[Archived] The Standard of refereeing

[Tom]

I thought I'd start this topic to get people's views on this. To me the officiating these days is shocking but are referees getting worse or is it the rules of the game changing and giving them little option?

For me Yakubu's possibly was a red today (by the book at least although v harsh IMO) yet there are so many things he missed and so many inconsitencies, Formica hauled down on the counter attack produced no yellow card but Pedersen got one for a meaty but honest tackle.

The key for me as Ferguson just said on MOTD is clarity and consistency, today the referee let many handballs go yet I believe he was the same one that penalised Nzonzi V Norwich for far less and last week Kompany was sent off whilst a few days later Glenn Johnson gets away with the same tackle.

Some insight is needed as similar incidents are treat differently game on game.

So who is to blame, the referee's or the system or both?

[80s russ]

If it had been Lampard/ Gerrard it wouldnt have been red. Didnt think it was red on Ewood still dont now

[DE.]

Two big problems with refereeing atm:

1) They're too easily influenced by various factors - players waving imaginary cards in their faces (Rooney when Kompany got sent off as a recent example), home crowd/home team pressure, big club pressure... the referees and their assistants need to be stronger.

2) The rules don't seem to be very clear and too much is left to the ref's interpretation. The playing field has to become more even, if a two footed tackle is a red then a ref must ALWAYS produce a red for the offence, no inconsistencies. Similarly if they're going to say the "last man foul" is a red then again it needs to be applied in every instance. Why was Zat Knight, for instance, only given a yellow in today's game for committing a last man foul? Don't even get me started on the ridiculously convoluted offside rule.

Until better consistency is established across the board people will continue to moan about refs as individuals and not about the rules themselves. There are two ways to help the refs out: use technology as practically every other sport does, and make the rules clearer and apply them fairly regardless of circumstances.

[ben_the_beast]

For me Yakubu's red was no worse than the foul by Savic on Agger when he gave away a penalty in the league cup semi. He wasn't sent off. I can't even remember whether or not he was booked. They were however near identical challenges.

Yes Yakubu's foot was high but thats where the ball was. He was simply going for it. Danny Murphys foot went just as high. Just so happens he got there first and was caught. Stupid decision in my opinion. Whilst we are at it does anybody else disagree with specific charges being attached to red cards thus meaning the Yak now gets a three match ban, whilst a player who has actively gone out to injure another player with a shocking leg breaking challenge would suffer the same fate. The punishment definitely does not fit the crime in this and many other incidents.

Having watched MOTD tonight it was unbelievable how inconsistent the refereeing was. Fergie hit the nail on the head with his comments.

[Seggie]

I dont think anybody knows the rules anymore. to me that was a 50/50 there to be won, even the Fulham players looked like they felt sorry for the Yak. The rules are being made up as they go along these days. Leg Breakers should be punished, assaults should be punished, delibrate handball on the line should be punished, preventing a clear goalscoring oppertunity outside the penalty box should be punished all by red cards with different bans for each offence. The other big problem refs have is yellow cards they seem to be given for even less these days too. I perhaps think its time to look at less game changing punishments for the less serious red cards especially since there seems to be a ridiculous one at least once a week these days. Sin Bins may be the answer to this.

[thenodrog]

For me Yakubu's red was no worse than the foul by Savic on Agger when he gave away a penalty in the league cup semi. He wasn't sent off. I can't even remember whether or not he was booked. They were however near identical challenges.

Yes Yakubu's foot was high but thats where the ball was. He was simply going for it. Danny Murphys foot went just as high. Just so happens he got there first and was caught. Stupid decision in my opinion. Whilst we are at it does anybody else disagree with specific charges being attached to red cards thus meaning the Yak now gets a three match ban, whilst a player who has actively gone out to injure another player with a shocking leg breaking challenge would suffer the same fate. The punishment definitely does not fit the crime in this and many other incidents.

Having watched MOTD tonight it was unbelievable how inconsistent the refereeing was. Fergie hit the nail on the head with his comments.

They'll never cure inconsistency without video evidence and a 5th official are introduced. Unfortunately the shoe is currently on the other foot as video evidence from every match and every angle is replayed to the viewing public on TV within hours of the event and used to criticise incorrect decisions rather than remedy them. Tonight MoTD compared decisions made across the country which produced much variation and anomaly. Refereees don't help themselves either by rarely admitting mistakes when they have had the chance to view the incidents afterwards. They need to and they should do.

