[Archived] Reffing Effs

[RovertheHill]

Is it me or are refs getting worse? I thought the guy against Spurs was bad but Bennett yesterday took it to a new low. And can somebody answer me this? Tugay got sent off against Spurs for being the last man back. David James and Mark Schwarzer both conceded penalties yesterday and both got yellows. Notwithstanding the fact that it should have been Ronaldo sent off for his outrageous dive, the fact the ref gave the penalty means he should have sent the keeper off. How is that consistent?

There is a precedent for good refereeing in professional sport, and it's rugby. Anyway, not just a moan - here's my blueprint for improving the situation and it borrow some things from rugby

1) All referees MUST have played the game at least 3 levels below the level they are refereeing and not just have been the school spanner. So a premiership ref must have been at least a division 4 (old money) pro, a championship ref must have been at least a conference semi-pro etc.

2) The video ref is available for difficult decisions that have caused play to stop. If play continues, it is up to the ref.

3) Only the captains are allowed to question the referee. Punishable by 10-minute sin bin

4) Cheating and diving to be retrospectively punished - including retrospective cards, bans, and even points deducted for serial offenders (Mr C. R. of Portugal to take note...)

5) Finally, as part of the Sky deal I believe clubs are obliged for managers or assistants to present themselves for the after-match press conference. Referees must also do the same.

[Lathund]

I'm not sure about my opinion on #2, but I agree with 3-5 and disagree with 1.

What would that really accomplish? A ref that's been reffing since he was a kid has "played" as many, if not more, games than a player who's been playing as long, and thus has similar experience. You obviously disagree on this, but I don't think the referee knows any less about the game just because he's wearing a black shirt on the pitch. Having only former players as referees would also mean that there would be less referees around because not all referees would've been able to play at a higher level. And those who do make it won't be around as long. Many of them wouldn't even start reffing until they were 32+, and then they'd need training and experience before they could ref at a high level.

[thenodrog]

1) All referees MUST have played the game at least 3 levels below the level they are refereeing and not just have been the school spanner. So a premiership ref must have been at least a division 4 (old money) pro, a championship ref must have been at least a conference semi-pro etc.

Maybe but also apply it to the rule makers or meddling rule CHANGERS as they should be referred to. Tugays sending off had nothing to do with intention, serious foul play, dangerous play etc etc. Those more justifiable terms have been superceded by some stupid (although apparently flexible dependent on who is involved ) 'Last man' ruling.

I'm not sure about my opinion on #2, but I agree with 3-5 and disagree with 1.

What would that really accomplish? A ref that's been reffing since he was a kid has "played" as many, if not more, games than a player who's been playing as long, and thus has similar experience.

Maybe it would make em realise things like .......... The single biggest fauly with todays rules is that the term 'unintentional' has been reduced to meaning sweet FA.

1. it is impossible to run, jump and play with ones arms firmly held to ones sides.

2. Trailing legs a la Tugay and Neill (v Carragher) tucked under the player making the tackle cannot be taken off and left at the side of the pitch. (the late Derek Dooley excepted).

3. People can frequently go to ground without being fouled simply to earn advantage.

4. Handball is not handball if it is inadvertant and if the hand has not moved but rather been hit by a fast moving ball. Neither is handball handball if the 'offending' player is looking away.

etc etc

[gumboots]

The most serious problem seems to be consistency, not between refs but from the same ref in the same game. You could see how angry Mark Hughes was with the ref yesterday, not because he booked our players but because he didn't then book Fulham players making tackles that looked every bit as bad if not worse. Anyone can make a mistake if the game is played at pace and you are not in the perfect position to see and we all understand that but to penalise one side and not the other winds fans up and creates the wrong atmosphere on the pitch. And how was Bennett taken in by the Fulham players going to ground to stop play every time Rovers looked like they had a chance to break away?

[Fife Rover]

Mark Hughes is supposed to be having a meeting with the referees boss at Brockhall sometime soon. Does anybody know when? Also I hope MH is allowed to discuss freely what his concerns are without getting pulled up for his opinions. The ability to show TV clips of the various contentious decisions with a free discussion on each one would also be good, but will it be allowed to happen?

Edited December 3, 2006 by Fife Rover

[roversmum]

If Sparky wheels out all the clips of dubious decisions so far this term there won't be any time for discussion.

Regarding the Fulham players, I wondered how Football First would manage to find an hour of play without any of them being filmed rolling about on the ground, and I was right, they couldn't .

