sotonian Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 On Saturday was in my normal seat in the northam, actually knowing the rules i didn't think the ref got hardly any decisions wrong, but as per virtually every game he seemed to upset the people around me, ive got used to this and just smile at the lack of football knowledge of saints fans, but saturday was even better, after the game waited outside the away end to meet up with a relative who is a forest season ticket holder, the first thing he said to me was, "how much did you pay that ref, he gave saints everything" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nexstar Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 On Saturday was in my normal seat in the northam, actually knowing the rules i didn't think the ref got hardly any decisions wrong, but as per virtually every game he seemed to upset the people around me, ive got used to this and just smile at the lack of football knowledge of saints fans, but saturday was even better, after the game waited outside the away end to meet up with a relative who is a forest season ticket holder, the first thing he said to me was, "how much did you pay that ref, he gave saints everything" There was a time near the end of the game where Jos was barely touched by the other player, shoulder-to-shoulder, and the ref gave us a free-kick. It was a laughable decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangkoksaint Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 I used to referee and to a reasonable standard. The lack of knowledge of some supporters used to astound me but when I have my Saints hat on biting my lip is somewhat difficult at times. There is a fundamental problem in football and in society in general - authorititive figures are abused and there is little respect. A similar vein was mentioned on the Seaborne thread and could have a thread in its own right. Football has to start to realise that if the respect disappears and referees continually get the abuse they do then it will deminish the amount of referees coming through the system and the potential pool from which they can be chosen will be smaller. As for Saturday I was not there but I know the the referee was Ian Williamson. I don't know Ian but I used to know his dad quite well and I remember discussing games with him where Ian had what I thought was a poor game. He has been at this level for a while now and never made it to the promised land of the Premiership so maybe this is his level. I don't know if he was poor on Saturday but one thing is for sure - I'm sure he gave an honest performance even if some of you thought it was a poor one. Maybe just maybe if we laid off referees a bit more performances may improve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden Balls Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 I would feel hard done by if I was a Forest fan. Only slightly though. However, the ref on Saturday did needlessly stop the game at times which was frustrating. He also gave a couple of odd decision but were nothing major. My annoyance with refs these days is that they will give decisions based on what will be considered the least controversial, rather than what they think is correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waterlooville saint Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 I think football really should take a leaf out of rugby union when it comes to referee's and match officials in general. I heard a really interesting interview on radio 5 live at the weekend with the welsh player who kicked the penalty that wasn't awarded as a score - although he was so sure it was going over he'd walked away he didn't argue, dispute or make bad comments about the officials at any time. I thought at the time how different that was to the Lampard 'goal' at the world cup last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattio Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 I would become a ref if they were treated like rugby refs... FACT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
for_heaven's_Saint Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 I would become a ref if they were treated like rugby refs... FACT! Have you considered becoming a Rugby ref?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huffton Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 The culture difference between the two games is unreal. Rugby refs never get questioned, or spoken back to. And as such they rarely make a mistake, and they have a lot more to watch than footbal refs. Contrast football, where every decision is pored over, and players regualarly get 'in the face' of the ref, and its no wonder they feel the pressure and make mistakes. Its time football got tough on players arguing. Maybe a third card should be added, when a player argues he is carded and sin binned for five minutes, a second card means a red. It might mean a few sendings off for the first couple of games but they will soon get the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingbattigger Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 This is why I don't allow Mrs D to come to the footie. She (unusually for a female) knows the rules and gets assy when the fans blame the ref. Being female she doesn't keep quiet about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyer Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 The culture difference between the two games is unreal. Rugby refs never get questioned, or spoken back to. And as such they rarely make a mistake, and they have a lot more to watch than footbal refs. Contrast football, where every decision is pored over, and players regualarly get 'in the face' of the ref, and its no wonder they feel the pressure and make mistakes. Its time football got tough on players