Dogawful Officiating - Dave Coote suspended

[M4]

Should turn this thread into a record of all the faults refs commit each game over the course of the rest of the season...

 

Two wrongs made a right for Norwich fans and their first goal yesterday.

 

Should have been a pen for Santon's handball. Don't think the ball went out for their corner.

[ChrisMcQuillan]

Refereeing in the Premier League is corrupt.  It's plain for all to see.

[M4]

yet in Spain you can appeal a yellow

 

Given how they dish them out like crazy, that's not surprising at all.

 

it's not the kind of thing that would be rescinded IMO. The fact he was sent off as a result of it is of no relevance.

 

Well, my only answer to that is it should and it should

[Guest ObiChrisKenobi]

Refereeing in the Premier League is corrupt.  It's plain for all to see.

 

Are you suggesting that the ref allowed Stoke to win today, to allow Arsenal/Liverpool time to catch up to Spurs?

[brummie]

Phil Dowd - who redefines the notion of the "look at me" referee, surpassing even the comedically shite Uriah Rennie - yesterday booked Gabby Agbonlahor for having the ball kicked at his ankle by Jaaskelainen

[Guest bimpy474]

yet in Spain you can appeal a yellow

 

Given how they dish them out like crazy, that's not surprising at all.

 

it's not the kind of thing that would be rescinded IMO. The fact he was sent off as a result of it is of no relevance.

 

Well, my only answer to that is it should and it should

 

But at least they can appeal, this goes a while back but when Robbie Elliott got sent off (2nd yellow) at Chelsea because SWP dived, if then the FA could not see the unjustness of it and have appeals for yellows, it shows just how shite our FA actually is, they can let players be banned for another players cheating or a bad referring decision, its just so daft you have to laugh.

[Guest bimpy474]

Refereeing in the Premier League is corrupt.  It's plain for all to see.

 

They are not corrupt, they are just plain crap at it.

[ChrisMcQuillan]

Refereeing in the Premier League is corrupt.  It's plain for all to see.

 

They are not corrupt, they are just plain crap at it.

 

I believe that there are certain decisions that are simply too poor to be down to negligence.

 

Any industry where so much money is at stake is never free from corruption.  FIFA know it goes on, otherwise they'd have been keen to introduce video technology to help.

[Guest bimpy474]

Refereeing in the Premier League is corrupt.  It's plain for all to see.

 

They are not corrupt, they are just plain crap at it.

 

I believe that there are certain decisions that are simply too poor to be down to negligence.

 

Any industry where so much money is at stake is never free from corruption.  FIFA know it goes on, otherwise they'd have been keen to introduce video technology to help.

 

FIFA are reluctant to introduce video technology as they think it undermines the ref, well Blatter does anyway, and he is where the problem lies, until he is outed video technology will not come in as he is so anti it.

 

One man should not have so much power when he is in charge of such a global sport, but until you get the corruption out of FIFA then this will continue for the foreseeable future.

[M4]

FIFA are reluctant to introduce video technology as they think it undermines the ref, well Blatter does anyway.

 

Which is the most infuriating thing about there not being goal line technology. It wouldn't undermine them one bit, in fact it would do the opposite it would help them greatly by making it so they have something less to worry about and can concentrate on other incidents. Especially given that it's a factual decision, not down to interpretation.

[Guest bimpy474]

FIFA are reluctant to introduce video technology as they think it undermines the ref, well Blatter does anyway.

 

Which is the most infuriating thing about there not being goal line technology. It wouldn't undermine them one bit, in fact it would do the opposite it would help them greatly by making it so they have something less to worry about and can concentrate on other incidents. Especially given that it's a factual decision, not down to interpretation.

 

Totally agree, even most refs to their credit have said they would welcome it.

[JH]

Refereeing is getting worse every week, yet they seem to get away with through the FA's reluctance to act upon poor officiating and the clubs/many fans accepting it through the "well it evens itself out eventually".

 

Two wrongs don't make a right and never will. It's time for change.

[themanupstairs]

Can't believe how many decisions Chris Foy got wrong today. If I were a Spud I'd be fuming tonight. Shambolic performance by the refs of late.

