[Archived] Never Mind Sacked!

[Baz]

Liverpool fan I know had some questions relating to their game yesterday. After Liverpool equalised, they 'scored' a second which was initially given by both the referee and linesman. 15 seconds later they then changed the decision to rule out the goal for handball (rightly). There is a strong suspicion the 4th official told the referee to change his decision. I have no idea if this is true or not, but if true then surely it's against the current rules? If not a good case for introducing technology?

[K-Hod]

Liverpool fan I know had some questions relating to their game yesterday. After Liverpool equalised, they 'scored' a second which was initially given by both the referee and linesman. 15 seconds later they then changed the decision to rule out the goal for handball (rightly). There is a strong suspicion the 4th official told the referee to change his decision. I have no idea if this is true or not, but if true then surely it's against the current rules? If not a good case for introducing technology?

I was saying to my dad the other day about the 4th official, it's almost like a security guard in a referee's outfit that gets berated by managers. Still have no idea of their purpose....

[JAL]

Don't be daft.

Why ?

Does any referee want to be conned ?

[PAFELL]

There was lots of talk about how the emotion/occasion etc would affect the players, but the person seemingly most affected by it all was the ref. Too scared to give a penalty against Bolton, or to book any of their players (despite the most blatent 'kicking the ball away' incident you'll ever see).

It was almost as though he believed a big decision against them would set back Muamba's recovery or something

Thought the same. Bolton supporter in my pub said Rovers were afraid to win, because of the emotion of the situation. He considered that if rovers had won, we would have seen headlines of, rovers add to boltons misery' etc etc.

The commentry on radio rovers said this was the worse referee they had seen for ages. He blatently made the wrong calls against Rovers.

Edited March 25, 2012 by PAFELL

[arbitro]

Why ?

Does any referee want to be conned ?

Of course referees don't want to be conned but the simple fact is they are and ultimately they accept that. If the match assessor and delegate saw that as a penalty he will lose marks (no consolation to us though). I will guarantee though that Andre Marriner can't remember that 'Martin Olssen took a dive' against Burnley two seasons ago. I thought he was average on Saturday but my gripe would be the ridiculously low amount of stoppage time he played in the second half. I counted three lengthy injuries, numerous substitutions and some blatant time wasting by the Bolton keeper. There should have been six minutes rather than the three he played.

[thenodrog]

Of course referees don't want to be conned but the simple fact is they are and ultimately they accept that. If the match assessor and delegate saw that as a penalty he will lose marks (no consolation to us though). I will guarantee though that Andre Marriner can't remember that 'Martin Olssen took a dive' against Burnley two seasons ago.

Marriner might not but I'm damned sure that Mike Dean would.

Must say if anybody conned me causing me to lose points / credibility etc to 20m viewers they'd get nowt ever again and I'd privately tell them as much before a match started. I'd wager that sort of 'don't get mad, get even' treatment and a nod and a wink attitude from the refereeing authorities on a general scale might go a long way to stop all diving and cheating in it's tracks.

[forumquizmaster]

Marriner might not but I'm damned sure that Mike Dean would.

Must say if anybody conned me causing me to lose points / credibility etc to 20m viewers they'd get nowt ever again and I'd privately tell them as much before a match started. I'd wager that sort of 'don't get mad, get even' treatment and a nod and a wink attitude from the refereeing authorities on a general scale might go a long way to stop all diving and cheating in it's tracks.

On this basis no club would ever get a penalty ever again because there are diving, cheating players everywhere.

[JAL]

Marriner might not but I'm damned sure that Mike Dean would.

Must say if anybody conned me causing me to lose points / credibility etc to 20m viewers they'd get nowt ever again and I'd privately tell them as much before a match started. I'd wager that sort of 'don't get mad, get even' treatment and a nod and a wink attitude from the refereeing authorities on a general scale might go a long way to stop all diving and cheating in it's tracks.

Mike Dean certainly remembers being conned by young Olsson and thats why just dont think its too clever to sing Martin Olsson took a dive especially if it means a referee missing out on a final appointment come the end of the season because of something like this.

[arbitro]

Marriner might not but I'm damned sure that Mike Dean would.

