Jump to content

Lee Mason


ToreSF

Recommended Posts

Look, he didn't have a good game. There were several things he got wrong and maybe each decision he felt unsure with weighed on the next one and as a result it seemed to get worse as the game went on.

 

HOWEVER

 

Some of you angry folks need to take a step back and look at yourselves. Posting cr&p like "I would be sacked if that was my job" - well refereeing isn't your job, is it?

 

Football refereeing is the hardest job in the world, not because it requires the most energy, but because people's expectations of your performance is 100% correct and nothing less. ONE bad decision and a good referee becomes a bad referee.

 

These guys are Premier League referees, they are here for a reason! From a realistic point of view, they are the best in the country. From the fans point of view, they are not as sh1t as the other sh1t refs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, he didn't have a good game. There were several things he got wrong and maybe each decision he felt unsure with weighed on the next one and as a result it seemed to get worse as the game went on.

 

HOWEVER

 

Some of you angry folks need to take a step back and look at yourselves. Posting cr&p like "I would be sacked if that was my job" - well refereeing isn't your job, is it?

 

Football refereeing is the hardest job in the world, not because it requires the most energy, but because people's expectations of your performance is 100% correct and nothing less. ONE bad decision and a good referee becomes a bad referee.

 

These guys are Premier League referees, they are here for a reason! From a realistic point of view, they are the best in the country. From the fans point of view, they are not as sh1t as the other sh1t refs.

 

I think most people realise they are only human and make mistakes, and that can be accepted. However when someone id paid upwards of £50k a year to do a job I don't think it unreasonable to expect them to spot a judo throw in the box or blow up for a body check. The guy had a mare and its not the first time. He just isn't premier league standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A word for the linesman in front of the Itchen stand. Totally and utterly incompetent. The fat **** was consistently behind the play and constantly missed fouls and gave throw ins the wrong way. The worst lino i've ever seen at St Mary's. Total and utter ****!

 

totally agree - total waste of space. JROD was onside for that goal that he flagged off. JRod was in-line and the goal shhould have stood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No he wasn't! Just watched it again on MOTD. Was inline and even the commentators even side it was inconclusive. If in doubt the advantage should be given to the forward.

 

But there wasn't any doubt, or else the flag would have stayed down. He wasn't in line, he was offside. The linesman made a decision that endless slow-motion replays cannot prove was wrong. That's life, lets deal with it and move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I saw on the stream, J Rod's legs were onside but because he was charging forward his body wasn't - but surely it's the positioning of his feet that count??

 

Agree 100% Jayrod legs were level with defenders but his head and body were ahead - there was no daylight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it is a difficult job, but if Mr Mason isn't capable of performing to at least a mediocre level he shouldn't continue to accept the cheques.

You don't catch me attempting brain surgery and then excusing a few deaths by the fact that it's difficult.

 

He was so inconsistent it was an invitation for players to take liberties, and they did.

If the ref doesn't ref the game, players will.

When you see Sunderland defenders not even looking at the ball as corners come in, something is wrong.

 

Thankfully O'Shea was way too busy fouling people to think about defending our equaliser, and Osvaldo, having already been held in an unpunished headlock, was happy he could get away with a blatant shirtpull.

 

 

I'm quite happy to defend the refs who get MOST things right, but not the refs who deliver woeful efforts.

When man on the street 50 metres away from an incident is proved by TV to have read it in live play better than the pro who is five metres away, something is wrong.

 

And it's not sour grapes - last season one of the best performances I recall at SMS was Howard Webb...in the Sunderland home defeat.

He was fair, consistent, in control.

 

 

Is that too much to ask in a professional sport where professional officials earn big money?

They're not doing football a favour and helping out, they are paid to deliver a specialist skill to a decent level.

 

 

Let's hope they don't give Mr Mason a difficult fixture.

If he couldn't cope with wild characters like Rickie and JWP, please keep him away from games involving Terry, Suarez, Mourinho etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With benefit of TV replays the JRod decision was marginal at best, in real time,I can't help but think the refs assistant was guessing at best when he put the flag up! Have to say that whilst being a ref is a thankless task, they get paid well enough these days to be better than what both teams had to put up with yesterday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's really surprising in this online age that there isn't a much-visited and influential site on which fans can rate referees.

 

All I could find was http://www.ratetheref.net, which doesn't seem that well used.

 

I found this quite interesting once I got past the propaganda dimensions:

 

http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/news/news/2013-14/aug/riley-pleased-with-improved-refereeing-standards.html

 

But things can't be that good if referees like Mason and Friend just seem to go on, week after week, without any sign of improvement or reassignment to a lower league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree 100% Jayrod legs were level with defenders but his head and body were ahead - there was no daylight

 

If he's head and body were ahead, its off side.

 

Mason was average , both ways.

 

His biggest mistake was not sending off Osvaldo . Blatant kick out was a yellow and most refs (including Webb) would have produced a second yellow for that tackle soon after. As for the other debatable incidents. Lallana clearly handled the ball before making a meal of a nothing contact . rameriez was fouled but maybe the theatrical fall went against him.

 

Personally I much prefer masons honest bumbling than "hair weave" clattenburg and baldy webbs " look how important I am " style of refereeing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he's head and body were ahead, its off side.

 

Mason was average , both ways.

 

His biggest mistake was not sending off Osvaldo . Blatant kick out was a yellow and most refs (including Webb) would have produced a second yellow for that tackle soon after. As for the other debatable incidents. Lallana clearly handled the ball before making a meal of a nothing contact . rameriez was fouled but maybe the theatrical fall went against him.

 

Personally I much prefer masons honest bumbling than "hair weave" clattenburg and baldy webbs " look how important I am " style of refereeing.

