Ref Watch

[MillionMilesAway]

A (very) long piece in the Guardian on PL refereeing. It contains little new other than its interesting to hear their perspective. It deals with VAR but I felt it was a very insular view and even with the appointment of Webb there is no effort to learn from other sports to improve. Lots on football as a subjective sport so not every decision is black and white. Notwithstanding that its worth a read.

The impossible job: inside the world of Premier League referees

Players, pundits and fans complain bitterly that referees are getting worse each season – but is that fair?

www.theguardian.com

It's an interesting read, but I'm surprised that anyone would go on record that cards are given/not given to manage the game, and hadn't heard Clattenberg say that he'd evened up the match with Atletico. As soon as that's out there for one ref, then it can infect opinion of every ref.

Obviously the VAR system needs amendments still. Maybe in the aftermath of Mitrovic's meltdown that VAR should include contact with officials and be able to instruct a yellow card (which isn't normally within remit). Clearly with Fernandes, a card then and a statement from the FA the morning after on the outcome of pushing a ref would have removed a lot of the muddiness. We do see incidents where players tap the ref on the arm, and there was the Aguero/Massey-Ellis incident too - there was no force in it but it was unwise.

It's not written by a football hack which probably is why it's pretty well written.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Naah. @Stephen230 is too tolerant and polite. Never the same person :)

My money would be on AHT. But I don't gamble so take it with a pinch of salt.

 

[halfcenturyup]

A (very) long piece in the Guardian on PL refereeing. It contains little new other than its interesting to hear their perspective. It deals with VAR but I felt it was a very insular view and even with the appointment of Webb there is no effort to learn from other sports to improve. Lots on football as a subjective sport so not every decision is black and white. Notwithstanding that its worth a read.

The impossible job: inside the world of Premier League referees

Players, pundits and fans complain bitterly that referees are getting worse each season – but is that fair?

www.theguardian.com

My main gripe is that if we accept football decisions are largely subjective, we should make the subjectivity easier to understand, not more difficult every bloody time the rules change, so that everyone watching can make up their own mind in the stadium or watching on TV. It won't eliminate discussion, controversy - nothing will - but at least everyone will know what they are talking about.

 

[Stephen230]

My main gripe is that if we accept football decisions are largely subjective, we should make the subjectivity easier to understand, not more difficult every bloody time the rules change, so that everyone watching can make up their own mind in the stadium or watching on TV. It won't eliminate discussion, controversy - nothing will - but at least everyone will know what they are talking about.

It doesn’t help that most football pundits who are literally paid to be ‘experts’ not only have no interest in trying to educate themselves on the latest laws and guidelines. But seem to wear it as a badge of honour that they “don’t understand the rules these days.”

Can you imagine experts in any other field almost boasting that they haven’t got a clue what they’re been paid to talk about, which a lot of ex pros seem to take great pleasure in doing?

 

[Saddleworth2]

My main gripe is that if we accept football decisions are largely subjective, we should make the subjectivity easier to understand, not more difficult every bloody time the rules change, so that everyone watching can make up their own mind in the stadium or watching on TV. It won't eliminate discussion, controversy - nothing will - but at least everyone will know what they are talking about.

Mike the up so you can hear every word. Then at least you could understand their decision making and it would be transparent. Everything is done in the shadows just now.

 

[its grim up north]

Umpire Watch. I know it's off topic but, watching the cricket there was an appeal for a run out by the keeper. On review it showed that as the ball hit the keepers gloves her elbow knocked off the bails. The keepers hands were a couple of inches short of the stumps.The batter was short of her ground by a fraction and given out. For our cricket umpires, I thought the ball in hand had to break the stumps. If it was, the batter would have made her ground.

 

[halfcenturyup]

Umpire Watch. I know it's off topic but, watching the cricket there was an appeal for a run out by the keeper. On review it showed that as the ball hit the keepers gloves her elbow knocked off the bails. The keepers hands were a couple of inches short of the stumps.The batter was short of her ground by a fraction and given out. For our cricket umpires, I thought the ball in hand had to break the stumps. If it was, the batter would have made her ground.

I thought so too. Btw, when did we start calling them batters? Haven't watched cricket for a long time, but is this new?

 

[The Clansman]

Umpire Watch. I know it's off topic but, watching the cricket there was an appeal for a run out by the keeper. On review it showed that as the ball hit the keepers gloves her elbow knocked off the bails. The keepers hands were a couple of inches short of the stumps.The batter was short of her ground by a fraction and given out. For our cricket umpires, I thought the ball in hand had to break the stumps. If it was, the batter would have made her ground.

Yep, it's out. So long as the ball is in the hand, the rest of the arm can be used to break the wicket (it's in law 29 "the wicket is broken by a fielder with his/her hand or arm, providing that the ball is held in the hand or hands so used, or in the hand of the arm so used")

 

[Sir peace frog]

fuck me who watches women's cricket

 

[ESP Blue]

I thought so too. Btw, when did we start calling them batters? Haven't watched cricket for a long time, but is this new?

I suppose you can't call the women Batsmen. How about Bat Girls ?

 

[Stephen230]

I thought so too. Btw, when did we start calling them batters? Haven't watched cricket for a long time, but is this new?

Game’s gone. They even let them wear long pants now and not those sexy little mini skirts they all used to wear.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I thought so too. Btw, when did we start calling them batters? Haven't watched cricket for a long time, but is this new?

I think it's to prevent the slip of the tongue and calling the women batsmen. So using an all-purpose (but ugly) term of batters.

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I thought so too. Btw, when did we start calling them batters? Haven't watched cricket for a long time, but is this new?

They have been doing it for some time now, in men's and women's cricket.

 

[The slaughtered lamb]

Doesn't matter how bad you think the Rat Face incident was. There was a line, which he crossed. You simply cannot lay a hand on an official.

That’s what I think. There was a slight difference between the two incidents but not enough for the hair splitting to give players of certain clubs a free pass. No controversy if Fernandes had been given a ban. It’s amusing to watch the squirming to justify degrees of action or inaction though.

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

Honestly, when you hear comments from the likes of Dermot how can anyone not think the alleged bias as a minimum towards certain clubs exists or at worst, the game is utterly bent?

Mitrovic and Fernandez incidents are exactly the same. Both angry at decisions, both screaming at an official and both our hands on yet only one is sanctioned and only one will get the book thrown at them and only one has these bent counts desperately making excuses for him.

And, if Fernandez had been punished by the FA retrospectively, I’d imagine Mitrovic doesn’t happen. Of course, he might just be a knob and it wouldn’t have made any difference, but the precedent looked to have been set, that you CAN touch an official and there will be no punishment.
Rugby League player gets 10 week ban for grabbing referee with a maximum sentence of 12 months. It’s almost like there’s a correlation between possible punishment and player behaviour! Who knew?

 

[its grim up north]

I thought so too. Btw, when did we start calling them batters? Haven't watched cricket for a long time, but is this new?

Think it's politically correct. It was women. No batsman anymore and batslady dont quite sound right. :-(

 

[its grim up north]

fuck me who watches women's cricket

:-))

 

[SebastianBlue]

My money would be on AHT. But I don't gamble so take it with a pinch of salt.

That’s a good shout, now that I think about it.

By the way, I think you were stretching the meaning of tolerant in your previous post. ;-)

 

[Stephen230]

That’s a good shout, now that I think about it.

By the way, I think you were stretching the meaning of tolerant in your previous post. ;-)

I had many discussions with Alan Harper’s ‘Tash, if that’s who you mean.

I think you’re overestimating my commitment to do whatever it is that would achieve, if you think I’m going to be firing up two devices and chatting away to myself in a thread.

 

[SebastianBlue]

I had many discussions with Alan Harper’s ‘Tash, if that’s who you mean.

I think you’re overestimating my commitment to do whatever it is that would achieve, if you think I’m going to be firing up two devices and chatting away to myself in a thread.

I would never overestimate you!