Standard of refs

[Whitey Grandad]

I do appreciate your candour Gentlemen, although I suspect, like many other fans we think we know what "deserves " to be a penalty.

What I seemingly failed to make clear was that an obvious (for the want of another word) goal-scoring chance isn't always that " obvious".....because even if the player is inside the box and facing goal..... there is no guarantee that he will " obviously " score...

 

..although what annoys me the most.... is the award of a penalty when a player is fouled half-a-yard inside the box....perhaps near the goal line - with no "obvious" chance of scoring ...in a hundred years..

 

I guess I'll have to leave it there....until the next time.

 

I share your pain but the simple answer is not to foul in the penalty area.

 

Have a good evening. Vi ses snart!

[The9]

When he gave the penalty, why did he not send Skrtel off for being the last man denying a goal-scoring opportunity?

 

Because it wasn't one. Had none of the fouling occurred, Skrtel would still have been in position to stop Pelle who would have either taken the ball away from goal or shot straight at Skrtel.

[The9]

I do appreciate your candour Gentlemen, although I suspect, like many other fans we think we know what "deserves " to be a penalty.

What I seemingly failed to make clear was that an obvious (for the want of another word) goal-scoring chance isn't always that " obvious".....because even if the player is inside the box and facing goal..... there is no guarantee that he will " obviously " score...

 

..although what annoys me the most.... is the award of a penalty when a player is fouled half-a-yard inside the box....perhaps near the goal line - with no "obvious" chance of scoring ...in a hundred years..

 

I guess I'll have to leave it there....until the next time.

 

As I've mentioned before, my favourite pointless penalties are the ones where the player is running out of the box to the side and they're tripped from behind by a clumsy defender, usually leads to the striker's feet staying exactly where they were, toes pointed to ensure they're still in the box.

[Pedro]

So Kevin Friend has been removed from Mondays Spurs v Stoke game because he's a Leicester fan.

[rallyboy]

I'm staggered to discover he's a fan of anyone, I thought he'd never seen the sport before they sent him out to referee our Liverpool game.

From his decision-making I presumed he was just a competition winner who had been given the chance to jog around the pitch with the players.

[Batman]

So Kevin Friend has been removed from Mondays Spurs v Stoke game because he's a Leicester fan.

 

He is a bristol city fan but lives in Leicester

 

Which is odd as roger east lives right near old Trafford and such like

[Saint IQ]

So Kevin Friend has been removed from Mondays Spurs v Stoke game because he's a Leicester fan.

 

A former ref on talksport said he was staggered he'd been removed from the game because he thought he was an avid Bristol City fan and just lived in Leicestershire.

[sandwichsaint]

Should last night's Barcelona pen have been a red card?

2 v 1 at the top of the D, the first player tries to play in the second (unmarked) fd who is 10-12 yds from goal.

Sliding defender (deliberately) intercepts with his arm and denies the pass

The forward would have had to collect and control the pass and then beat the GK from 10 yds.

 

In the spirit of the law it was a clear red card, in the actual rules I think the ref probably got it right (I don't know what the panel said?)

 

Either ways Leicester would have got away it.

[rallyboy]

Ball to hand!

Accidental.

 

 

 

 

[benjii]

Should last night's Barcelona pen have been a red card?

2 v 1 at the top of the D, the first player tries to play in the second (unmarked) fd who is 10-12 yds from goal.

Sliding defender (deliberately) intercepts with his arm and denies the pass

The forward would have had to collect and control the pass and then beat the GK from 10 yds.

 

In the spirit of the law it was a clear red card, in the actual rules I think the ref probably got it right (I don't know what the panel said?)

 

Either ways Leicester would have got away it.

 

Huth could catch the ball and throw it up to Vardy who can dive on the edge of the oppo box for a penalty.

 

Wouldn't be surprised at all!

[trousers]

Yikes. I find myself agreeing with Arsene Wenger...