arguing. Maybe a third card should be added, when a player argues he is carded and sin binned for five minutes, a second card means a red. It might mean a few sendings off for the first couple of games but they will soon get the idea. Rugby refs rarely make a mistake because the players arent trying to cheat all the time. footballers cheat dozens of times every game. Cut out the cheating and you cut out 90+% of ref mistakes. They need 5 match bans for anyone who cheats and that includes going down when you could have stayed on your feet, thats still cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chin Strain Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 Rugby refs rarely make a mistake because the players arent trying to cheat all the time. footballers cheat dozens of times every game. Cut out the cheating and you cut out 90+% of ref mistakes. They need 5 match bans for anyone who cheats and that includes going down when you could have stayed on your feet, thats still cheating. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 I thought he had a good game. I don't know what all the fuss is about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Appy Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 The linesman on the Kingsland side made a stupid decision in the 1st half, gave a throw in when the ball was nothing like out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 The culture difference between the two games is unreal. Rugby refs never get questioned, or spoken back to. I was quite shocked during, I think, the Wales v South Africa game, they were addressing the Referee as "Sir". Maybe thats what football should do. I don't agree though with the comment that rugby players do not try to cheat, they do freuqently. But rugby also had the sense to introduce citing (I saw it first in Aussie Rules, not sure which came first), so that cheats who get away with it at the time still often get found out later thanks to the TV cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 The difference with rugby is that territory is everything. Teams can spend phase after phase, minutes on end failing to get a few metres closer to the opposition try line. To get pegged back ten metres because of back chat is a real blow. There's no equivalent in football. The other advantage of rugby is that players aren't powerful stars like there are in football. If edge gave a yellow everytime someone talked back it would soon stop but the authorities will never be brave enough and the media (especially old school pundits) will just moan and moan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattio Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 Have you considered becoming a Rugby ref?! could do but not as interested in becoming a rugby ref, I understand football like second nature but I didn't even know all the rules of rugby when I used to play! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sydney_saint Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 What I despise is how it is has filtered down to grassroots football. I used to ref, to quite a decent level over here, but gave it up simply because it is no fun. When you are getting abused for calling a throw in at the half way line, you know its time to pack it in. People don't also seem to realise that refs are actually people. I have the unfortunate story to back this up with my brother a few years back. He (wasn't diagnosed at the time) suffers from severe bipolar and anxiety but loves football. He had been reffing for only one year and was put on an under 12's match division 4 or something equally pointless in the local league. Now he didn't have a good game fair enough. But the amount of abuse he received that match from parents and other 'football people' led him to been hospitalised for 3 months. He just wanted to enjoy himself and earn himself a bit of pocket money. So for all those fans who feels the need to abuse the ref at pro matches, think about the impact that it has all the way down the football leagues as more and more people adopt that behaviour. For those that abuse refs at grassroots level, I have nothing to say for you. I'm not suggesting that respecting the ref at the top level will neccasrily stop abuse at grassroots, but abuse at the top certainly filtered down and its time to stop that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 Why do all Linesman run like complete knobs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Who? Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 I love refereeing. Before every game I make it clear what I expect and that I will explain may decisions on what I believe. I have no reason to favour any one team over another. I always finish my talk to the teams with te statement that the match is about the two teams and I will try and let the game flow. I hate stopping games every few seconds for little things and I try and let the game flow as much as possible. I know how much a stop start game pees off the players as well as the people who have come to watch. It is not about me, I am really happy if I have not been noticed, because if I am I am doing something wrong. You cannot please everyone, but I feel being open and honest is the best way forward. I can only give decisions on what I believe is a foul. I love it and referee in the supply leagues as well as local Sunday youth leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Who? Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 Why do all Linesman run like complete knobs? As per instructed I am afriad, crabbing it is called, as you are suppose to face the pitch, unless you have to sprint. Also the flag has to be pitch side all the time and down low, unless you are giving a foul or a throw in of course, so the ref can see it clearly!