Dogawful Officiating

[LoveItIfWeBeatU]

Which refs dish out the most cards - and to which teams?

 

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/premier-league-stats-referees-dish-6369263

[Belfast Boy]

Any talk of Shelvey being done by video for the "headbutt"? He more or less admitted it in the post match interview, laughingly claiming Debuchy moved towards him and he was just trying to move out the way. Usual let off is that ref dealt with it but surely not in this case.

[Cronky]

In fairness, Debuchy could have been sent off as well.

 

I thought he made the right decision with a yellow. Many refs would have succumbed to pressure from the crowd and given a red.

 

The two penalty claims were both a bit marginal. Some you get, some you don't. It wasn't much of a push, and those handballs where a shot gets blocked can go either way.

 

The only really poor decision was the Shelvey head-butt. I can only assume he didn't see it.

 

Williams was a blatant handball, arms were all over the place.

 

Both arms above his head, just scandalous it wasn't given.

 

That one was a tough spot, in real time. I don't think anyone noticed it until the TV replays after the game, did they? I didn't see any appeals from the players.

 

The linesman was 10 yards from it.

 

As well as four of our own players. If neither they, nor anyone else, spotted it, is it too much of a surprise that the linesman missed it too? It only seemed to graze his arm.

 

Officials aren't blessed with superhuman powers, or slow-motion replays from a variety of angles.

 

Well an official ten yards directly behind a ball with a clear view of the Swansea CB raising both hands above his head deflecting the ball as it was crossed. Yeah i can see why he didn't spot it.

 

And fwiw the player who crossed it (gouff) appealed immediately.

 

It didn't look like much of an appeal to me, but in any case, you're deliberately avoiding the point. You can only call a decision 'scandalous' or a 'disgrace' if it's blatant and the official has a clear view. That cannot be described as blatant.

 

How can it not be blatant (a blatant pen, a blatant wrong decision), take your pick,  if he has a clear view from ten yards away, and the player he is looking at has his hands above his head, and that player deflects the cross with those raised hands. It's blatantly wrong......avoiding what question by the way, wasn't aware you asked one.

 

Are you blind to what you saw ?

 

I'm not sure there's much more I can add here. I can remember getting into similar arguments when Mark Halsey didn't send McManaman off last year.

 

For me, there is a huge difference between making a quick decision, in real time, from an often imperfect viewpoint and with the right degree of certainty (which is what officials have to do) and making a decision made at leisure after the event, based on a slow motion replay, with a camera with a zoom lens at the best possible angle (which is what we can do in our living rooms). If, with that sort of hindsight, a decision is shown to be wrong, it doesn't follow that the official is incompetent.

 

I am far more often surprised at how often Premiership officials get their decisions right, rather than wrong. It really is not an easy job.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Which refs dish out the most cards - and to which teams?

 

http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/premier-league-stats-referees-dish-6369263

 

That would be decent if it was for more than just last season. Using just one season is pointless, really.

[heero]

Both were penalties for me. 'Ball to hand' or not.

 

We've conceded plenty of them.

yep, and we got screwed, we'll win at manure

[themanupstairs]

Both were penalties for me. 'Ball to hand' or not.

 

We've conceded plenty of them.

 

For me this should be a non issue in football. It should have nothing to do with the handball being deliberate or not. Hardly any handball is deliberate in the way that Suarez blocked the ball on the line in the world cup.

 

It's very simple. A hand or arm that isn't in-line with the body, and is stretched out, blocking the path of the ball, hence changing it's intended trajectory or direction is handball. Penalty, or foul if outside the box. Simple. The distance of the shot away from the hand is irrelevant. If it happens, then tough. Part of football. I'd accept conceding such penalties if it meant that this becomes a consistent way to judge them.

[Guest Haris Vuckic]

Exactly. You see plenty defenders with their hands to their body or behind backs, so why should some get away with it?

 

Especially when like last night - there's two incidents in one phase of play and one of them was on it's way into the back of the net!

[Guest firetotheworks]

The way that these things work, we're probably likely to get a pretty soft penalty in the next few games, because of this. It's not how it should work like, it's fucking mental.

[Fenham Mag]

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/newcastle-united/schiedsrichterdetail/verein_762_615.html

 

Kevin Friend, one of us.

[Toonpack]

The way that these things work, we're probably likely to get a pretty soft penalty in the next few games, because of this. It's not how it should work like, it's f***ing mental.

 

Ball to hand is total bollocks, if the ball hits the hand in the box with the hand away from the body it should be a penalty, some will be given and be considered "harsh" undoubtedly but it'd remove a lot of the uncertainty.

[Exiled in Texas]

I recently watched a Bundesliga match and once again was really impressed with the standard of officiating.

 

Not picking on Benwell Lad, but Referees always look better when they are not refereeing your team. Objectivity goes out the window when your team is involved.

[Dave]

Exactly. You see plenty defenders with their hands to their body or behind backs, so why should some get away with it?

 

Especially when like last night - there's two incidents in one phase of play and one of them was on it's way into the back of the net!

 

Colo for their first goal last night being one example. Should have tried spreading his arms out based on the Remy incident.

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

The way that these things work, we're probably likely to get a pretty soft penalty in the next few games, because of this. It's not how it should work like, it's f***ing mental.

 

Ball to hand is total bollocks, if the ball hits the hand in the box with the hand away from the body it should be a penalty, some will be given and be considered "harsh" undoubtedly but it'd remove a lot of the uncertainty.