 

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2016-04-15/wenger-criticises-call-to-withdraw-ref-from-spurs-game/

 

"If you go down that route, you're thinking the referees are not professional. To be profesional is to do what the rules demand. If they can't be impartial because they have an emotional link with the club, that's not about being professional.

 

"If you go that way, it becomes a nightmare every week to choose a referee for every single game. A dangerous precedent.

 

"The solution is you don't look where they come from, who they support, and you put the best referees into the games."

[hasper57saint]

I see where the Refs Association have serious reservations about favouritism with one Kevin Friend and removing him from the Stoke v Spuds game.Is this not an admission that some Refs favour some Clubs and make decisions which affect the outcome of a match? We have been denied blatant penalties in three recent matches which had it been another Club those decisions would be confirmed fouls and in two cases Red cards given.Perhaps I'm biased?

[Batman]

Just woeful this season in general. Moss was crap at Leicester in such a huge game for both sides

[Mr Biscuits]

Still mystifies me how Rugby can develop and support such a great refereeing system and yet football appears to be stuck in the Stone Age. Rugby refs do still make the odd wrong call (hello Scotland) but by and large you can't fault their performance.

One thing I'm not sure about is what we saw in the last World Cup and the 6 nations where foul play was shown on the large screens in the stadium and the ref pulled the game back and awarded a foul - on the one hand it's great to see foul play actually being dealt with properly and ensures that players understand they can't get away with it, on the other it does break the game up more which I'm not sure I like.

 

Compare that to football referees...........

Frankly the point at which I realised football needs a revolution when it comes to how the 90 minutes are governed was when that buffoon Blatter insisted that human error was good for the game several years ago.

 

The performance of the ref in the West Ham - Leicester game was a perfect example of poor decision making on several different occasions during the game.

[nta786]

Still mystifies me how Rugby can develop and support such a great refereeing system and yet football appears to be stuck in the Stone Age. Rugby refs do still make the odd wrong call (hello Scotland) but by and large you can't fault their performance.

One thing I'm not sure about is what we saw in the last World Cup and the 6 nations where foul play was shown on the large screens in the stadium and the ref pulled the game back and awarded a foul - on the one hand it's great to see foul play actually being dealt with properly and ensures that players understand they can't get away with it, on the other it does break the game up more which I'm not sure I like.

 

Compare that to football referees...........

Frankly the point at which I realised football needs a revolution when it comes to how the 90 minutes are governed was when that buffoon Blatter insisted that human error was good for the game several years ago.

 

The performance of the ref in the West Ham - Leicester game was a perfect example of poor decision making on several different occasions during the game.

 

Firstly, you complain that it breaks the game up 'more than you like', but a lot of time is wasted because the players complain a lot debating the decision. It could speed up decisions if anything.

Secondly, I think it would be exciting to see decisions on the big screen, a bit like cricket and tennis where it is nail biting stuff.

Thirdly, it would be fair!

[Sour Mash]

Another example tonight of the inconsistency of refereeing. This one choosing he doesn't book anyone.

[angelman]

Another example tonight of the inconsistency of refereeing. This one choosing he doesn't book anyone.

 

apart from Imbula and Adam.

[Sour Mash]

apart from Imbula and Adam.

 

You know what I mean.

[Kingsbridge Saint]

Another example tonight of the inconsistency of refereeing. This one choosing he doesn't book anyone.

 

Agreed - woeful again. A booking is a booking. So many refs seem to operate off their own agenda - this one clearly wasn't going to book anyone in the first half, but in the second he wasn't letting anything go. Pathetic.

[Mr Biscuits]

Firstly, you complain that it breaks the game up 'more than you like', but a lot of time is wasted because the players complain a lot debating the decision. It could speed up decisions if anything.

Secondly, I think it would be exciting to see decisions on the big screen, a bit like cricket and tennis where it is nail biting stuff.

Thirdly, it would be fair!

 

Complaining about it would be 'it's rubbish and stops the game I don't think it should be allowed'

 

Saying 'I'm not sure I like it' is mere opinion stating that I haven't actually decided about it yet.