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 As per instructed I am afriad, crabbing it is called, as you are suppose to face the pitch, unless you have to sprint. Also the flag has to be pitch side all the time and down low, unless you are giving a foul or a throw in of course, so the ref can see it clearly!! Never knew that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Who? Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 The most common mistake is offsides, so not directly refs fault and incomparable with rugby. It's almost impossible to watch the ball and the run, so its very often wrong. Football has more ball in play and often a very fast pace, so again there'll be more difficult decisions and mistakes. But football fans are often idiots. Wherever i sit and however bad the view, there'll be people shouting at the ref claiming they can clearly see the right decision from 90 yards away. When I run the line, I do find it hard. You are looking to see if the ball has gone out of play, and who off of last, across the line for offside, and for fouls. I find that listening is the best way, for when the ball is kicked, and look across the line, but still very hard. I think there should be a linesman on the runnig on the outside of the one who is already there looking for offsides, and the other linesman for fouls and the direction of the thrown in. It is a very very hard job to do, but they can be overrules by the ref of course for fouls and direction! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Who? Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 Never knew that! Yep, when I first qualified I thought I will run the line, piece of cake that will be. then I was told all the ways you had to do things....I have to say I was amazed! Sideways running (crabbing) is so that you can look across the line for offsides, while also still facing the play. Also the same reason the ref looks an idiot when running backwards. They have to face the ball at all times, and of course make sure that no foul play is going on behind them as the keeper is walking out to take his drop kick after gathering the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edprice1984 Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 As a season ticket holder at Gloucester Rugby I would say that rugby refs very rarely make mistakes, but they do miss a lot. This isn't reallh suprising considering the amount that is going on, also there is a certain element of individual interpretation that simply doesn't apply in football. If the respect campaign was enforced on the top players, coaches and supporters in the way that it is enforced on the grass roots levels it would be a success. If a ref sent off Rooney, Ferdinand, Cole, Terry or Lampard for swearing at them and this was done consistently the game would change very quickly. As it is, children still see the stars acting like children and getting away with it so nothing changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 13 September, 2011 Share Posted 13 September, 2011 I used to referee and to a reasonable standard. The lack of knowledge of some supporters used to astound me but when I have my Saints hat on biting my lip is somewhat difficult at times. There is a fundamental problem in football and in society in general - authorititive figures are abused and there is little respect. A similar vein was mentioned on the Seaborne thread and could have a thread in its own right. Football has to start to realise that if the respect disappears and referees continually get the abuse they do then it will deminish the amount of referees coming through the system and the potential pool from which they can be chosen will be smaller. As for Saturday I was not there but I know the the referee was Ian Williamson. I don't know Ian but I used to know his dad quite well and I remember discussing games with him where Ian had what I thought was a poor game. He has been at this level for a while now and never made it to the promised land of the Premiership so maybe this is his level. I don't know if he was poor on Saturday but one thing is for sure - I'm sure he gave an honest performance even if some of you thought it was a poor one. Maybe just maybe if we laid off referees a bit more performances may improve. Well said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SO16_Saint Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 I'm surprised nothing was mentioned about the (correct) decision from the extremely well worked corner in the second half when we tapped in from a yard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyer Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 As a season ticket holder at Gloucester Rugby I would say that rugby refs very rarely make mistakes, but they do miss a lot. This isn't reallh suprising considering the amount that is going on, also there is a certain element of individual interpretation that simply doesn't apply in football. Thats the other thing, Id rather see 5 penalties not give than 1 penalty that isnt a foul given. Rugby refs dont give anything unless they are sure. Football refs give everything unless they are sure its not a foul. The whole system rewards divers and cheaters, especially when you could get a pen and a red card for the opponent if you cheat and only get a yellow yourself if you get caught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_John Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 There was a time near the end of the game where Jos was barely touched by the other player, shoulder-to-shoulder, and the ref gave us a free-kick. It was a laughable decision. My view on that was totally different. Jos had only eyes for the ball, whereas the forest player looked sideways for the Saints player and ran 4 or 5 yards and JUMPED straight into Jos and gave him a "shoulder to shoulder" barge. At NO time did the forest player LOOK AT THE BALL, imo he was attempting to stop Jos heading the ball clear so that his teammates might pick up the loose ball. The Ref got that 100% correct. I thought the Ref on saturday got most things right (remember the "dive" incident which the picture afterwards also proved he got right), whereas last season against the sea-weed he had a bit of a shocker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golac's Cunning Stunts Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 I never could understand why anybody would want to be a referee? Is it because they were bullied at school and want to get off on the power of bossing people around? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 It would be interesting to compare "Grassroots" refereeing respect in England with that in Europe, especially say Spain. Just watching highlights of the Barca/Real CL games and the diving back chat fake appeals etc show that the lack of respect is not just an English Disease. Rugby refs (Like Cricket Umpires) do get decisions wrong. Cricket has a format that allows Technology to be used, but while we call for that in football is it practical to all stop and hang around for a minute or so to see 5 replays from different angles regarding a penalty decision? Sure rugby has TV for a try and you could have the same for a goal, but when do you stop the game to review? Straight away? but then sometimes the follow on play creates a chance or a goal. When the ball next goes out of play? What happens if there is a break away and a goal is scored the other end... TV could be used better in football for disciplinary decisions. It is stupid that if a ref gives a free kick for an offence that he has seen when TV shows it to be more dangerous and a yellow or red card offence they should be given. You could give out red's and yellows after the game for diving etc - that would be a start Think it was a shame they dropped the "retreat 10 yards" at a free kick for dissent experiment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 I would feel hard done by if I was a Forest fan. Only slightly though. However, the ref on Saturday did needlessly stop the game at times which was frustrating. He also gave a couple of odd decision but were nothing major. My annoyance with refs these days is that they will give decisions based on what will be considered the least controversial, rather than what they think is correct. Good observation - I cuss and swear as much as anyone when my red and white specs are on but this is spot on - undoubtedly thr result, I'm afraid, of the scrutiny that TV has brought to the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintbag Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 On Sunday I had to persuade one of my mates to referee my son's U10 match. He hasn't done it for years and did it as a massive favour to me. Five minutes in I was yelling at him for missing a foul on one of our players. Bloody refs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rallyboy Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 it doesn't help when many commentators and ex-player pundits are still living under 1970s laws of the game. 'That was a late flag'...no it wasn't, he wasn't offside until he went for the ball. 'It was ball to hand'....yes, the hand he was holding out to block the path of a raised cross. And my favourite - 'but he got the ball'....sort of, he came in studs first at knee height from behind, and after crippling the player the ball happened to make contact with his foot. I thought Norwich were hard done by at the weekend, possibly by a linesman or two - There was a blatant dive for the penalty, then up the other end the defender looked round to see where the forward was and swung his arm to block his run at the ball, making contact with his face. The pundit opinion? - 'it wasn't intentional'. Yeah right. Its decisions like that which can lead to players thinking they have to ref the game, because the ref isn't. I always assumed that half the time the abuse heaped on refs at St Marys is about pressure. A ref has never changed his decision when pressured by players or the crowd. But you can be sure it's in his mind for the next one... Imagine if Darbyshire went down a second time and the ref thought he had been clipped, but six Saints players ran over remonstrating about diving, and the crowd started booing...suddenly a simple decison has enormous pressure. And thats the fun of reffing I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilf Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 Rugby refs also seem to talk to the players all the time, actively coaching them in some circumstances (particularly in scrums where they might tell players what they are doing wrong when the scrum collapses and coach them on how to do it properly). Can you imagine a ref at St Marys coaching the away team on how to line up their defensive wall at a free kick; that would make her popular wouldn't it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketphilly Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 I was quite shocked during, I think, the Wales v South Africa game, they were addressing the Referee as "Sir". Maybe thats what football should do. I don't agree though with the comment that rugby players do not try to cheat, they do freuqently. But rugby also had the sense to introduce citing (I saw it first in Aussie Rules, not sure which came first), so that cheats who get away with it at the time still often get found out later thanks to the TV cameras. The fans at matches call the ref Sir also, along the lines of "that was a sh%t decision Sir!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketphilly Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 it doesn't help when many commentators and ex-player pundits are still living under 1970s laws of the game.