Ref Watch

cyan said:
part of a referee's role is to ensure player safety. The result of not punishing Martinelli for that challenge is that Martinelli was himself injured in an act of revenge - and presumably on the basis that he not booked Martinelli he then did not book Caicedo - he then potentially gave free range to other revenge challenges, and the game is left out of control.

A good referee deals strongly with early foul play and that sets the ground rules. He could have booked or sent off Martinelli and then if Caicedo still thought he needed to take revenge he could have been dealt with the same way - and then everyone knows. Both codes of Rugby are so far ahead of football in looking to eradicate foul play by strong consistent refereeing and take a particularly strong stance on anything that involves a head injury - it doesn't ruin a game - it makes for a game in which skilful players on either side are allowed to play without thugs ruining the game.
Click to expand...

Agree.

Martinelli should have gone. Some are defending him online saying he kept his eyes on the ball. Then Haaland doesn't get the pen because he looked at Pickford.

That's the rules from 20 years back. Now they have a duty to be aware of other players and to not knacker them unintentionally. Not seeing the player is no defence.
 
mattcity5 said:
How many times though do we hear commentators/'experts' saying the ref 'spoilt the game' when they give an early red card?

I think they just want to avoid doing that, but in doing so they're avoiding doing their jobs. Not saying there's no corruption, but more often than not it's due to cowardice on their part.
Click to expand...
@mattcity5 I've said many times that corruption does not always entail bribes. If you do not follow the rules/laws of the game you are acting corruptly. If you are advised by the PL that the product is better for the tv viewers with 22 men on the pitch so do not or try not to send anybody off, you are acting corruptly.
Cowardice is too easy as an excuse. Was he frightened of the abuse he might have got of he had sent Martinelli off ? If so he is in the wrong job.
 
cyan said:
part of a referee's role is to ensure player safety. The result of not punishing Martinelli for that challenge is that Martinelli was himself injured in an act of revenge - and presumably on the basis that he not booked Martinelli he then did not book Caicedo - he then potentially gave free range to other revenge challenges, and the game is left out of control.

A good referee deals strongly with early foul play and that sets the ground rules. He could have booked or sent off Martinelli and then if Caicedo still thought he needed to take revenge he could have been dealt with the same way - and then everyone knows. Both codes of Rugby are so far ahead of football in looking to eradicate foul play by strong consistent refereeing and take a particularly strong stance on anything that involves a head injury - it doesn't ruin a game - it makes for a game in which skilful players on either side are allowed to play without thugs ruining the game.
Click to expand...
I totally agree with you but I believe they are 'encouraged' not to send players off because it affects the product. If Milner had been sent off against us last season, 3 yellows, Sky would not have had the end to end frantic last 10 minutes. If Martinelli had been sent off Arsenal's title hopes were gone, the neutral turns off and sky, the paymasters are very unhappy.
 
Blue Mist said:
@mattcity5 I've said many times that corruption does not always entail bribes. If you do not follow the rules/laws of the game you are acting corruptly. If you are advised by the PL that the product is better for the tv viewers with 22 men on the pitch so do not or try not to send anybody off, you are acting corruptly.
Cowardice is too easy as an excuse. Was he frightened of the abuse he might have got of he had sent Martinelli off ? If so he is in the wrong job.
Click to expand...

I've said there's corruption loads of times too, maybe we just have slightly different definitions here but I don't think we're entirely disagreeing.

Lots of the laws of the game are open to slightly different interpretations (eg. What is 'excessive force').

I don't particularly think refs are told by TV companies or the league to not do early red cards in big games. However, they have probably worked out themselves that there are usually less obvious problems if they are cautious. That to me leads to cowardly refereeing and what we've been up against numerous times this season.

However, it's a fine line. I've said numerous times this season that there have been games where the opposition has been given a helping hand by this kind of refereeing. The most obvious being at Anfield, where we were unable to play our game and have any kind of control, because the ref let everything go. It ended up chaotic, which just suited Liverpool. That one went too far, was too obvious and to me should have warranted some kind of investigation.
 
blueinsa said:
Haaland went looking to be punched in the side of his head apparently lol.

Dermot the twat says so
Click to expand...
What fucking chance have we got when that cloud cuckoo fucker is their voice of reason and explanation??

The FA need to seriously look at their recruitment,some things cant be taught....and it seems those they currently employ fall into that category.
 
that punch by anderson
that challenge by martinelli
that none penalty

all checked by var all imo wrong, var is pretty much fucked, not so much the system but the refs using it, they haven't got a fucking clue.
if that punch is not reviewed and the palace defender banned then what is the point
 
Sir peace frog said:
that punch by anderson
that challenge by martinelli
that none penalty

all checked by var all imo wrong, var is pretty much fucked, not so much the system but the refs using it, they haven't got a fucking clue.
if that punch is not reviewed and the palace defender banned then what is the point
Click to expand...
Agree. VAR shows all clearly are as you say!!

The Refs using the technology all thought different. The question for Webb should be why? They wont ask that but thats what should happen and he should be made to answer directly. Im not holding my breath!!
 
Sir peace frog said:
pickford leads with his hand ,hit big erl in the face,that's the first contact, 100% penalty calling @richardtheref :) if partey was shielding against kdb surely this is a penalty :)
Click to expand...

This weekend, IMO, was probably one of the worst this season for officials. Starting with Simon Hooper at Leed v Newcastle. Didn't seem to recognise cautionable offences. Firpo could have had 4 yellows before he reluctantly sent him off. Add to this the fact he missed an obvious penalty and his fitness issues.

Then to Villa v Spurs. Ref quite rightly never gave a penalty as Kane initiated the contact. Then VAR official told him it was a penalty and lo & behold he didn't have the courage of his convictions.

As for the assault in the Palace game, I haven't noticed the change to violent play where it has to be a hay maker punch to be a red card.

As for our game I am not sure how you can give a free kick for the slightest push by Gundogan and then not give a penalty for Pickfords assault on Haaland. Not only does he not go through Haaland but he punches him and is nowhere near the ball. Probably a red card, although not a full blown hay maker so who knows. Surely Everton's relegation rivals should see Pickford banned for 3 games.

And it all ended with Andy Madley trying to prove that his brother was not at all as bad as some think. Red card for Marinelli all day. What would have happened if he had scored the winner. Had no control at all from the 1st minute.

Complete mess
 
Sir peace frog said:
that punch by anderson
that challenge by martinelli
that none penalty

all checked by var all imo wrong, var is pretty much fucked, not so much the system but the refs using it, they haven't got a fucking clue.
if that punch is not reviewed and the palace defender banned then what is the point
Click to expand...
They’re a mixture of both insecure and arrogant.

They’re insecure because they’re scared to death of making the referee on the pitch look like they’ve made a mistake. Which is ridiculous… that’s what VAR was brought in for! Don’t be ashamed of showing the referee to be wrong. In other sports nobody cares that the video ref shows the on-pitch ref to be wrong. We just want the best decisions being made as we all understand that on-pitch refs only see things once, at one speed, from one angle, sometimes they even understandably miss things, so that’s where VAR comes in to make the correct decision.

They’re arrogant because they won’t go to other sports to see how well they use video refs because they think it’s beneath them because they think football is above all other sports.

They really need to sort themselves out. This sport is nowhere near as good as it should be.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So Webb is guest on Monday Night Football and they are releasing some audio between ref and VAR tonight,bet they don’t have the derby game at the shithole as one of the games ..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top