 

As for the behaviour of football players mobbing the ref I think having the replay on the big screen would cut a lot of it out - it certainly levels the playing field if the ref says 'I think there has been foul play let's review it' and then bases his call on that review. It would be very hard for players to do what we have seen in the past once the replay is up there for all to see.

[stevegrant]

You're always going to have inconsistency between different referees unless they introduce robots to officiate. Literally no point wasting your energy getting wound up by that.

 

What CAN be looked at and worked on is inconsistency within a single game - if a referee applies the same criteria to every single decision from first whistle to last, then the only complaints will be around whether a referee's got a decision right or wrong, rather than the even application of the laws.

[stevegrant]

Complaining about it would be 'it's rubbish and stops the game I don't think it should be allowed'

 

Saying 'I'm not sure I like it' is mere opinion stating that I haven't actually decided about it yet.

 

As for the behaviour of football players mobbing the ref I think having the replay on the big screen would cut a lot of it out - it certainly levels the playing field if the ref says 'I think there has been foul play let's review it' and then bases his call on that review. It would be very hard for players to do what we have seen in the past once the replay is up there for all to see.

The problem with that, though, is that you could get endless breaks in play for reviews, and even then the outcome is potentially unclear - take that Leicester v West Ham game, nearly all of the big decisions that Jon Moss made have been argued heavily from both sides, I think Vardy's first yellow card is the only one where there's been a unanimous "he got that one wrong" viewpoint from observers, and even that's after about 400 replays from every different possible angle.

 

For me, they absolutely should be using technology as much as possible for factual decisions, i.e. did the ball cross the line for a goal (already working superbly well, there's never a single debate about those tight decisions anymore, the possibility of human error has been removed completely), did the ball go out of play before a goal was scored or a penalty awarded, did an incident of foul play take place inside or outside the penalty area, etc. For subjective decisions like "was it a foul, and if so, against who?", I think it's a massive waste of time.

[rallyboy]

Mr G sums it up - how can a referee be some inconsistent in the same game?

The Leicester West Ham was a prime example - he had no consistency at all.

 

I just think that so many games are now being decided by referees that they need some help.

A twenty second delay while they decide whether a defender got the ball or not is time worth spending if it means a red card/penalty decision is correct.

Games and seasons are changed by these moments and millions of pounds hang on them, we should do our best to get them right.

Some of the player behaviour is disgraceful, pushing and shoving refs - with less frustration boiling over from dodgy decisions that could be massively reduced.

And if you have dived with no contact you are more likely to get up and say nothing than rush up in the ref's face knowing it's about to go up on the big screen.

[The9]

Agreed - woeful again. A booking is a booking. So many refs seem to operate off their own agenda - this one clearly wasn't going to book anyone in the first half, but in the second he wasn't letting anything go. Pathetic.

 

Funnily enough one of the biggest problems with rugby refereeing is the entirely inconsistent application of their rules from referee to referee. In a contest which can be entirely down to who team is the biggest, who the ref is and how they interpret things like rucking and mauling makes a huge difference and in numerous cases completely prejudices the result depending on how the referee is known to arbitrate.

 

Of course there's a cult of personality around refs which makes me able to name a rugby ref but none of the players. It's possibly the worst example of consistency I can think of, and it certainly isn't a "great refereeing system". In fact the only thing they have nailed is respect for referees, which always stops when you have draconian punishments for dissent, which for some reason football doesn't want to encourage.

[The9]

The problem with that, though, is that you could get endless breaks in play for reviews, and even then the outcome is potentially unclear - take that Leicester v West Ham game, nearly all of the big decisions that Jon Moss made have been argued heavily from both sides, I think Vardy's first yellow card is the only one where there's been a unanimous "he got that one wrong" viewpoint from observers, and even that's after about 400 replays from every different possible angle.