 

So hitting a defender on the hand is essentially as good as scoring a goal?

[ScottishMagpie]

We'll probably get a soft penalty awarded to us in the last few mins against man u when we're down 3-0 and that will be counted as things 'evening themselves out'.  bollocks!

[Guest neesy111]

The rule is deliberate handball.  Blatantly obvious both were last night imo.

[Toonpack]

The way that these things work, we're probably likely to get a pretty soft penalty in the next few games, because of this. It's not how it should work like, it's f***ing mental.

 

Ball to hand is total bollocks, if the ball hits the hand in the box with the hand away from the body it should be a penalty, some will be given and be considered "harsh" undoubtedly but it'd remove a lot of the uncertainty.

 

So hitting a defender on the hand is essentially as good as scoring a goal?

 

I probably should have said "arm" and it's not as good as a goal but it should be a penalty IMO, as was said above if some defenders are tucking their hands/arms behind them (and that will restrict movement somewhat) why should those flailing around get away with it

[Skirge]

Both hadballs and Williams shoves denied goal scoring opportunities so therefore we also red cards.

[Guest neesy111]

Both hadballs and Williams shoves denied goal scoring opportunities so therefore we also red cards.

 

Only the remy hand-ball was a red card offence, others no-where near ffs.

[Skirge]

Both hadballs and Williams shoves denied goal scoring opportunities so therefore we also red cards.

 

Only the remy hand-ball was a red card offence, others no-where near ffs.

Aye the Remy handball but the shoves in the back both denied a goal scoring chance

[Toonpack]

The rule is deliberate handball.  Blatantly obvious both were last night imo.

 

But that's the problem only the person handling it knows if it was deliberate or not, they should take the need for "interpretation (aka guessing) away. If it's a handball it's a handball. Outside the box they give nearly them all, should do the same in the box. It's ridiculous.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

It would be crazy though if smashing the ball against an opponent's arm was as good as winning a penalty. You would have players aiming for their opponents instead of the goal.

 

Defenders tucking their arms in and moving unnaturally is a stupid aspect of modern football IMO. Just leave it to the ref to judge whether it was deliberate or not. Obviously judgement is involved, but judgement is involved in almost every decision in football.

[Skirge]

Distance between the two is key, they need a ruling on how far away an opponent can be before its classed as them not being able to avoid the ball. Remy was a good distance away and he moved to block the ball it hit his arm deffo a pen.

[themanupstairs]

It would be crazy though if smashing the ball against an opponent's arm was as good as winning a penalty. You would have players aiming for their opponents instead of the goal.

 

Defenders tucking their arms in and moving unnaturally is a stupid aspect of modern football IMO. Just leave it to the ref to judge whether it was deliberate or not. Obviously judgement is involved, but judgement is involved in almost every decision in football.

 

Not when the judgement is poor more often than not, because the guidelines are fucking sketchy. "Deliberate"? What the fuck is that? So the ref is meant to analyze the offending player's psyche and be inside his mind to know if it was deliberate or not? And yes, it should be ok if a player is accurate enough and can think fast enough to aim the ball at an opponent's outstretched hand or arm, that they are awarded a penalty.

 

At the end of the day, this is what football is. Playing a ball with your feet. Not your hands. It's a pretty simplistic view, but this is how you are taught what football is when you are a bairn, and the first thing you are told is that you can't handle the ball unless you're a keeper.

 

Remy's shot last night was goal bound, almost certainly. An outstretched arm blocked it, and prevented it from hitting the target. 100% penalty, without the ref needing to judge anything if he's seen it. Simple as that.

[Toonpack]

It would be crazy though if smashing the ball against an opponent's arm was as good as winning a penalty. You would have players aiming for their opponents instead of the goal.

 

Defenders tucking their arms in and moving unnaturally is a stupid aspect of modern football IMO. Just leave it to the ref to judge whether it was deliberate or not. Obviously judgement is involved, but judgement is involved in almost every decision in football.

 

No you wouldn't, half the fuckers can't accurately pass a ball to a 6ft+ striker let alone hit an arm on purpose. Even if they did try, the defenders would sharp be whipping/keeping their arms out of the way which would make anyone trying it look bloody stupid.

 

As much judgement (i.e. guessing) that can be taken out of the game the better IMO.

 

 

[themanupstairs]

It would be crazy though if smashing the ball against an opponent's arm was as good as winning a penalty. You would have players aiming for their opponents instead of the goal.

 

Defenders tucking their arms in and moving unnaturally is a stupid aspect of modern football IMO. Just leave it to the ref to judge whether it was deliberate or not. Obviously judgement is involved, but judgement is involved in almost every decision in football.

 

No you wouldn't, half the f***ers can't accurately pass a ball to a 6ft+ striker let alone hit an arm on purpose. Even if they did try, the defenders would sharp be whipping/keeping their arms out of the way which would make anyone trying it look bloody stupid.

 

As much judgement (i.e. guessing) that can be taken out of the game the better IMO.

 

Absolutely right. In the heat of the game, I doubt many would have the skill and presence of mind to try it often enough. The crux of the matter for me though, is whether or not the handball changed the intended direction of the ball. If the hand is outstretched in front of the body for example, it shouldn't be considered handball. If you're blocking your face, bollocks, abdomen from a shot, that's not handball obviously. The presence of the hand hasn't changed the outcome of the ball getting blocked.