Must say if anybody conned me causing me to lose points / credibility etc to 20m viewers they'd get nowt ever again and I'd privately tell them as much before a match started. I'd wager that sort of 'don't get mad, get even' treatment and a nod and a wink attitude from the refereeing authorities on a general scale might go a long way to stop all diving and cheating in it's tracks.

It doesn't work like that. Wouldn't you be as bad as the cheats yourself if you took that attitude onto the pitch with you?

Having been at the sharp end for 500+ games at the top level you can't 'privately' say anything remotely like that.

Referees are fair game - the solution lies with the authorities who should be able to retrospectively punish players for clear acts of simulation that go unpunished during the game. Also managers and the PFA should be heard more in such cases.

Mike Dean certainly remembers being conned by young Olsson and thats why just dont think its too clever to sing Martin Olsson took a dive especially if it means a referee missing out on a final appointment come the end of the season because of something like this.

I can assure you that it doesn't work that way. I am pretty sure that none of the referees are even aware of the song.

[47er]

Having seen that Hoilett incident several times on replay, I cannot believe that the ref was not influenced by the occasion. He's human and maybe it was all too much for him.

He should apologise because he's cost us big-time.

[JAL]

I can assure you that it doesn't work that way. I am pretty sure that none of the referees are even aware of the song.

Keep singing it over and over again and they soon will.

Cryer knows Mike Deans thoughts on the Olsson incident and after the youth game last thursday he printed the chant in the Telegraph.

It doesnt make Blackburn Rovers look good, thats all i'm saying. Time to drop the song/chant at least from the stadiums.

[LeChuck]

On this basis no club would ever get a penalty ever again because there are diving, cheating players everywhere.

It would force clubs to deal with it in house, because it's blatantly obvious right now that clubs condone the behaviour if it wins them points.

[Steve Moss]

Marriner might not but I'm damned sure that Mike Dean would.

Must say if anybody conned me causing me to lose points / credibility etc to 20m viewers they'd get nowt ever again and I'd privately tell them as much before a match started.

All that would do is result in complaints about the referee being biased even before the ball was kicked. Add a witness or two and the "corruption" within the referee pool would be front page news for weeks.

I agree with you, though, that something needs to be done.

The first thing I would do is require the publication of the assessor's report on each referee at the end of the match. Shame is a powerful motivator, and both the center referee and the player should be on the receiving end.

Referees are fair game - the solution lies with the authorities who should be able to retrospectively punish players for clear acts of simulation that go unpunished during the game. Also managers and the PFA should be heard more in such cases.

I would very much like a after match panel of three referees reviewing the video footage and handing out retroactive cards at the end of each match. I don't care it it is for violent conduct, simulation, etc., it should be stamped out. And the match referee's statement that he "saw it" but decided not to act should count for nothing. The issue is stamping out the incentive to cheat, not protect the feelings of the center referee.

[arbitro]

Keep singing it over and over again and they soon will.

Cryer knows Mike Deans thoughts on the Olsson incident and after the youth game last thursday he printed the chant in the Telegraph.

It doesnt make Blackburn Rovers look good, thats all i'm saying. Time to drop the song/chant at least from the stadiums.

Unless you are going to tell me differently I doubt whether Andy Cryer has ever spoken to Mike Dean. Any referee at that level has to sign on to a code of practice and any media interviews have to be authorised by the PGMO.

Mike didn't send a Chelsea player off at Newcastle this season (Luiz I think) and saw the DVD and rang Pardew to apologise for his error. Pardew then went public about the call. Pardew accepted his apology and moved on. Not all referees would be as forthright in admitting their errors and some will even justify clear mistakes by convincing themselves that they are right. I have seen this at first hand and been in meetings and seminars where this has happened despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

[Tom]

There is good news though, the ref for next Monday?

Mr 'penalty to united' Webb!

[thenodrog]

Rum do this. As a retired Policeman I'd assume that Sergeant Webb when confronted in public by a yob with a face contorted by uncontrolled rage screaming at full pitch into his face "you are an effin wanka" would have made an arrest and taken the lout into custody. So why on earth did he just wag a finger at Paul Scholes after his foul mouthed outburst was caught full and in close up by Sky camera's?

Terrified of Fergies wrath no doubt but I wonder it the FA will dare do anything?