 

For me, they absolutely should be using technology as much as possible for factual decisions, i.e. did the ball cross the line for a goal (already working superbly well, there's never a single debate about those tight decisions anymore, the possibility of human error has been removed completely), did the ball go out of play before a goal was scored or a penalty awarded, did an incident of foul play take place inside or outside the penalty area, etc. For subjective decisions like "was it a foul, and if so, against who?", I think it's a massive waste of time.

 

What he said.

 

Either that or my suggestion that they get rid of all officials on the pitch and have tv run the whole thing using technology and the big screen to communicate decisions. Difficult to argue with a remotely voiced big brother app with no physical on-pitch presence, and checking offside is a couple of seconds rewinding the tape and uploading the free-frame to the screen to explain it. I'm aware it's entirely ridiculous, but where exactly are the tv companies and confederations planning on stopping with this stuff?

[david in sweden]

I've argued for the use of video technology on here for some time past. ......if it's seen to work with so many other sports .....why should football be ignored?

 

One wrong decision, an offside or "bad" penalty call might finally end up costing a club their place in the Prem. and the subsequent income loss be catastrophic.

 

Most people admit that refereeing is a difficult job, but let's face it ..they're not perfect either, and which ref. could keep pace with Mane or Long in a sprint?

 

If millions of fans can see "what really happened" , referees would get more respect for making the right decisions when they come.

 

I've heard the same lame excuses many times....that " stop-start " games would waste even more time, but no more so than other incidents in the game.

...and I don't buy the argument that "wrong penalty calls " even themselves out over the season. Numerically (?) maybe but only if it affects the final result.

Getting a penalty award, when your side is already losing 3-0 is totally meaningless. One " wrong call " can mean a side winning ...or losing by that single goal.

 

Some while ago I clocked the timing of stoppages in several games over a period of time.......

A goal kick takes (on average) 20-30 seconds (unless the keeper wants to waste even more time)

 

Corners take between 20-40 seconds. Throw-ins can be less than 10 seconds, (but occasionally much longer if the player can't find a teammate to throw to....)

 

Free kicks can be the greatest timewaster of all. Ref stops game for foul, opposition players retreat, Ref. marks out 9 meters, kicker places the ball, covert talk with others about who will take it, who will dummy etc, etc. One such situation I watched took ...more than a minute.

 

Video replays can come up much quicker, and with a 4th. ref. watching the same TV picture that we see .....can come to the same decision as the rest of us.

 

At the end of the 95 minutes (or whatever).... we all want to see a fair result. Fair is Fair. Refereeing "mistakes "- no matter how well-intentioned simply ruin the game.

[torsaint]

Bring in best refs from Europe.

[radio slave]

Kevin Friend: Which teams do Premier League referees support?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36075347

 

can we deduce from this that Keith Stroud is not in fact a Luton fan but instead a skate?

[radio slave]

Kevin Friend: Which teams do Premier League referees support?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36075347

 

can we deduce from this that Keith Stroud is not in fact a Luton fan but instead a skate?

 

No we can't, I've read it wrong...he's one of us?!

[fanimal]

Well I think the offside Aguero goal is a classic case in point (see SG posts above) that by the time Man City had finished their celebratory huddle, a fourth official could have easily seen the goal and told the ref to disallow it. How the Lino missed that is very suspect.

[benjii]

More pathetic officiating costing Newcastle a goal. Would have been sorted in five seconds with a TV official checking.

[Batman]

More pathetic officiating costing Newcastle a goal. Would have been sorted in five seconds with a TV official checking.

 

that was ridiculous wasn't it. woefully offside

as you say, a TV replay would have had that sorted within 5 seconds

[david in sweden]

More pathetic officiating costing Newcastle a goal. Would have been sorted in five seconds with a TV official checking.

 

Agreed. It's not as if it were a borderline decision - is it ? If Newcastle get relegated by two points .or even one...it'll be rough justice.

[The9]

Still not as bad as the one City scored against us when Silva was nearly 5 yards offside a couple of seasons ago...

[benjii]

Still not as bad as the one City scored against us when Silva was nearly 5 yards offside a couple of seasons ago...