As for the rules and Yak's red card.... For me it was a yellow and thats it.Two players converging at speed on a bouncing ball is always likely to end in a similar incident, if either pulled out they would have been admonished by manager, teammates and supporters alike for not being committed to the team. Fact is that it was a high speed collision that ended with Yakubu clattering Murphy. Note the word 'collision'. Neither players fault just one of those things in football. It was obviously not intentional and that imo is the key (just as handball has to be intentional). Red cards should be reserved for intentional serious foul play not accidental collision. If it was to be adjudged red then Wigans Jones should surely now be serving time at HM pleasure for gbh on Paul Robinson! Jones was not even cautioned remember for an action which saw his studs rake down Robbo's forehead at least 2 feet higher in the air.

Referees and the law makers have to get it in their thick heads that reducing one team to 10 men or less produces an unequal contest and that is something that should be avoided at all costs. The spectator should be considered first and foremost! I've opined in the past that referees should have another two cards of different colour. One for a 10 min sin bin, and one for a compulsory substitution. The latter would have been punishment enough for Yak, the team and the supporters. The fact that we won with 10 men is an exeption to the rule.

Unfortunately there is currently a plethora of over zealous refereeing caused by the recent media frenzy of the ludicrous Kompany dismissal and the equally ludicrous inaction over Glenn Johnson's two footer. It will of course die a death as the media find some other witchhunt when this one is no longer selling papers or provoking people into costly radio phone in fees. God knows why but we have cultivated an overly judgemental society but we have. Racism is another 'fashionable' issue which is producing skewed judgement by authorities who seem incapable of producing responsible and consistent judgement.

I dont think anybody knows the rules anymore. to me that was a 50/50 there to be won, even the Fulham players looked like they felt sorry for the Yak.

Some did but I thought Zamora was applauding the ref.

[arbitro]

As an ex referee (probably over 1000 games) the real frustration for me is the inconsistency we see. It's difficult to get collective consistency but the very least I expect is for the referee to at least be consistent in the same game. The way the Law is worded means that the referee was correct to send off Yakubu. The question of 'endangering the safety of an opponent' is the main criteria to be used in instances like this so from that perspective I do believe that the referee will be supported. Late on Senderos quite deliberately and cynically chopped down Junior who was in full flight. Now if that wasn't 'endangering the safety of an opponent' I don't know what was. Comparing the two incidents the latter was, in my opinion most likely to cause a serious injury. Maybe it was because Junior didn't roll around and Murphy did. This same referee gave a penalty against us at Norwich for an unintentional hand-ball. Yesterday I can recall at least three times when players deliberately handled the ball but no free-kick. How on earth Murphy wasn't cautioned yesterday was a mystery to me but as he was 'assisting' the referee all day in his decision making maybe the referee would have felt guilty. There were many other examples of his lack of consistency which frustrated both players and fans alike.

The Select Group (Premier League) referees meet on a regular basis and go through many of the previous rounds of game and study key incidents. I have been in some of these gatherings and the way they back each other is incredible. Collectively they decide what a sending off should be for and (with some assistance from poorly written Laws) they try and implement these. The problem is that there is such a scatter-gun approach that there is bound to be inconsistencies. For example we say Kompany sent off and Johnson stay on for challenges which were almost identical within a few days.

There is also an inherent fear among referees that they will get marked down for getting big, match changing decisions wrong. The mentality then becomes that they don't give the benefit of doubt to the player but selfishly think more about their marks than the good of the game as a spectacle. These guys earn big money these days and their accountability to the games stakeholders is almost negligible. Any manager can speak to the referee after a mandatory 'cooling off' period (30 minutes) but for me they referee should have to face the press after the game to explain his decisions. At the moment they are not mandated to do so but I genuinely believe that there would be more trust in them if they came out and were prepared to justify their decisions.

[American Rover12]

I've often wondered if having the ref wear a head/helmet cam so we can see what they saw at key moments. While I don't think they should have to face the press, I do think they should/have to justify key choices in a public statement.

[Stuart]

For me Yakubu's possibly was a red today (by the book at least although v harsh IMO) yet there are so many things he missed and so many inconsitencies, Formica hauled down on the counter attack produced no yellow card but Pedersen got one for a meaty but honest tackle.

This comparison REALLY annoyed me at the time.

I'm convinced some refs still see us as bully-boys when deciding on free-kick/yellow card/red card for us. The idea being no-one would bat an eyelid if Rovers get yellow cards and they can make their stats look good.

[RTM08]

I've often wondered if having the ref wear a head/helmet cam so we can see what they saw at key moments. While I don't think they should have to face the press, I do think they should/have to justify key choices in a public statement.