[/i]QUOTE] My favourite is the "he wasnt the last man" pundit excuse. I'm fairly confident the rule is about stopping a goal scoring opportunity, irrelevant of how many players are in view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St_Tel49 Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 It would be interesting to compare "Grassroots" refereeing respect in England with that in Europe, especially say Spain. Just watching highlights of the Barca/Real CL games and the diving back chat fake appeals etc show that the lack of respect is not just an English Disease. Rugby refs (Like Cricket Umpires) do get decisions wrong. Cricket has a format that allows Technology to be used, but while we call for that in football is it practical to all stop and hang around for a minute or so to see 5 replays from different angles regarding a penalty decision? Sure rugby has TV for a try and you could have the same for a goal, but when do you stop the game to review? Straight away? but then sometimes the follow on play creates a chance or a goal. When the ball next goes out of play? What happens if there is a break away and a goal is scored the other end... TV could be used better in football for disciplinary decisions. It is stupid that if a ref gives a free kick for an offence that he has seen when TV shows it to be more dangerous and a yellow or red card offence they should be given. You could give out red's and yellows after the game for diving etc - that would be a start Think it was a shame they dropped the "retreat 10 yards" at a free kick for dissent experiment. I agree - and it demonstrates that Football administrators really do not have the balls to deal with the issue of disrespect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Professor Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 I played much of my football in what was then the Hampshire League Div.1 but I gave up playing at 29 when I could have played on for another 5 or so years because I was so frustrated playing against young players for whom cheating and diving was becoming the norm, mainly because it was there in the professional game and shown on MoTD. This was over 30 years ago, so cheating is not new, and its been around for so long that its incredible that the football authorities have done so little about it. Don't think we can blame the referees as they get their guidance from the game authorities, but that shouldn't stop individual referees from using their common sense when they see the way a player falls to the ground in the penalty area is so different to how the same player behaves when challenged anywhere else on the field. Maybe the problem is with the rules of football, that a penalty is just too big a reward for a foul in a situation where there was not a goal chance. We see penalties awarded for fouls in the area when the ball is already running out of play or where the attacker has already lost the ball to the defending team. There needs to be a less severe award for such fouls, which in turn would remove some of the incentive for simulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimond Geezer Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 One of the other differences between rugby & football refs is that rugby refs will always justifty a decision. My experience of football refs is that they are generally aloof and won't enter into dialogue with a player, many a time I've heard footy refs come out with "I'm the ref, my descision is final", it's unhelpful & often inflammatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 Whilst it is true that rubgy refs are given much more respect, let's not pretend all is well in rugby either. There are rarely incidents of deliberate eye gouging or stamping on an opponent's face in football, like there are in rugby. There is cheating all the time in rugby -- it's just that most of it is violence towards an opponent, not dissent or cheating to score points. Nonetheless, as someone else said it's a real shame they dropped the 'move back 10 yards if you don't retire from a free kick' rule from football. And I do not understand why refs are expected to put up with foul-mouthed abuse from players. Of course they make mistakes but I think even the most fanatical supporters realise that actually they are doing their best and are mostly doing fairly well. I'ts not as if we have corrupt refs in this country. I couldn't be a ref -- I reckon I'd send off half the players for dissent within minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Who? Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 it doesn't help when many commentators and ex-player pundits are still living under 1970s laws of the game. 'That was a late flag'...no it wasn't, he wasn't offside until he went for the ball. 'It was ball to hand'....yes, the hand he was holding out to block the path of a raised cross. And my favourite - 'but he got the ball'....sort of, he came in studs first at knee height from behind, and after crippling the player the ball happened to make contact with his foot. I thought Norwich were hard done by at the weekend, possibly by a linesman or two - There was a blatant dive for the penalty, then up the other end the defender looked round to see where the forward was and swung his arm to block his run at the ball, making contact with his face. The pundit opinion? - 'it wasn't intentional'. Yeah right. Its decisions like that which can lead to players thinking they have to ref the game, because the ref isn't. I always assumed that half the time the abuse heaped on refs at St Marys is about pressure. A ref has never changed his decision when pressured by players or the crowd. But you can be sure it's in his mind for the next one... Imagine if Darbyshire went down a second time and the ref thought he had been clipped, but six Saints players ran over remonstrating about diving, and the crowd started booing...suddenly a simple decison has enormous pressure. And thats the fun of reffing I guess. I think if the ball hits the hand in any way shape or form, it should be handball. A free kick or a pen. This would get rid of a huge grey area. Look at Hockey for example, if it hits your foot, it is a foul, if you meant it or not. The other one is when a player is tripped up, and they say 'he barley touch him' sorry but still a foul!