Ref Watch

Alan Harper's Tash said:
Referees have always had abuse, but social media has ramped up the vitriol against them.

Armchair fans armed with 12 replays from different angles in slow motion have decided that reffing is easy and any wrong decision is either corrupt or means they aren’t competent enough and should be sacked.

I hope your lad sticks at it, if it’s what he wants to do, but would totally understand if he just called it a day.

It’s never going to get better for him or any ref. All decisions against their team are noted for further use.

Do you have any ideas as to how to get fans to respect referees more?
Click to expand...
I’d like to see refs be allowed to explain some of their “controversial” decisions on telly after a game. I think a lot of fans and pundits, even players and managers, would actually learn more about the laws of the game and understand more about why and how certain decisions were made. The secrecy around PGMOL does nothing to support them, just allows conspiracy theories to grow. It would also out any wrong-uns.

A case in point is Rodri’s goal against Villa a few years ago when he won the ball off Mings, coming back from offside. Looked for all the world like it should’ve been disallowed but Jon Moss (I think) allowed it correctly. Villa complained, commentators baffled. If he was allowed to say after the game why the goal was allowed, it would have educated people who should already know better. This would filter down to all the dickeads who scream at kids at the weekend.

However, every referee who ever does our games is a fucking bent cheating bastard.
 
JPAMCR said:
I’d like to see refs be allowed to explain some of their “controversial” decisions on telly after a game. I think a lot of fans and pundits, even players and managers, would actually learn more about the laws of the game and understand more about why and how certain decisions were made. The secrecy around PGMOL does nothing to support them, just allows conspiracy theories to grow. It would also out any wrong-uns.

A case in point is Rodri’s goal against Villa a few years ago when he won the ball off Mings, coming back from offside. Looked for all the world like it should’ve been disallowed but Jon Moss (I think) allowed it correctly. Villa complained, commentators baffled. If he was allowed to say after the game why the goal was allowed, it would have educated people who should already know better. This would filter down to all the dickeads who scream at kids at the weekend.

However, every referee who ever does our games is a fucking bent cheating bastard.
Click to expand...
This just enhances the point that rhetoric around referees is off the scale now.
 
citydad said:
As the parent of a ref, my lad and fellow officials are predominately seen as the enemy and one only has to read some of the uneducated comments and vitriol on here and elsewhere regarding officials to see they have an uphill battle but I support him unconditionally. We moan about the hatred stirred up in the press and media about our beloved club and how it has and will cause opposition fans to target us but then the same happens towards officials and that's ok to some. if people had a dog in the fight or knew how hard it was they may have a rethink .As in refereeing it's all about opinions/
Click to expand...
But PiGMOL, the PL and the FArce do not help themselves. Their system of arbitration is substantially opaque. The payihg public do not see, neither do they hear, what is happening. The fans have seen what they have seen - they might be wrong, of course, I know I have! - and we see such variance in the application of the laws. It's not just the incidents that happen to MCFC. Other clubs have suffered from exceptionally poor application. Would putting the whole decision making process into the public domain - vision and sound - when it comes down to VAR be such a controversial way of making sure that decisions taken reflect more accurately what has happened.

There are several 'incidents' that refs completely ignore - free kicks not taken from the spot the offence occurred, goalkeepers pissing as much time as they can up the stadium wall with just the faintest chance of being cautioned after 80 mins. Alex Greenwood was carded, and utlimately sent off for allegedly timewasting at a free kick and we played about an hour with ten. Does the law state that the application can be varied for goalkeepers? Refs deserve the opprobrium of fans if they are not applying the LotG impartially.

Added time? A minimum of who knows what. What goes up on the board is just another element of how to manipulate a game. My ERO texted me and said last night's ref at the Luton v EFC game played 11 mins and the board stated 6. Was somebody unconscious for five mins after the board went up? I don't know, I haven't checked the BBC rubric. Let's help out refs and have a countdown clock. Why do we not have the simplest thing that would stop all the moaning about 'Fergie' time?
 
