Referees/Officials

[St.Pauli support]

Never happen. Mike Riley won't allow it."

Is Riley some kind of God then?
Somebody has to ask some questions, publically. Who could do it?

It seems the media are having a huge part of the game. The German football market is dominated by public TV groups, controlled by political parties and financed by public tax, about 9 bn EUR per year. They have an educational mandate as well.
UK football market is, if I am correct, mainly dominated by private companies only committed to profit.

What I find strange is a global football industry that tries to improve the market share with a product that stinks:
- many grounds having quite a graveyard atmosphere
- refs taking strange decisions not in line with a basic idea of "fair play"
- media and pundit coverage which are more and more manipulating instead of informing.

Is the end product fitted to a consuming bunch of numpties then, which is us? :-/

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

Oh, I agree. That was my point - both on or both off, but consistent. In this case, both off would be more correct.

I think it's moving towards forcing the refs to explain themselves, but very slowly.

Well this is where a 4th official should have the power to relay anything missed by the referee, the issue for me here with the 2 Rojo challenges is that they were both committed in the area of an opposition player who had the ball, surely either the referee or one of the linesman should have clocked the challenge committed and flagged for it.

If neither of the linesmen or the referee see the offence then a fourth official who has access to a screen that is showing the game via Sky or whoever can identify a missed red/yellow card offence and communicate to the referee via the earpiece.

The FA for me are cowards in the 2 Rojo offences because they know the damage that those tackles can cause if he had connected fully with the players leg. To actually get away with it in 2 games back to back with no punishment is a joke, but then the FA have been a laughing stock since I can remember

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Well this is where a 4th official should have the power to relay anything missed by the referee, the issue for me here with the 2 Rojo challenges is that they were both committed in the area of an opposition player who had the ball, surely either the referee or one of the linesman should have clocked the challenge committed and flagged for it.

If neither of the linesmen or the referee see the offence then a fourth official who has access to a screen that is showing the game via Sky or whoever can identify a missed red/yellow card offence and communicate to the referee via the earpiece.

The FA for me are cowards in the 2 Rojo offences because they know the damage that those tackles can cause if he had connected fully with the players leg. To actually get away with it in 2 games back to back with no punishment is a joke, but then the FA have been a laughing stock since I can remember

These are excerpts from the role of the 4th official:

• He assists the referee to control the match in accordance with the Laws of the Game. The referee, however, retains the authority to decide on all points connected with play.

• After the match, the fourth official must submit a report to the appropriate authorities on any misconduct or other incident that occurred out of the view of the referee and the assistant referees. The fourth official must advise the referee and his assistants of any report being made - He has the authority to inform the referee of irresponsible behaviour by any occupant of the technical area

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...reserve-assistant-referee#4CIFQPR5bqeolgwT.99

What you are suggesting is a 5th official. Frankly, if 4 of them can't see something, then there's something going wrong. For those, I don't believe that they all missed it, but the referee is the one who chooses what to do. In that, he was wrong twice.

Interestingly, Hackett has said that all reviews and the assessor who stops by to discuss post-match have all been done away with.

 

[BlueMoonz1977]

These are excerpts from the role of the 4th official:

• He assists the referee to control the match in accordance with the Laws of the Game. The referee, however, retains the authority to decide on all points connected with play.

• After the match, the fourth official must submit a report to the appropriate authorities on any misconduct or other incident that occurred out of the view of the referee and the assistant referees. The fourth official must advise the referee and his assistants of any report being made - He has the authority to inform the referee of irresponsible behaviour by any occupant of the technical area

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules...reserve-assistant-referee#4CIFQPR5bqeolgwT.99

What you are suggesting is a 5th official. Frankly, if 4 of them can't see something, then there's something going wrong. For those, I don't believe that they all missed it, but the referee is the one who chooses what to do. In that, he was wrong twice.

Interestingly, Hackett has said that all reviews and the assessor who stops by to discuss post-match have all been done away with.

so in essence then, firstly the referee bottled the decision if he saw it, then possibly one of the linesmen who could have spotted it didn't, and then a fourth official has definitely not done his job or maybe he did report it ?? if that is the case then surely the report would have highlighted these challenges - so who does it sit with then to act - The FA and if so they too have bottled it

baffling and snide spring to mind from the authorities

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Is Riley some kind of God then?
Somebody has to ask some questions, publically. Who could do it?

It seems the media are having a huge part of the game. The German football market is dominated by public TV groups, controlled by political parties and financed by public tax, about 9 bn EUR per year. They have an educational mandate as well.
UK football market is, if I am correct, mainly dominated by private companies only committed to profit.

What I find strange is a global football industry that tries to improve the market share with a product that stinks:
- many grounds having quite a graveyard atmosphere
- refs taking strange decisions not in line with a basic idea of "fair play"
- media and pundit coverage which are more and more manipulating instead of informing.

Is the end product fitted to a consuming bunch of numpties then, which is us? :-/

Riley is just the faceless minion who manages the refs (yes, I think his role is 'manager'). He is essentially safe unless the PL decide it's time to make him take the blame. The media can ask questions but don't want to rock the cosy boat.
An ex-ref, although one with some black marks against his own name, a few months ago alleged that he had been instructed to change his match report on what had occurred to allow further action to be taken. Who investigated it? The refs organisation did it themselves, and unsurprisingly found nothing wrong.

You're right. The majority of the TV rights are commercial companies who have ulterior motives. e.g. Sky used it to drive their expansion in the Far East, and BT used it to boost their cable/web network in part to beat Sky into the ground for moving in on broadband delivery. Even the national team's away matches are on Sky now.
The BBC have the highlights rights, but no live matches, partly because they can't afford to bid as much as the satellite companies, and the governments over the last 25 years have made it steadily harder for them to afford what they do.

The clubs are happy apparently, the media tell everyone how great it is (except every two years when there's an international tournament to have a pratfall in), and the only way to break that cycle is for everyone to stop watching.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

so in essence then, firstly the referee bottled the decision if he saw it, then possibly one of the linesmen who could have spotted it didn't, and then a fourth official has definitely not done his job or maybe he did report it ?? if that is the case then surely the report would have highlighted these challenges - so who does it sit with then to act - The FA and if so they too have bottled it

baffling and snide spring to mind from the authorities

It has to come down to the ref, as he decides which card to use. he acted, and the rules prevent re-reffing it.

Hence if the ref is so minded, all he needs to do is use a yellow card and claim he saw it fully, and the whole thing is closed. There is no further path available to pursue it, and only the refs can pursue their own.

In this case, any failing of the 4th official is only in not advising strongly a red card, assuming he didn't but was ignored. That's the same as the linesmen, and covered by the first bullet point.

 

[jonmcity]

We just need refs to give what they see, not think which club the player belongs to, or the manager he has, or what the press are going to Say.
Full honesty is all we ask for.

 

[quiet_riot]

I thought Martin Atkinson was excellent tonight again. By far the best of the bunch.

The guy who gave offside from a throw?

 

[TBooksbluearmy]

As all managers or their assistants have to give an interview after the match in a press conference. It is about time that the referees and their assistants also have to come the same press conference and give an interview, to explain any dubious bookings or sending off/s. How many times has it been said by a co-commentator said that if that player had not all ready been booked that would have been booked. Surely a booking for a foul is a booking for a foul whether that player has been booked or not.

 

[rnblade]

Fairness, Honesty, impartiality & unbiased control of a match is all we ask for from a match official. Is that too much to ask for???
If I behaved the way some of these clowns do when I umpire hockey, I would have my license revoked.