Edited April 3, 2012 by thenodrog

[K-Hod]

Rum do this. As a retired Policeman I'd assume that Sergeant Webb when confronted in public by a yob with a face contorted by uncontrolled rage screaming at full pitch into his face "you are an effin wanka" would have made an arrest and taken the lout into custody. So why on earth did he just wag a finger at Paul Scholes after his foul mouthed outburst was caught full and in close up by Sky camera's?

Terrified of Fergies wrath no doubt but I wonder it the FA will dare do anything?

Think we both know the answer to that....

He's a disgrace to refereeing, the fact that he refereed a WC final is alarming to say the least.

[Stuart]

Paul Scholes is untouchable. If he receives any kind of ban, he'll just retire again.

Nothing to lose.

[Tom]

Overall Webb wasn't overly pro united I thought, scholes should have been booked but it was never a foul, he also didn't book hoilett for kicking the ball away and had a small chance of giving them a penalty, he doesn't normally pass those up

[JAL]

Our French central midfielder and Hanley could easily have been sent off last night so lets not go there about a Scholes rant.

[thenodrog]

Overall Webb wasn't overly pro united I thought, scholes should have been booked but it was never a foul,

If his offence is deemed simple 'dissent' then the punishment is a yellow card, if his offence is deemed 'foul and abusive language' the punishment is a red card and thats that. A yellow cannot be awarded for foul and abusive language.

http://www.wfms.org/Other/Football/FIFA/law12.html

[bluebruce]

Overall Webb wasn't overly pro united I thought, scholes should have been booked but it was never a foul, he also didn't book hoilett for kicking the ball away and had a small chance of giving them a penalty, he doesn't normally pass those up

There was a foul Scholes made earlier than that that he should DEFINITELY have been booked for at least.

[arbitro]

There was a foul Scholes made earlier than that that he should DEFINITELY have been booked for at least.

100% correct. All tactical/technical fouls which deny the opposing team any potential advantage should be cautioned. This is where too many referees are found wanting, probably due to a lack of understanding of the game as opposed to the Laws.

[The_Expert]

100% correct. All tactical/technical fouls which deny the opposing team any potential advantage should be cautioned. This is where too many referees are found wanting, probably due to a lack of understanding of the game as opposed to the Laws.

's funny - the number of people on here who think refereeing is simply a question of rolling up to a game and having a go... You don't get anywhere as a referee without taking part in thousands of games, during which time you see it all. The advantage that most referees have over the mindless yobs plying their trade as players, is that decision making and evaluation of complex situations quickly, objectively and fairly requires a modicum of intelligence and a good degree of integrity. Intelligence and integrity being two of the key characteristics sadly lacking at ALL levels in the sorry spectacle that football has become.

The lack of understanding is entirely on the side of the spectator (who if they had any balls would pick up the whistle and have a go) and definitely on he part of the players who, in my experience even at the highest levels in the game, refuse to study and abide by the Laws of the Game.

To say top level referees lack understanding of the game is complete B0!!ox.

[arbitro]

's funny - the number of people on here who think refereeing is simply a question of rolling up to a game and having a go... You don't get anywhere as a referee without taking part in thousands of games, during which time you see it all. The advantage that most referees have over the mindless yobs plying their trade as players, is that decision making and evaluation of complex situations quickly, objectively and fairly requires a modicum of intelligence and a good degree of integrity. Intelligence and integrity being two of the key characteristics sadly lacking at ALL levels in the sorry spectacle that football has become.

The lack of understanding is entirely on the side of the spectator (who if they had any balls would pick up the whistle and have a go) and definitely on he part of the players who, in my experience even at the highest levels in the game, refuse to study and abide by the Laws of the Game.

To say top level referees lack understanding of the game is complete B0!!ox.

Having refereed probably 1000 games and 500 of these involving professional clubs I think I know the refereeing business. I have also worked with all the current Select Group of referees in various forms. I also played in a tough competition for several years before injury forced me to give up. Trust me there is a complete understanding of the game by a lot (not all) of referees. I have been in seminars and changing rooms all over the country and disagreed with many of my then colleagues. I have also spoken to many players who told me that they have to change the way they play when certain referees were involved in their games. They were wary of making a challenge in case it was mistimed and certain referees couldn't understand that.

So I will reiterate that too many referees don't know the game but can probably recite Law in parrot fashion. There is a distinct difference between the two.