Stop the stadium clock every time the play stops.
Head injuries (Unless obviously serious), treat player as play continues as in rugby.
VAR, let everyone in the stadium hear and see the conversations. Obviously not possible at a couple of stadiums though.
Book every player who grapples in the box at corners/free kicks. Once a team has players sent off they will cotton on.
Every referee must declare their allegiances publicly.
Throw ins to be taken where the ball leaves the pitch (not 20 yards further forward, Ben Orange!)

Just a few for starters
 
Dave Ewing's Back 'eader said:
But PiGMOL, the PL and the FArce do not help themselves. Their system of arbitration is substantially opaque. The payihg public do not see, neither do they hear, what is happening. The fans have seen what they have seen - they might be wrong, of course, I know I have! - and we see such variance in the application of the laws. It's not just the incidents that happen to MCFC. Other clubs have suffered from exceptionally poor application. Would putting the whole decision making process into the public domain - vision and sound - when it comes down to VAR be such a controversial way of making sure that decisions taken reflect more accurately what has happened.

There are several 'incidents' that refs completely ignore - free kicks not taken from the spot the offence occurred, goalkeepers pissing as much time as they can up the stadium wall with just the faintest chance of being cautioned after 80 mins. Alex Greenwood was carded, and utlimately sent off for allegedly timewasting at a free kick and we played about an hour with ten. Does the law state that the application can be varied for goalkeepers? Refs deserve the opprobrium of fans if they are not applying the LotG impartially.

Added time? A minimum of who knows what. What goes up on the board is just another element of how to manipulate a game. My ERO texted me and said last night's ref at the Luton v EFC game played 11 mins and the board stated 6. Was somebody unconscious for five mins after the board went up? I don't know, I haven't checked the BBC rubric. Let's help out refs and have a countdown clock. Why do we not have the simplest thing that would stop all the moaning about 'Fergie' time?
Click to expand...
My lad has his pet hates some of which you mention so the free kick is made to be taken where it should, goalkeepers hurried up and warned dealt with for time wasting g and the time added on.
On a personal level he would rather ditch VAR and go back to having to suck up the consequences as we all had to before we got it. We chat about refs being interviewed post match because it could be beneficial for them when the fans and public realise why a player defended to the hilt by their manager is second yellow carded for abusing them.
 
citydad said:
My lad has his pet hates some of which you mention so the free kick is made to be taken where it should, goalkeepers hurried up and warned dealt with for time wasting g and the time added on.
On a personal level he would rather ditch VAR and go back to having to suck up the consequences as we all had to before we got it. We chat about refs being interviewed post match because it could be beneficial for them when the fans and public realise why a player defended to the hilt by their manager is second yellow carded for abusing them.
Click to expand...
Bruno the rodent needs to get the first yellow before he can possibly get a second.
 
citydad said:
My lad has his pet hates some of which you mention so the free kick is made to be taken where it should, goalkeepers hurried up and warned dealt with for time wasting g and the time added on.
On a personal level he would rather ditch VAR and go back to having to suck up the consequences as we all had to before we got it. We chat about refs being interviewed post match because it could be beneficial for them when the fans and public realise why a player defended to the hilt by their manager is second yellow carded for abusing them.
Click to expand...
Fans no longer being able to suck up the consequences is the biggest reason we are where we are with refereeing.
 
TonyColemansbagofapples said:
Stop the stadium clock every time the play stops.
Head injuries (Unless obviously serious), treat player as play continues as in rugby.
VAR, let everyone in the stadium hear and see the conversations. Obviously not possible at a couple of stadiums though.
Book every player who grapples in the box at corners/free kicks. Once a team has players sent off they will cotton on.
Every referee must declare their allegiances publicly.
Throw ins to be taken where the ball leaves the pitch (not 20 yards further forward, Ben Orange!)

Just a few for starters
Click to expand...
Nearly every tackle these days is made with full use of a defender's arms, and rarely are they penalised.
 
An absolute joke that theh 2nd pen wasn't given by the on-field referee at the time. Never mind the amount of time it took when he went over to the monitor.. What was the discussion? "Do I have to give this one too? Are you sure? Are you positive? Are you definitely sure? Can't we just stick with the original decision?"

I really do not like Pawson.
 
