I know what you mean, but I am now imagining Michael Oliver surrounded by Fulham players, with the crowd whistling and jeering, shouting into his mic, "have you filled out form O11 correctly? Have you filled the form? I just need to know the forms are correctly filled and filed, and I'll give the goal."Without trying to be pedantic, they need to follow a structure for these decisions. The very first question should be "Is he in an offisde position?" Always. Because if the answer is "No", there is no point faffing around considering line of sight, for example. It was an easy question to answer in this case, but it won't always be and they should be made to answer that question and others clearly in a pre-defined sequence. If they can't remember it, give them a questionnaire. They shouldn't just be chucking ideas out randomly. No wonder mistakes are made.
I know what you mean, but I am now imagining Michael Oliver surrounded by Fulham players, with the crowd whistling and jeering, shouting into his mic, "have you filled out form O11 correctly? Have you filled the form? I just need to know the forms are correctly filled and filed, and I'll give the goal."
Well they have proved themselves incapable at best (likely corrupt) of being able to administer the laws of the game correctly. So however they do it, questionnaire, cheat sheet or getting the IFAB book on laws of the game out, they need to do something as its a clusterfuck!!I know what you mean, but I am now imagining Michael Oliver surrounded by Fulham players, with the crowd whistling and jeering, shouting into his mic, "have you filled out form O11 correctly? Have you filled the form? I just need to know the forms are correctly filled and filed, and I'll give the goal."
Without trying to be pedantic, they need to follow a structure for these decisions. The very first question should be "Is he in an offisde position?" Always. Because if the answer is "No", there is no point faffing around considering line of sight, for example. It was an easy question to answer in this case, but it won't always be and they should be made to answer that question and others clearly in a pre-defined sequence. If they can't remember it, give them a questionnaire. They shouldn't just be chucking ideas out randomly. No wonder mistakes are made.
The time pressure is immense.
It was a point I made before, that some decisions are just not easy no matter how many checklists and questionnaires you have - football has many many grey areas and that’s why officials and pundits who have been in the game all their lives will debate refs verdics and come to different conclusions.
That’s not to excuse some of the really simple ones they’ve got wrong.
When you hear some of that audio, it stands out that these are not the right people to be performing this type of work. And if this is whats released, image some of the stuff they’ve decided against releasing. You can only imagine how bad it is.No it isn't. Surgeons have immense time pressure, air traffic controllers have immense time pressure. These guys just have to consider an incident, compare it to the laws and make an assessment. Nobody dies if they get it wrong, and they will sometimes. But if they can't do it systematically, coolly and in a way that explains the decision making process thoroughly and clearly, then get people in who can do that.
Maybe referees don't have that sort of analytical skill, which would be a problem in itself if you ask me, but this stuff can normally be trained.
No it isn't. Surgeons have immense time pressure, air traffic controllers have immense time pressure. These guys just have to consider an incident, compare it to the laws and make an assessment. Nobody dies if they get it wrong, and they will sometimes. But if they can't do it systematically, coolly and in a way that explains the decision making process thoroughly and clearly, then get people in who can do that.
Maybe referees don't have that sort of analytical skill, which would be a problem in itself if you ask me, but this stuff can normally be trained.