 

And that wasn't as bad as one Spurs got earlier in the season when Walker (I think) was about ten yards offside, right in front of the linesman, and crossed the ball for a goal.

[nta786]

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11945/10276923/mark-clattenburg-will-referee-this-years-champions-league-and-fa-cup-finals

 

Jesus Christ.

 

The less said the better.

[Give it to Ron]

http://www.skysports.com/football/news/11945/10276923/mark-clattenburg-will-referee-this-years-champions-league-and-fa-cup-finals

 

Jesus Christ.

 

The less said the better.

 

He deserves it for Spurs v Chelsea he made 1 mistake in an almost impossible to ref game

[Shroppie]

He deserves it for Spurs v Chelsea he made 1 mistake in an almost impossible to ref game

Only one? Should have been at least two reds.

 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

[rallyboy]

I think his one mistake lasted approx 95 minutes.

[sandwichsaint]

Utter joke.

[Shroppie]

Got to feel for Brighton. Concede a goal after an obvious push. Very poor by the ref, and another big case for video referrals. Would have taken 10 seconds to get the right outcome.

 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

[Batman]

Got to feel for Brighton. Concede a goal after an obvious push. Very poor by the ref, and another big case for video referrals. Would have taken 10 seconds to get the right outcome.

 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

 

it evens out over the season. apparently

[Shroppie]

it evens out over the season. apparently

Bo!!ocks.

 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

[Whitey Grandad]

Got to feel for Brighton. Concede a goal after an obvious push. Very poor by the ref, and another big case for video referrals. Would have taken 10 seconds to get the right outcome.

 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

 

You can't judge a push on TV. Maybe the defender knew that he wasn't getting there and 'pretended' to receive a push. He's a big man and seemed to fly through the air easily. As I say, you can't tell on TV.

[Shroppie]

You can't judge a push on TV. Maybe the defender knew that he wasn't getting there and 'pretended' to receive a push. He's a big man and seemed to fly through the air easily. As I say, you can't tell on TV.

I'm a fairly big man and I don't tend to fly anywhere unless I'm shoved very hard.

 

And why can't you tell on TV?

 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

[Whitey Grandad]

I'm a fairly big man and I don't tend to fly anywhere unless I'm shoved very hard.

 

And why can't you tell on TV?

 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

 

Unless you shove yourself? Yes - it can happen and some of them are very good at it. Forwards especially spend ages practising throwing themselves to the ground. The only clue you get is the speed and timing with which it happens. Sometimes they just seem to go down too quickly.

 

To judge whether it's a shove you need to see the nuances of the moves, how the alleged shiver has planted his feet, how his weight changes, how the one being shoved changes body shape under the impulse, these are all difficult to determine through a television screen. I'm not saying that this definitely wasn't a foul, by the way, just that what you see on TV is not necessarily what actually happened.

 

Anyway, back to the game

[Shroppie]

Unless you shove yourself? Yes - it can happen and some of them are very good at it. Forwards especially spend ages practising throwing themselves to the ground. The only clue you get is the speed and timing with which it happens. Sometimes they just seem to go down too quickly.

 

To judge whether it's a shove you need to see the nuances of the moves, how the alleged shiver has planted his feet, how his weight changes, how the one being shoved changes body shape under the impulse, these are all difficult to determine through a television screen. I'm not saying that this definitely wasn't a foul, by the way, just that what you see on TV is not necessarily what actually happened.

 

Anyway, back to the game

Fair enough. Truce. Just want Brighton to win.

 

Sent from my D6503 using Tapatalk

[whelk]

Ladies and gentlemen I give you the best referee in the world.......Mark Clattenburg. Also wanted by China. The man's ego will be even more out of control today.

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/chinese-super-league-targeting-move-9524426

[Batman]

Mike Dean rightly getting slaughtered in the last 24 hours or so

 

the standard of officiating is appalling really

[Give it to Ron]

Oliver having a great game tonight

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk