Referees’ Performances | 2024/2025

Trevor Morley's Tache said:
Only 20% of Ipswich's fouls resulted in a booking, compared to 50% of City's fouls.
Click to expand...
To put it another way, we were booked for every 2 fouls called, whilst Ipswich were booked every 5 fouls called.

What makes it worse, is that Grealish was actually booked for being fouled in Ipswich’s box, which should have been a foul and a yellow for Ipswich (and a penalty for us). And Delap’s various fouls without booking adds insult to literal injury (in the case of his knee to Kova’s hip/thigh).

And that, of course, does not include the incidents where no foul was called or where multiple fouls were committed in a discrete sequence, with only one actual foul being recorded. I am sure we had a few, but I would wager Ipswich had quite a few more (I can think of a few just on Haaland alone right now, including the pull back in the box which should have been at least a foul and a penalty, if not a yellow or even a red, given the position and situation for the foul, which might be the reason the VAR didn’t want to have the referee take a look).

Could the referee have given a penalty against us? Absolutely, but that is 2-1 unawarded penalties favouring Ipswich, with many, many fouls (and many more not even given) for Ipswich with very few bookings (one of the three actually came in the 95th minute, otherwise it would have been a booking for every 7 fouls).

I am not sure how anyone can argue that Ipswich weren’t shown leniency in the game, for whatever reason.
 
Last edited:
I see Dale Johnson, the ESPN VAR "expert" has gone full conspiracy theorist about our game :

"Each of these incidents have their merits for a spot kick, yet both went in favour of the bigger club."
 
halfcenturyup said:
I see Dale Johnson, the ESPN VAR "expert" has gone full conspiracy theorist about our game :

"Each of these incidents have their merits for a spot kick, yet both went in favour of the bigger club."
Click to expand...
I saw that, too, and noted he decided not to discuss the Haaland pullback in the box or Grealish getting booked for being fouled in the box, as well. All were reviewed by VAR, and only the Savinho penalty was deemed worth a review at the monitor. So that would be 2-1 in favour of Ipswich in my opinion. Had no idea they were now such a “big” club.

I was tempted to share it in the VAR thread but decided I just didn’t have the energy to debate the officials’ performance in both threads today.
 
SebastianBlue said:
I saw that, too, and noted he decided not to discuss the Haaland pullback in the box or Grealish getting booked for being fouled in the box, as well. All were reviewed by VAR, and only the Savinho penalty was deemed worth a review at the monitor. So that would be 4-1 in favour of Ipswich in my opinion.

I was tempted to share it in the VAR thread but decided I just didn’t have the energy to debate the officials’ performance in both threads today.
Click to expand...

It was an extraordinary thing for Johnson to put in writing because he usually makes sure his opinions tie into what he is told by PGMOL (which miraculously is normally also supported by the "independent" review panel. If that is the message he is getting from PGMOL, it is more than a little disconcerting
 
halfcenturyup said:
It was an extraordinary thing for Johnson to put in writing because he usually makes sure his opinions tie into what he is told by PGMOL (which miraculously is normally also supported by the "independent" review panel. If that is the message he is getting from PGMOL, it is more than a little disconcerting
Click to expand...
It’s also extraordinary given it is a subtle rebuke of the referee and VAR, which he normally defends to the hilt. It gives the impression that the comment was sanctioned, as you said, and PGMOL is perfectly happy with hanging both out-to-dry (even if the comment is nonsensical if you actually watched the match).
 
SebastianBlue said:
To put it another way, we were booked for every 2 fouls called, whilst Ipswich were booked every 5 fouls called.

What makes it worse, is that Grealish was actually booked for being fouled in Ipswich’s box, which should have been a foul and a yellow for Ipswich (and a penalty for us). And Delap’s various fouls without booking adds insult to literal injury (in the case of his knee to Kova’s hip/thigh).

And that, of course, does not include the incidents where no foul was called or where multiple fouls were committed in a discrete sequence, with only one actual foul being recorded. I am sure we had a few, but I would wager Ipswich had quite a few more (I can think of a few just on Haaland alone right now, including the pull back in the box which should have been at least a foul and a penalty, if not a yellow or even a red, given the position and situation for the foul, which might be the reason the VAR didn’t want to have the referee take a look).

Could the referee have given a penalty against us? Absolutely, but that is 2-1 unawarded penalties favouring Ipswich, with many, many fouls (and many more not even given) for Ipswich with very few bookings (one of the three actually came in the 95th minute, otherwise it would have been a booking for every 7 fouls).

I am not sure how anyone can argue that Ipswich weren’t shown leniency in the game, for whatever reason.
Click to expand...
I had their 3rd booking (El-Hamadi) down as the 83rd minute. I could be wrong though.

Even so, late bookings when there have been numerous worthy fouls all game is nothing more than stat padding. Chelsea got away with loads last week, but ony Caicedo was booked in the 89th minute.
 
Trevor Morley's Tache said:
I had their 3rd booking (El-Hamadi) down as the 83rd minute. I could be wrong though.

Even so, late bookings when there have been numerous worthy fouls all game is nothing more than stat padding. Chelsea got away with loads last week, but ony Caicedo was booked in the 89th minute.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

And both ESPN and the official PL app have Al-Hamadi’s yellow in the 94th minute so you should update your spreadsheet! ;-)
 
I don’t see how any statistics judging what percentage of decisions are correct, can be anything other than one person’s opinion.

Virtually every contact between two players leads to a subjective decision by a referee whether he’s seen enough for a foul or not. In fact there doesn’t even have to be any contact for a foul.

So I can’t take seriously any stats judging how many decisions are right or wrong.
 
Stephen230 said:
I don’t see how any statistics judging what percentage of decisions are correct, can be anything other than one person’s opinion.

Virtually every contact between two players leads to a subjective decision by a referee whether he’s seen enough for a foul or not. In fact there doesn’t even have to be any contact for a foul.

So I can’t take seriously any stats judging how many decisions are right or wrong.
Click to expand...
And certainly not claims that indicate that the PL referees have the most accurate decision making in the history of human civilisation (that are then somehow improved with the introduction of VAR).
 
SebastianBlue said:
And certainly not claims that indicate that the PL referees have the most accurate decision making in the history of human civilisation (that are then somehow improved with the introduction of VAR).
Click to expand...

I’ve never really looked into it too deeply because I’m not really that interested.

But when I have seen these stats. I’ve never seen them accompanied by any source or explanation as to how they were reached.

Maybe if I saw an explanation of how they reached them, I’d be a bit more interested. But I doubt it.

Also, even if these figures were accurate, a referee is judged on the big decisions. In most games a referee will probably have between something like 0 & 3 big, game changing decisions to make.

If he’s getting the vast of those right, I’m not overly concerned if he’s giving a few throw ins near the half way line, the wrong way.
 
Last edited:
I thought he was shite Saturday but then again I think that every week, I dont particularly think many (if any) of them are bent but I do think most of them are pretty poor at their job.

My major gripe Saturday was the penalty we did get the referee blew his whistle, then looked at the linesman, then 3 or 4 seconds later gave a deadball, now ive watched football live for nigh on 35 years and I dont ever remember a referee whistling for a goal kick before
 
Blue Mist said:
Bar KdB's booking yes but that said, he didn't have much to do.
Click to expand...
KDB's booking was an odd one. He made a genuine attempt to win the ball, and made contact with their player. It wasn't deliberate, there was no malice, and it certainly wasn't brutal or forceful, but Olivar couldn't wait to book him for his first offence. I was just before half-time and it definitely effected his game second-half.

Compare and contrast to how he let WHU players get away with multiple similar challenges before being booked. Their foul count to bookings was 10/3. Ours was 3/2.
 
MCFC1993 said:
Can't complain again, fairly consistent, unnoticeable which is always good.

Refs have been solid so far this season.
Click to expand...
What is your view on Kdb's booking ? I find even when refs have a good game, he did, we still suffer a crazy decision like that.
 
Blue Mist said:
What is your view on Kdb's booking ? I find even when refs have a good game, he did, we still suffer a crazy decision like that.
Click to expand...
Thought Oliver backed himself into a corner by booking De Bruyne for what was both his first offence and fairly innocuous. Once he’d set that benchmark he then ended up booking 5 players in a match with only 13 fouls and hardly a bad tackle in there.
 
Blue Mist said:
What is your view on Kdb's booking ? I find even when refs have a good game, he did, we still suffer a crazy decision like that.
Click to expand...
Caught the trailing leg of Antonio, nowhere near the ball. Antonio might have left his leg there but not shocked to see a booking. It could be deemed cynical trying to stop a break, albeit very far back. I think once you go to ground you leave the referee with a decision to make.

He booked Emerson, Kilman and Rodriguez for similar tackles (cynical nature) if not softer in some cases slightly further up the pitch.
 
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