Also maybe have one of the mics like they do in Rugby? So that whilst they are discussing their reasons on the pitch everyone will know why it has been given?

[Gogger]

Shocking to see Derry not receiving a red for that tackle on cabaye. DOnt understand the logic of Foy, red for KOmpany but an assault is perfectly legal.

[Tom]

This is where the rule falls down, Yak sent off for risking a players safety or whatever yet Derry HAS just injured Cabaye so surely thats more dangerous?

[American Rover12]

Also maybe have one of the mics like they do in Rugby? So that whilst they are discussing their reasons on the pitch everyone will know why it has been given?

Yes, if only to hear the abuse players give the man in the center and we can see how crap their respect campaign really is.

[McClarky]

I don't think refereeing is getting worse and personally I am sick to death of hearing about it. There is so much football on TV now and so many pundits talking about it that all they can think of is discussing decisions rather than the game itself. Match of the day gets more boring every week as Hanson and co show you 50 slow motion replays of a banale incident to prove how bad the referee was and give managers a ready made excuse for their own ineptness. Interviewers should challenege managers more to explain why they made certain decision rather than just allowing them to blame the ref every time they lose. The worst of all is Alan Green on the radio. he commentates more on the referee than he does on the game itself.

The ref has 1 look at an incident in real time and has to make a snap decision based on this. there's no benefit in people sat ab hour later in a studio watching it time and time again to try and prove he was wrong, they should accept that people make mistakes and just get over it.

Brian Clough had it right years ago when he had a right go at Motty on TV for not showing enough action and spending too much time talking about it.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Swansea v Arsenal today. If that's a penalty my d--ks a kipper.

[Kelbo]

I don't think refereeing is getting worse and personally I am sick to death of hearing about it. There is so much football on TV now and so many pundits talking about it that all they can think of is discussing decisions rather than the game itself. Match of the day gets more boring every week as Hanson and co show you 50 slow motion replays of a banale incident to prove how bad the referee was and give managers a ready made excuse for their own ineptness. Interviewers should challenege managers more to explain why they made certain decision rather than just allowing them to blame the ref every time they lose. The worst of all is Alan Green on the radio. he commentates more on the referee than he does on the game itself.

The ref has 1 look at an incident in real time and has to make a snap decision based on this. there's no benefit in people sat ab hour later in a studio watching it time and time again to try and prove he was wrong, they should accept that people make mistakes and just get over it.

Brian Clough had it right years ago when he had a right go at Motty on TV for not showing enough action and spending too much time talking about it.

In the words of one ex FIFA official and top class referee (Clough described him as a players Ref) Refs nowadays try to control the games with cards rather than common sense!!

[JohnD]

Those of you who have had a go at refereeing at any level will know just how difficult it is. At the speed the Prem is played at by teams of cheating b*st*rds it must be a nightmare. I would like UEFA and FIFA to grow some and really bring an end to the diving and cheating. Points reductions should do it.

I've always said that the game would be farcial if referees performed as badly as some players.

[Speedie Dived]

Yes, if only to hear the abuse players give the man in the center and we can see how crap their respect campaign really is.

They tried miking up ref's in the early 90's. It was Millwall v Arsenal if my memory serves me correct. It was basically one continuous long beep due to Tony Adams, it was scrapped after this.

[thenodrog]

Any manager can speak to the referee after a mandatory 'cooling off' period (30 minutes) but for me they referee should have to face the press after the game to explain his decisions. At the moment they are not mandated to do so but I genuinely believe that there would be more trust in them if they came out and were prepared to justify their decisions.

Precisely arbitro. It would 'humanise' them in the eyes of the public. Closing ranks just promotes a them and us situation.

[Speedie Dived]

I recently had a conversation with a few pals in the pub about the standards of refs and came up with an idea (I was on the red bull and vodka at this stage so bare with me)

Ref's have one second to see an incident and then make a decision, they gain a wealth of experience and then have to retire at 45 as they cannot keep up. So, my idea was to have the "ref" sat in the stand surrounded by 3 TV screens. He controls the game from there and relays all his decision to an official on the pitch, who stops the play and informs players etc. The ref in the stand can choose to look at incidents again by simply rewinding the footage in front of him.

The major plus points for me would be not losing the experienced refs at 45, and you could quickly look at decisions.

Something needs to be done. Refs are now affecting results on a regular basis.

Also, red cards now spoil games, they should be a last resort. So what about introducing a card in between a yellow and a red, which would result in a sin bin?