[RovertheHill]

Same again. If the two keepers were not sending off offences then why was Henchoz? Pathetic double standards

[todd_could_take_tyson]

Cmon henchoz deserved to go, Martins would have had a goal scoring chance with his pace.

[James No. 7]

Mark Hughes is supposed to be having a meeting with the referees boss at Brockhall sometime soon. Does anybody know when? Also I hope MH is allowed to discuss freely what his concerns are without getting pulled up for his opinions. The ability to show TV clips of the various contentious decisions with a free discussion on each one would also be good, but will it be allowed to happen?

I don't know if this is the meeting or not, but he did mention a two hour chat with Keith Hackett on Radio Rovers and mentioned it again in this article.

"I had a chat with (referees' chief) Keith Hackett for a couple of hours this week."

[ABBEY]

if derprat today wanted to be even for both sides why book mcarthy for kicking ball in ne6 when the whistle had gone butb not book the skunk for keeping the ball in exactly the sAME spot.we go on about refs but i honestly think we are being stitched up for some obscure reason

[Jordan]

Just watching the Lazio Roma match and something quite strange has happened.

The Roma keeper gave a penalty away and the referee pointed to the spot. He then went and spoke with the assistant and gave the keeper the red card. The Roma keeper then complained the ref went back over to the assistant they spoke for a bit and then the ref produced the yellow card and showed it to the keeped. The Roma keeper stayed on the pitch.

[gumboots]

See Ian Pearce yesterday only get a yellow card for handling in the area when the ball was heading straight for the goal? How can that not be a clear goal scoring opportunity? It's that word consistency again, isn't it? We don't mind being harshly treated if everyone else gets the same harsh treatment. Last man by the way is a media interpretation. Clear goalscoring opportunity or some such formula is what it says in the rules and they are 2 very different things

[USABlue]

"I had a chat with (referees' chief) Keith Hackett for a couple of hours this week."

Well based on what I have read on the performance of yesterdays officials Sparky must have said something to upset Hackett

Also, "clear goal scoring opportunity" No such thing for our lot

Edited December 11, 2006 by USABlue

[CAPT KAYOS]

Maybe but also apply it to the rule makers or meddling rule CHANGERS as they should be referred to. Tugays sending off had nothing to do with intention, serious foul play, dangerous play etc etc. Those more justifiable terms have been superceded by some stupid (although apparently flexible dependent on who is involved

Totally Tot agree TND.

Too many rules 'interpreted' in my book.

Black and white, black and white, black and white.

What really annoye me more though is there are ruling bodies that govern the numpties in the middle - there is so much outrage about what is what etc yet nothing seems to be done about anything for the better except the constant harping on about `bloody video cameras'.

What has happened to good old common sense and reading of a game ffs? Most in the game know what a genuine tackle is etc but more importance seems to be given up to stupid decisions like taking your shirt off yet and what could have happened instead of what has happened. If

All of it is really getting me to the end of my tether and my enjoyment of the game is fast deteriorating much the same as alot who don't go watching anymore. Players managers and refs and their governing bodies all have a part to play it getting this sorted - by this I mean managers punishng players , players getting back to concentrating on football rather than playacting and cheating, berating refs... - refs to question the stupid rulings and black and white areas etc.

If Henchoz was a sending off - why wasn't Lehman for Arsenal or in fact both of em especially the shennanigans that went on yesterday.

All of it is spoiling the game - most of it down to money.

Also with Abbey on this , there is a conspiracy somebody does not want lil'old Blackburn in the Premier League (Media)

[AggyBlue]

Also with Abbey on this , there is a conspiracy somebody does not want lil'old Blackburn in the Premier League (Media)

We are obviously an embarrassment to the premier league, half empty stadiums isn't the image they want to portray.

Who knows :ph34r:

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

I haven't always been the biggest fan of Graham 'Publicity' Poll, with his theatrical gestures, nods and winks in front of the camera, but I found myself agreeing with him today when he said that the FA failed to protect him in the row he had with Chelsea.

In Chelsea's Premiership match against Spurs at White Hart Lane last November, Poll dismissed John Terry for two yellow cards. After the match Terry said that Poll had changed his story over why he had been sent off. Frank Lampard and Jose Mourinho also waded into the row, suggesting that Poll had sent Terry off to teach Chelsea a lesson.

Poll felt that the FA failed to back him in the wake of Chelsea's criticisms. Poll indicated today that John Terry's position as England captain had unduly influenced the FA. As Poll said: "So they're left with the confrontation of England captain versus English referee. It shouldn't be that. It should be that whoever the player is, if he has done something wrong, he should be dealt with properly."