JRockBlues said:
An absolute joke that theh 2nd pen wasn't given by the on-field referee at the time. Never mind the amount of time it took when he went over to the monitor.. What was the discussion? "Do I have to give this one too? Are you sure? Are you positive? Are you definitely sure? Can't we just stick with the original decision?"

I really do not like Pawson.
Click to expand...
Compare that to Havertz deliberately dragging his foot across the floor to make sure he gets contact when his first touch is going out. No questions there. How is that not something they can address? They can judge handball based on a 'natural arm position' so why can't they judge penalties on whether a player's foot or leg is in a natural position when he gets tripped? If your foot is already dragging along the ground when the contact happens, no foul.
 
I thought Pawson's man marking today was excellent.

On one of our corners, KdB and Foden had a discussion over by the corner, Foden left and stood unmarked on the edge of the box, it was clear as day what the plan was, then Pawson came over and stood directly in front of Phil, so Kev had no choice but to put it in the box.

That wasn't the only time this happened.
 
INCIDENT: Let's start at the Emirates and the race for the Premier League title. Arsenal were awarded a penalty after referee David Coote felt Bournemouth goalkeeper Mark Travers brought down Kai Havertz.

DERMOT SAYS: "When you see it in real-time, you think it's a penalty all day long. When you see it slowed down, it's totally different. But is this what we want to do, forensically diagnose every decision in slow motion? I'm not sure supporters do. Travers goes with his feet and doesn't get the ball. Once you commit like that, you have to get the ball. Is Havertz obliged to step over him? Only he can say, but he doesn't get the ball and the referee gives a penalty. I can understand why it's given on-field and I can understand why it's not overturned."

INCIDENT: On Saturday Night Football, Manchester City were awarded a penalty in their win over Wolves when Rayan Ait-Nouri collided with Josko Gvardiol. Gary O'Neil was watching this from the stands due to suspension and wasn't impressed - was this harsh?

DERMOT SAYS: "Not a penalty for me. This is the kind of decision you see time and again in a football match, but I didn't think it was a penalty.

"It was two players going for the ball."

—————

So, to recap…

Bournemouth keeper lunging in and not getting the ball, but not actually initiating contact with the Arsenal attacker in the box: deserved penalty.

Wolves defender lunging in, studs up, above the waist, and not getting the ball, initiating contact with the City player’s leg in the box (and clearing him out): undeserved penalty.

Expert analysis at its best.
 
Last edited:
SebastianBlue said:
INCIDENT: Let's start at the Emirates and the race for the Premier League title. Arsenal were awarded a penalty after referee David Coote felt Bournemouth goalkeeper Mark Travers brought down Kai Havertz.

DERMOT SAYS: "When you see it in real-time, you think it's a penalty all day long. When you see it slowed down, it's totally different. But is this what we want to do, forensically diagnose every decision in slow motion? I'm not sure supporters do. Travers goes with his feet and doesn't get the ball. Once you commit like that, you have to get the ball. Is Havertz obliged to step over him? Only he can say, but he doesn't get the ball and the referee gives a penalty. I can understand why it's given on-field and I can understand why it's not overturned."

INCIDENT: On Saturday Night Football, Manchester City were awarded a penalty in their win over Wolves when Rayan Ait-Nouri collided with Josko Gvardiol. Gary O'Neil was watching this from the stands due to suspension and wasn't impressed - was this harsh?

DERMOT SAYS: "Not a penalty for me. This is the kind of decision you see time and again in a football match, but I didn't think it was a penalty.

"It was two players going for the ball."

—————

So, to recap…

Bournemouth keeper lounging in and not getting the ball, but not actually initiating contact with the Arsenal attacker in the box: deserved penalty.

Wolves defender lounging in, studs up, above the waist, and not getting the ball, initiating contact with the City player’s leg in the box (and clearing him out): undeserved penalty.

Expert analysis at its best.
Click to expand...

Dale Johnson on ESPN is the same: higher threshold for penalty here, higher threshold for intervention there, foul anywhere else on the pitch but not in the box, faintest of touches of the boot on the head, VAR isn't about consistency ....

It's all wearing a bit thin.
 
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