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyer Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 It would be interesting to compare "Grassroots" refereeing respect in England with that in Europe, especially say Spain. Just watching highlights of the Barca/Real CL games and the diving back chat fake appeals etc show that the lack of respect is not just an English Disease. Rugby refs (Like Cricket Umpires) do get decisions wrong. Cricket has a format that allows Technology to be used, but while we call for that in football is it practical to all stop and hang around for a minute or so to see 5 replays from different angles regarding a penalty decision? Sure rugby has TV for a try and you could have the same for a goal, but when do you stop the game to review? Straight away? but then sometimes the follow on play creates a chance or a goal. When the ball next goes out of play? What happens if there is a break away and a goal is scored the other end... TV could be used better in football for disciplinary decisions. It is stupid that if a ref gives a free kick for an offence that he has seen when TV shows it to be more dangerous and a yellow or red card offence they should be given. You could give out red's and yellows after the game for diving etc - that would be a start Think it was a shame they dropped the "retreat 10 yards" at a free kick for dissent experiment. They manage it in ice hockey, if a decision is reviewed and the ref is incorrect, anything that happens after is invalid. Replays should be used for all goals/goaline decisions, all red cards and penalties and the 4th official should be allowed to review the monitor at will. Every game should be reviewed for dives too. This would stop all diving apart from finals when players would risk a 5 match ban if it won the cup. The more they clamp down on stuff, the more players will cheat and the more deicisons the refs will get wrong, the only thing they need to clamp down on is cheating. The 10 yard dissent rule was good, Id also bring in the foam to mark out 10 yards so the players cant cheat there either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Who? Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 One of the other differences between rugby & football refs is that rugby refs will always justifty a decision. My experience of football refs is that they are generally aloof and won't enter into dialogue with a player, many a time I've heard footy refs come out with "I'm the ref, my descision is final", it's unhelpful & often inflammatory. I try and explain my decisions, but at the end of the day, it is normally for a trip, push, climb, pull, or hand ball. I give the signal for each thing, and really do not know how to explain any more than, 'it was a push' a hand ball' It seems to me that the players do not want to talk to the ref, but just argue with them. It can be a clear foul, and they will still say NEVER REF!! I am not sure how they want to to explain any more to them that it was a foul. It is explained in one word most of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 I try and explain my decisions, but at the end of the day, it is normally for a trip, push, climb, pull, or hand ball. I give the signal for each thing, and really do not know how to explain any more than, 'it was a push' a hand ball' It seems to me that the players do not want to talk to the ref, but just argue with them. It can be a clear foul, and they will still say NEVER REF!! I am not sure how they want to to explain any more to them that it was a foul. It is explained in one word most of the time. As one ref to another, remember that you don't always have to give an explanation of your decisions. You only need to give a clear signal of what you have decided. To give an explanation is to open the matter up for debate. Of course, it can help your control of the game if you have a quiet word with the players now and again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 I think if the ball hits the hand in any way shape or form, it should be handball. A free kick or a pen. This would get rid of a huge grey area. Look at Hockey for example, if it hits your foot, it is a foul, if you meant it or not. The other one is when a player is tripped up, and they say 'he barley touch him' sorry but still a foul!!! Quite correct. The wording of the Law is 'trip, or attemp to trip'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alain Perrin Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 I agree with much of what has been said. The level of tolerance by pundits and commentators for kidology is ridiculous. Whether it is a player diving, making more of something than it is, arguing for a throw in / corner or trying to influence the ref - it's all cheating. I'd introduce three fundamental things into football : 1) Any chat back to the ref or linesman - regardless of the justification or the referees tolerance - results in a yellow card. The captain is allowed to ask for an explanation, but not challenge the decision. But players need to understand that genuine mistakes will happen. The Ref is always right, even when he's wrong. 2) The FA stop the pretense that the Refs decision cannot be questioned after the event using television evidence. Situations where a player is judged to either have been too lightly or too harshly punished can be rectified. Where someone has kidded the ref to get a major decision (penalty, opposing player punishment etc.), that player is punished after the event (by double the amount they'd normally get). 3) Punishments are quick (none of this waiting for months before reviews / defence). Decisions ideally should be made in the following week. Financial punishments should be significant and be payable to charity, not to the FA's coffers. That and give pundits a good slap for excusing poor behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketphilly Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 Sky loves to flog to death any marginal offside or offical's decision. Watching football abroad, these events are hardly if ever replayed. A debate on Sky after a game can be spent on what a ref did or didn't do, it's pathetic. Every interview with a manager always has the ref's performance in it, rather than their teams deficiences, usually as the result of the interviewer. If TV ignored the referee and let the paper media report it (any contentious decisions) and their own body manage them, the blame culture would go i'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketphilly Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 One of the other differences between rugby & football refs is that rugby refs will always justifty a decision. My experience of football refs is that they are generally aloof and won't enter into dialogue with a player, many a time I've heard footy refs come out with "I'm the ref, my descision is final", it's unhelpful & often inflammatory. Funnily enough, I was talking to an '80's ref last week. He told me that, even then, the players would be so tightly strung during a game, it was impossible to talk sense to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimond Geezer Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 I try and explain my decisions, but at the end of the day, it is normally for a trip, push, climb, pull, or hand ball. I give the signal for each thing, and really do not know how to explain any more than, 'it was a push' a hand ball' It seems to me that the players do not want to talk to the ref, but just argue with them. It can be a clear foul, and they will still say NEVER REF!! I am not sure how they want to to explain any more to them that it was a foul. It is explained in one word most of the time. As one ref to another, remember that you don't always have to give an explanation of your decisions. You only need to give a clear signal of what you have decided. To give an explanation is to open the matter up for debate. Of course, it can help your control of the game if you have a quiet word with the players now and again. I admire you guys, it's not a job I'd want to do at any level. My point is that the more dialogue (dare I say it even banter) that a ref has with the players, the more they respect & respond to him. I played parks football from the age of 18 to about 35 & the refs that got the least hassle were the "friendlier", less aloof types. I'm sorry to say that some are on a power-trip and come across as complete c()cks. Also they generally bugger off after a match, with hardly a word to anyone. When My kids got involved in rugby about 8 years ago & I got dragged kicking & screaming into the vets team, whilst the standard of reffing is no better than parks football (ie they miss a lot & get things wrong), they will give the required signal, and generally reinforce it with "No12, you can't use hands in the ruck". It helps justify their position, whether it's the correct decision or not. Then after the game the ref can usually be found in the clubhouse, with the players from both teams, having a bevvy or two. The best footy ref I encountered, was actually partially blind. When he missed something once, a player turned to him and said "are you blind ref", his reply was somthing like "yes I am in my left eye, I'll give what I can see". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 14 September, 2011 Share Posted 14 September, 2011 (edited) of course it's true that some refs. ought never to be allowed to referee anything above schoolboy level, but in the main the standard is surely quite good (even allowing for the cheaters) - mentioned above. However, I do feel that some refs. are more than pedantic and have " a bee in their bonnet " over quite small things. 10 meters from the ball....EXACT placement of free-kicks.... physical contact between defenders..and IMHO... worst of all the so-called "penalty " situations. Was it hand-to-ball? ..or ball-to-hand. However, I do think that an attacker who deliberately plays the ball onto a defenders arm, is just as guilty of an offence as the one who " dives " in the area at the slightest contact deserves a yellow card, especially when a wrong decision might mean a RED for the opponent...and should an offending goalie always get a red card as well as conceding a penalty? ..but I can't help feeling that some refs. do favour the home side " unfairly " sometimes..perhaps in the hope, or anticipation that he'll still find the wheels on his car when he makes his way home. The worst fault though, is a human one. I read an article some years ago from a Spanish researcher who categorically proved that the human eye is not capable of making the FIVE different physical adjustments necessary to follow the ball from dead ball situations to calling an offside, or penalty ..in the time it takes to kick the ball! Was that really offside, ref ?.. Roll on CCTV, and let's get it right every time . The camera cannot lie, well most of the time anyway! Edited 14 September, 2011 by david in sweden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now