off follows next. So what i mean is that the action of making a note in the book is related to the yellow card and the action of sending the player off is related to the red card (is the preposition "to" or "with" by the way?=)


No. The first serious offence leads to the referee writing somethng "in his book"* and showing the player a yellow card.  The second serious offence leads to the referee writing something "in his book" , showing the player the red card which means the player must leave.

* actually he writes it on the (only) yellow card he has in his pocket; that way, if he sees the same name/number again (in the case of a second use of the card for the same player)  he will know to get out the red card (maybe write the player's name on that?) and send him off.


----------



## Loob

Umm ...  I'm confused, too, now.

Regardless of what actually happens with the referee's book ~ when we say "Player X got booked" or "Player X got a booking", don't we usually mean "Player X got a caution"?  And in that non-technical sense, isn't there a contrast between "Player X got booked" and "Player X got sent off"?


----------



## JulianStuart

Indeed, in the "non-technical" usage, people will say "he was sent off" rather than "he got booked again".   So people often use "booking" only for the first offence.  However, each offence results in the "name going in the book".


----------



## Hoax

JulianStuart said:


> Indeed, in the "non-technical" usage, people will say "he was sent off" rather than "he got booked again".   So people often use "booking" only for the first offence.  However, each offence results in the "name going in the book".




 you are confusing me again


----------



## JulianStuart

Paul and I, it seems, are perhaps being  literal/technical by saying they are both " bookings" because each one results in an entry in "the book".  
Before cards were introduced in 1970, the first offence resulted in a "caution" and the second in a "dismissal" and both were officially recorded in the ref's notebook.  Hence the term "booking". Now when someone uses the term for the caution (from the first offence) they usually refer to the "(first) booking" (or yellow carding) and the second is referred to as "ejection, dismissal, sending off and red carding".  There are cards of other colours (in other sports) but the terminology isn't really black and white


----------



## Hoax

JulianStuart said:


> Paul and I, it seems, are perhaps being  literal/technical by saying they are both " bookings" because each one results in an entry in "the book".
> Before cards were introduced in 1970, the first offence resulted in a "caution" and the second in a "dismissal" and both were officially recorded in the ref's notebook.  Hence the term "booking". Now when someone uses the term for the caution (from the first offence) they usually refer to the "(first) booking" (or yellow carding) and the second is referred to as "ejection, dismissal, sending off and red carding".  There are cards of other colours (in other sports) but the terminology isn't really black and white



i understand it, but you judge it from the point of view of the real life and i need to understand it from the point of view of the linguistics. therefore as far as I understand "booking" is used in the same language situations as "yellow card", they are interchangeable in the sentences. as for red card, "booking" can be used as well but with some additional information implied (it must be the second card which has the following result). and according to this i consider "booking" a synonym to "yellow card" as both mean a caution and "sending off" a synonym to "red card" as both mean "dismissed". sending of is a result of two bookings = red card is a result of two yellow cards = dismiss is a result of two cautions.


----------



## Loob

Hi Hoax

As I understand it now (thanks, Julian!), the distinction isn't between "real life" and "linguistics", but between "technical language" and "non-technical language".

Technically, both a "caution" and a "sending-off" are "bookings".

In layman's language, a distinction is made between "the player was booked" (given a caution) and "the player was sent off" (dismissed from the field).  In other words, in layman's language, "booked" or "given a booking" indicates "given a _first_ booking".


----------



## JulianStuart

Thank you Loob, for a clarifying succinct recap 

Still close to the original topic, and extending some linguistic understanding, the term "booked/booking" is not used solely for soccer. You can get "booked for speeding" if you exceed the posted speed limit.  Things that get recorded in a book, real or figurative, can be considered as "being booked" (profits and losses on a financial statement also come to mind) and obviously a ticket or reservation can also be "booked".  The equivalence of "booking" = "yellow card" is mainly soccer (and possibly other sports).


----------



## cycloneviv

Hoax said:


> But if you say that "booking" is used instead of the red card and that red card means "sending off" than as result we have the idea that booking and sending off is the same. And you say it is not.



I don't think anybody has said that "booking" is used instead of "red card". We have said that "booking" means a player's name being written in the book. If it is the first booking recorded, a yellow card ought to be shown (sometimes followed by a red card, if the offence is serious enough) immediately after the name is written down. If it is the second booking recorded, a yellow then a red card ought to be shown, resulting in the player being sent off. The showing of the cards is the consequence of the booking. It is _not_ the booking itself. (And, by the way, the sending off is a consequence of a booking followed by a red card.)

I have heard commentators say things such as "That's his second booking. He'll be shown a red now. They're down to ten men."

I can understand why you think "booking" and "yellow card" _should_ equate, and I'm sure that I've heard people leave out any reference to one or other event. That doesn't mean that they actually mean the same thing.

For example: "Oh, that was a bad foul. He's been shown the yellow card." (The commentator has not mentioned the booking prior to the showing of the yellow card, but that doesn't mean it didn't occur and doesn't mean the two things are the same.)

"He was booked early on in the second half for a nasty tackle on the opposing forward." (The commentator has not mentioned the card that was shown after the booking - we assume only a yellow was shown since sending off is not mentioned - but that doesn't mean a card was not shown and does not mean that the two actions equate to the same thing.)

I think we've had a good, robust discussion on this issue! I hope my comments help rather than confuse.


----------



## morzh

If it is still not clear we will have to involve some lawyers (sorry, solicitors), FIFA and possibly, as a last resort, the House of Lords.


----------



## sound shift

... Or just switch the television on. Football will come along before long. (By the way, we say "lawyers" and "solicitors" here; the second is a sub-set of the first.)


----------