[Tom]

They tried miking up ref's in the early 90's. It was Millwall v Arsenal if my memory serves me correct. It was basically one continuous long beep due to Tony Adams, it was scrapped after this.

Was that the one when Adams ran past the red (possibly Ellery) and shouted you F'ing cheat at him?

[Amo]

I don't think refereeing is getting worse and personally I am sick to death of hearing about it. There is so much football on TV now and so many pundits talking about it that all they can think of is discussing decisions rather than the game itself. Match of the day gets more boring every week as Hanson and co show you 50 slow motion replays of a banale incident to prove how bad the referee was and give managers a ready made excuse for their own ineptness. Interviewers should challenege managers more to explain why they made certain decision rather than just allowing them to blame the ref every time they lose. The worst of all is Alan Green on the radio. he commentates more on the referee than he does on the game itself.

The ref has 1 look at an incident in real time and has to make a snap decision based on this. there's no benefit in people sat ab hour later in a studio watching it time and time again to try and prove he was wrong, they should accept that people make mistakes and just get over it.

Brian Clough had it right years ago when he had a right go at Motty on TV for not showing enough action and spending too much time talking about it.

Well said.

People are always saying that referees think of themselves as celebrities these days. Well, it's hardly surprising when they're being put under the spotlight every week.

[Stuart]

I recently had a conversation with a few pals in the pub about the standards of refs and came up with an idea (I was on the red bull and vodka at this stage so bare with me)

Ref's have one second to see an incident and then make a decision, they gain a wealth of experience and then have to retire at 45 as they cannot keep up. So, my idea was to have the "ref" sat in the stand surrounded by 3 TV screens. He controls the game from there and relays all his decision to an official on the pitch, who stops the play and informs players etc. The ref in the stand can choose to look at incidents again by simply rewinding the footage in front of him.

The major plus points for me would be not losing the experienced refs at 45, and you could quickly look at decisions.

Something needs to be done. Refs are now affecting results on a regular basis.

Also, red cards now spoil games, they should be a last resort. So what about introducing a card in between a yellow and a red, which would result in a sin bin?

Some good ideas SD. The sinbin idea has been kicking around for years. A very easy one to trial, and might be a good one for foul and abusive language or desent - rather than a yellow. Problem with sinbin for a red would be that players might be encouraged to commit more professional fouls.

The other idea about older refs looking at TV screens is a variation on the 4th (or even 5th) official discussion - which always ends with "well you can't have all that technology down in the Blue Square, and the game HAS to be the same at all levels". Which is a bogus argument but there you go.

Good ideas. You should drink more!

[Kelbo]

I recently had a conversation with a few pals in the pub about the standards of refs and came up with an idea (I was on the red bull and vodka at this stage so bare with me)

Ref's have one second to see an incident and then make a decision, they gain a wealth of experience and then have to retire at 45 as they cannot keep up. So, my idea was to have the "ref" sat in the stand surrounded by 3 TV screens. He controls the game from there and relays all his decision to an official on the pitch, who stops the play and informs players etc. The ref in the stand can choose to look at incidents again by simply rewinding the footage in front of him.

The major plus points for me would be not losing the experienced refs at 45, and you could quickly look at decisions.

Something needs to be done. Refs are now affecting results on a regular basis.

Also, red cards now spoil games, they should be a last resort. So what about introducing a card in between a yellow and a red, which would result in a sin bin?

For me it would be to fast track ex players to ref status, they are fit, know the game and the tricks, to go through the ranks an ex player, under the present rules wouldnt get to ref until he was past 40!! Assuming of course they got the right marks!!

[arbitro]

For me it would be to fast track ex players to ref status, they are fit, know the game and the tricks, to go through the ranks an ex player, under the present rules wouldnt get to ref until he was past 40!! Assuming of course they got the right marks!!

This has been done with Steve Baines (ex Bradford and Chesterfield) who was on the list at the same time as me. I got quite friendly with him and one aspect in which he excelled at was player management which was borne out of the respect afforded to him as an ex pro. Steve used to let a lot go and relied on his reputation as an ex player to control games. His card count was the lowest on the list and I can only recall him sending one player off if the time he was on the Football League list.

One of the big problems is that refereeing has become a political animal and the likes of David Elleray have a major say in important matters. The best (or worst) example of this is Stuart Atwell. Elleray has 'sponsored' him and used him as a little project. He has been ring fenced despite a litany of howlers and will continue to be favoured whilst the likes of Elleray are influential. There are many other examples of favoritism and referees who clearly aren't good enough continue to play a major role in games and erroneously affecting the results of games.