[Mowen]

http://www.wsc.co.uk/content/view/8082/38/

 

Judge referees and players by the same tough standards

 

 

12 December ~ Much of the football broadcasting on the first weekend in December was devoted to criticising what had been, by common consensus, a terrible couple of days for refereeing. Indignation levels soared. Each supposed howler – Gary Cahill being sent off, David Luiz staying on the pitch, the non-penalty awarded to Sunderland – was subjected to a mixture of uncomprehending ridicule and scorn. How could top-level referees make such obvious mistakes? The simple explanation, of course, is that they are doing an extremely difficult job. They’re trying to control a game played at high speed, by top athletes, who are often trying deliberately to deceive them.

Referees don’t have access to the instant replays upon which Alan Green surely bases his unshakeable belief in his own infallibility. They will, inevitably, make mistakes and some of those mistakes will have a significant impact on the outcomes of matches. Referees shouldn't be above criticism but they should not be subjected to a level of criticism far in excess of that directed at players and managers, either.

 

When a player misplaces a simple pass, falls over his own feet or misses an open goal, the criticism is leavened with sympathy. He has simply had an "off day". When a referee makes a mistake, more sinister motives are ascribed. He is trying to make himself the centre of attention. He is incompetent. Petty. Probably perverted.

 

It is not hard to see why hammering the referee is seductive for those directly connected to the game. For managers and players, it is a convenient smokescreen, especially when the alternative involves taking personal responsibility for a defeat or offering a resigned shrug followed by the explanation: "Yes, we lost, but what do you expect? We have Lee Cattermole in our team."

 

More insidious are those ex-players now working in the media, who instinctively side with former colleagues rather than officials. This professional solidarity doesn't apply if the player deserving criticism is foreign and psychologically vulnerable, like David de Gea or Fernando Torres. Pundits don't regularly bump into these players on the after-dinner circuit or at pro-celeb golf tournaments, so they are fair game.

 

Which means it is down to the independent voices – journalists and broadcasters who haven't been directly involved with football – to ensure that the criticism directed at referees is proportional to that levelled at players – to suggest that, occasionally, a team may have lost for reasons other than the incompetence of an official, even when that official has made a mistake.

 

If those on the playing side of the game won't reduce their criticism of referees from the vitriolic to the merely unsympathetic, the level of scorn directed at player errors should be raised correspondingly. In this brave and brutal new world, there would be no escape for anybody.

 

After Bolton's 3-0 defeat to Spurs, for instance, the journalist interviewing Owen Coyle would have refused to be deflected by Coyle's complaints about Gary Cahill's sending off, and instead asked: "Why was Gary Cahill trying to perform a Cruyff turn in his own half anyway? He's not suffering from a delusion that he is Johan Cruyff, is he? He does realise he is Gary Cahill, with all the limitations that implies?"

 

Highlights and analysis that refused to devote a disproportionate amount of time to scrutinising the officials' shortcomings would be able to run extended blooper reels of the glaring cock-ups committed by even the best players every week. As well as being great fun, this would give a far more accurate picture of how most games are lost – an accumulation of minor individual and collective errors, rather than dramatic blunders by referees.

 

Adjusting the balance of criticism between referees and players and managers won't be easy. Referees don't help themselves. Rather than humbly regarding themselves as necessary evils, they trot around with a pomposity that comes from knowing they are the only person on the pitch with their name sewn into their underpants.

 

Broadcasters can criticise them with impunity, knowing that upsetting Mark Clattenburg won't have the same implications for their programme as upsetting Kenny Dalglish or Alex Ferguson. But while referees aren't glamorous, or even particularly sympathetic, we shouldn't passively allow their mistakes to be exaggerated or distorted to serve other agendas.

[54]

The problem with bad refs is that if a manager says something needs to be changed, they get slapped with a fine. I would imagine that most managers think there should be change, but they just can't, its ridiculous. 

[clintdempsey]

Apparently over 12 000 offside decisions from last year's PL have been analyzed using ProZone. 99% of all decisions were correct.

 

Seems like the assistant referees aren't quite as incompetent as we like to think.

[Canuck]

The players are fitter and faster than ever and the refereeing system is the same as it has been for decades. This strikes me as very wrong.

 

While I appreciate the argument about gaol line technology removing the human element. This cannot be the end of the discussion.

 

They tried goal judges in the Europa League last year (?) but didn't pursue it.