 

 

 

He could have easily sent off Osvaldo. Sometimes our fans don't know the laws. The offside would have been the lino. We could have had a few more bookings. Wanyama hacked one of them to stop them attacking and Clyne pulled a shirt to slow them down. Both could have been yellows. However Mason was not great but he won't be the worst we see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you like a good giggle at a piece of supreme irony, try reading this:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2401978/Graham-Poll-Commentators-need-responsibility-say-refs.html

 

Unless they changed it after I submitted a comment, Poll's article - a claim that TV commentators are often wrong when they criticize refereeing decisions - includes the following:

 

Southampton rallied and ‘scored’ through a Jay Rodriguez header. Their joy was short lived when they saw that assistant referee, Andy Halliday, had his flag up to indicate that Rodriguez had been offside when heading the ball into the goal.

 

Replays showed this to be an excellent decision. Sure, it was marginal, but the best decisions are – however it was correct.

 

BBC commentator John Roder went on about how Southampton should feel hard done by after seeing the replay. What nonsense. Rodriguez was offside and Halliday should have been applauded for his excellent judgement.

 

Commentators really should take more responsibility for their comments because if the referees they criticise actually made that many mistakes, their positions would be in jeopardy.

 

I'm not too sure what "replays" Poll was looking at, or even which game, but I do agree that his position should be in jeopardy after getting that so spectacularly wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree 100% Jayrod legs were level with defenders but his head and body were ahead - there was no daylight

 

What's daylight got to do with anything? Daylight between them would imply the furthest back part of one would need to be ahead of the furthest forward part of the other. There's nothing in the rules about that at all. It's the proximity of the nearest scoring part of the body to the goal line that counts.

"any part of his head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent (the last opponent typically being the goalkeeper)."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have spoken to a true expert on the offside rule....:)

 

and my missus:? fully explained it to me and after looking at the JayRod offside decision several times.. stated JayRod has nice legs...:p

 

So for the moment we have to abide by the lino Haliday and his guess work....

 

I thought at the time ..when the ball was kicked..Jay Rod in line and onside...

 

Mr Halliday thought Jay Rod was off side......I do not think for one minute he would give the same decision against Man Utd or Chelsea...

 

YES...I do think some of these officials are poor and scared to give decisions against bigger teams....

 

In my view I can't for the life of me think linesman Halliday could see that as off side.....SLIDE RULE HANDY:rolleyes:

 

AND Ref MASON.......Waste of space......How the hell he gets given football games:(

 

 

AS A SUPER FAN....I AM ALWAYS RIGHT....JUST ASK THE MISSUS.

 

Rant over..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's daylight got to do with anything? Daylight between them would imply the furthest back part of one would need to be ahead of the furthest forward part of the other. There's nothing in the rules about that at all. It's the proximity of the nearest scoring part of the body to the goal line that counts.

"any part of his head, body or feet is nearer to his opponents' goal line than both the ball and the second-last opponent (the last opponent typically being the goalkeeper)."

 

I think the 'clear daylight' business goes back to the guidance from a few seasons ago. This changes more often than the wind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well its a good job he didn't see this for during Fontes climb for the header lol

 

1236467_604549032930277_406624057_n.jpg

 

OR the first foul on OSVALDO...WHO WAS BEING HELD ON THE GROUND.....:p

 

aLL HIS STRENGTH TO GET OFF THE GROUND WITH THAT BIG LUMP ON HIS BACK:rolleyes:

 

Holding onto the yellow shirt was for balance purposes only as he was being pushed/held by the Sunderland defender..

 

If we did not score....would have been a penalty......utmost faith in Mr Mason and his lino;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Daylight" and "benefit of the doubt to the attacking player" are no longer current interpretations of the Laws, both having been shelved a couple of years ago when they introduced the stuff about "any part of the body which can play the ball being ahead of the penultimate defender".

 

With that in mind, Rodriguez was marginally offside, and the lino was right - he was also absolutely in line to make the decision. He might have been guessing, but it was a good guess. Mason, in contrast, made a lot of bad guesses, and missed a couple of blatant offences by Osvaldo as well as a few potential penalties for Saints - and a bad corner decision in front of the Northam.

 

Whilst I'm thinking about the Northam and corners, I do wish the idiots around me would stop saying "the ball's not in the arc, hurr hurr" when we take corners with the ball barely touching the outside edge of the line. The ball doesn't even have to touch the bloody line, it only has to appear to be overlapping the line from any of the many possible angles you could be looking at it from to be legitimate. You can even see daylight between ball and line from some angles, but if the edge of the ball is over the edge of the line, that is absolutely fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He might have been guessing, but it was a good guess.

 

What do the rules say? Is a linesman 'allowed' to give offside if he's not 100% sure (which no human could have been in such a close scenario) but flags anyway because he thinks there's a strong chance the attacker is offside?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Daylight" and "benefit of the doubt to the attacking player" are no longer current interpretations of the Laws, both having been shelved a couple of years ago when they introduced the stuff about "any part of the body which can play the ball being ahead of the penultimate defender".

 

With that in mind, Rodriguez was marginally offside, and the lino was right - he was also absolutely in line to make the decision. He might have been guessing, but it was a good guess. Mason, in contrast, made a lot of bad guesses, and missed a couple of blatant offences by Osvaldo as well as a few potential penalties for Saints - and a bad corner decision in front of the Northam.

 

Whilst I'm thinking about the Northam and corners, I do wish the idiots around me would stop saying "the ball's not in the arc, hurr hurr" when we take corners with the ball barely touching the outside edge of the line. The ball doesn't even have to touch the bloody line, it only has to appear to be overlapping the line from any of the many possible angles you could be looking at it from to be legitimate. You can even see daylight between ball and line from some angles, but if the edge of the ball is over the edge of the line, that is absolutely fine.

 

Spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...