I agree with Poll that nobody should get special treatment from the FA, irrespective of whether they are England captain or not.

Poll said "The FA are inherently weak. If you lie about a referee you should get punished. The Chelsea case, which ran from 5 November to 12 January, curtailed my career by one season. My credibility was stripped not by Chelsea trying it on but by the FA letting them try it on. My anger is at the FA not at Chelsea."

Poll claimed that FA chief executive Brian Barwick did nothing more than "huff and puff" when he dodged the issue of John Terry accusing the referee of telling lies.

Graham Poll's interview with "Inside Sport" will be shown on BBC One at 11.05pm this coming Monday, 4th June. When I heard that 'Publicity' Poll was about to retire, I didn't think that it would be the last time we'd see him on camera....

Edited May 30, 2007 by Anti Euro Smiths Fan

[thenodrog]

Poll said "The FA are inherently weak. If you lie about a referee you should get punished. The Chelsea case, which ran from 5 November to 12 January, curtailed my career by one season. My credibility was stripped not by Chelsea trying it on but by the FA letting them try it on. My anger is at the FA not at Chelsea."

Don't think his gaffs at the World Cup helped him much either.

for what it's worth ... and I do not like Terry one bit.... I don't think that he should have been sent off that day.

Edited May 30, 2007 by thenodrog

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

Pedersen and Hughes line up to slate Saturday's ref

Whilst ref Alan Wiley didn't have a good game, I think Rovers were still a bit fortunate not to lose the match, because Andy Johnson's "goal" might well have been allowed by other officials.

As for MGP, well his comments are fair enough - but perhaps he should be concentrating solely on his own performances, which have left much to be desired this season. He hasn't scored a Premiership goal since a 90th minute free-kick against Sheffield United over a year ago.

When he's not scoring any goals, MGP's contribution can be somewhat limited. In fact, his passing, dribbling and crossing can sometimes be inept. But if in doubt, blame the ref....

[trueblue]

Pedersen and Hughes line up to slate Saturday's ref

Whilst ref Alan Wiley didn't have a good game, I think Rovers were still a bit fortunate not to lose the match, because Andy Johnson's "goal" might well have been allowed by other officials.

As for MGP, well his comments are fair enough - but perhaps he should be concentrating solely on his own performances, which have left much to be desired this season. He hasn't scored a Premiership goal since a 90th minute free-kick against Sheffield United over a year ago.

When he's not scoring any goals, MGP's contribution can be somewhat limited. In fact, his passing, dribbling and crossing can sometimes be inept. But if in doubt, blame the ref....

You're not suggesting for one minute that MGP is blaming the referees for his twelve month lack of form are you ?

[Anti Euro Smiths Fan]

You're not suggesting for one minute that MGP is blaming the referees for his twelve month lack of form are you ?

No, I was thinking more in general terms that some players are quick to criticise refs for poor displays, rather than looking at their own poor performances.

[roversmum]

Morten's got a point though. If you get grabbed by the neck you would expect your opponent to get his marching orders. Knowing Wiley's 'form' with us if things had been the other way round our player would have been red carded immediately.

[trueblue]

Agreed Mum... all the games that 'Wonker' Wiley has officiated for us have turned out to be episodes of the Alan Wiley Show (and blow the rules and regulations)

[LeChuck]

Agreed Mum... all the games that 'Wonker' Wiley has officiated for us have turned out to be episodes of the Alan Wiley Show (and blow the rules and regulations)

You seem to be forgetting that Dunn should have been sent off, Ooijer flattened Johnson in the area and Everton had a fairly legitimate goal disallowed.

You'd think Hughes would want to try and get on the right side of the officials, so why he's complaining after we got the rub of the green I'll never know.

[roversmum]

Football First clearly showed that Benni was pulled down from behind as he was about to shoot. It was fast but the camera caught the incident. Carsley also got away with quite a few fouls as did some of the others. To be honest I had given up hope of a result after the first fifteen minutes given the way things were going. And yes, Dunny did get lucky - when will he learn?

Regarding the 'goal' - I just wish they'd stop mucking about with the rules so we all knew where we were

[modes98]

Football First clearly showed that Benni was pulled down from behind as he was about to shoot.

His shirt was clearly pulled which took him off balance. In real life i couldn't see it but it's very clear on the replay and your instincts say that a top striker would not go down in that position, with a goal almost certain.