 

Perhaps a different approach similar to what they did for ice hockey in the NHL. They now have two linesmen and two referees. In football, the system would translate where each ref is assigned a half of the pitch and is the primary authority in his half. Less running, the ability to get in to better positions and also, the ref in the "non-active" half can offer back up on a call using the head sets, as they may have a better site line. All of which happens instantly so that it does not disrupt the flow of the game.

 

My point being simply that it is not nearly good enough to keep doing things the same way simply because that is always how it has been done.

[wormy]

So two referees on the pitch at a time? It may only be one extra person, but do you feel things may get clogged on-pitch?

[Guest je85]

 

They tried goal judges in the Europa League last year (?) but didn't pursue it.

 

 

 

They are currently in use in the Champions League.

[Guest bimpy474]

So two referees on the pitch at a time? It may only be one extra person, but do you feel things may get clogged on-pitch?

 

Just use one and use the technology exactly how Rugby League use it, they have it to near perfection imo.

 

I know Rugby League is obviously different but the technology doesn't undermine refs in Rubgy League, and that for me is the reason its not used in Football yet, because the authorities think it would undermine football refs, which it clearly wouldn't, it would help them get the major decisions right which surely must be the goal at the end of the day. 

[Guest gggg]

So two referees on the pitch at a time? It may only be one extra person, but do you feel things may get clogged on-pitch?

 

Just use one and use the technology exactly how Rugby League use it, they have it to near perfection imo.

 

Technology's completely fucked Rugby League, as it would football. It's a pantomime now just like American sports, with every try going to the video ref and celebration replaced with everyone looking at a screen.

 

And that's a stop-start game anyway, nothing like football.

[Mowen]

There are extra penalty area referees in the Europa league at the moment, I dot know how they're working in general but they caused a Tottenham goal to be correctly, albeit slowly, disallowed. Might be worth giving them flags but it worked on that occasion.

 

It also looks like we'll have goal line technology soon. For all we've complained about needing it I'm fairly sure no technology has come up to scratch at previous tests.

 

Personally I'm not interested in having replays of anything in addition to this. I know many people will disagree but I really think it would make the game shit.

[Nobody]

There are extra penalty area referees in the Europa league at the moment, I dot know how they're working in general but they caused a Tottenham goal to be correctly, albeit slowly, disallowed. Might be worth giving them flags but it worked on that occasion.

 

It also looks like we'll have goal line technology soon. For all we've complained about needing it I'm fairly sure no technology has come up to scratch at previous tests.

 

Personally I'm not interested in having replays of anything in addition to this. I know many people will disagree but I really think it would make the game shit.

Completely agree. Goal line technology is fine, but it needs to stop there.

Problem with the penalty area referees is that they don't seem to dare to make a call. Not sure, but it seemed to me that it wasn't the penalty area ref that gave the Man U goal against Basel last week, and if he didn't, it's a bit of a disgrace.

Wouldn't be against having two main referees on the pitch. Not only would you have the referees in better positions, but you'd also have referees that doesn't tire and makes a mistake because of it. Don't think it would clog the pitch up either.

[Canuck]

So two referees on the pitch at a time? It may only be one extra person, but do you feel things may get clogged on-pitch?

 

generally not because there is only one referee in each half. In the NHL the playing surface is exponentially smaller and they don't seem to get in the way any more than they used to.

[Guest bimpy474]

So two referees on the pitch at a time? It may only be one extra person, but do you feel things may get clogged on-pitch?

 

Just use one and use the technology exactly how Rugby League use it, they have it to near perfection imo.

 

Technology's completely fucked Rugby League, as it would football. It's a pantomime now just like American sports, with every try going to the video ref and celebration replaced with everyone looking at a screen.

 

And that's a stop-start game anyway, nothing like football.

 

Your missing my point, possibly me not making clear though, i'm not talking about the stop start part of it, i'm talking about the penalty, overline type, which usually especially in the case of penalties, has the game stopped anyway with players surrounding the ref, all he has to do is ask the 4th official to look at it, you dont need to have big screen, no need for razzmatazz at all, just the 4th official and a screen to look back at it.

 

Exactly the same with bad/looking bad tackles, goal scoring opportunities (like Luiz, Cahill ones), etc the games stops anyway, the 4th official can look and say, yes its a red or a yellow, thats what i mean, the game has stopped anyway, like booking Luiz or sending off Cahill, time to look at an instant replay.