Questioning Ref's

[Terminal Boardom]

Sod the referees, they don't command respect - maybe they might have a case if they weren't so useless at their jobs. If I was as shit at my job as Mike Dean is at his, I'd get sued for fraud. The main problem lies with the people who run the game, but unfortunately they've been in power for so long that it's trickled down and now I can't even name one decent referee. Officials should be taught to use common sense, should be wary of the limelight and choose to leave that to the players and do their jobs, but nowadays the likes of Graham Poll and Winter are ACTUALLY BEING PAID to give their opinions. Give it a rest guys, when have you ever played the game? Poll will go down in history as the man who couldn't count at the World Cup, waste of space tosser.

Sadly, referees are not allowed to use common sense. If only they could.

[Terminal Boardom]

The problem is that refs decisions or lack of them now directly change results because the standards of play are so high. The best way for a player to get an advantage over another team is to cheat. IMHO there's no way Chelsea should of had a penalty, yet that decision hands Chelsea 2pts.

I think most of the blame lies with the players and their standard of cheating, until that changes it will be pretty well impossible for refs to make genuine calls without points for artistic impression. There's no way someone who's 6'6" gets toppled over by a slight nudge in the back, but if they don't the defenders get away with the push.

Having said that some refs seem to have decided it's a non contact sport, particularly at International and Champions league level, which just makes the games tedious to watch.

Who is responsible for having the players cheat or to surround a match official? Brian Clough never tolerated his players berating match officials. SSC instilled a great level of discipline when he was here. The reponsibility lies squarely with the clubs.

[Hoop Blah]

The problem is that refs decisions or lack of them now directly change results because the standards of play are so high. The best way for a player to get an advantage over another team is to cheat. IMHO there's no way Chelsea should of had a penalty, yet that decision hands Chelsea 2pts.

There was nothing wrong with that penalty decision though was there? The ball was played past him and he prevented (although arguably unintentionally) the attacker from getting to the ball the other side of him. That's a foul.

I think most of the blame lies with the players and their standard of cheating, until that changes it will be pretty well impossible for refs to make genuine calls without points for artistic impression. There's no way someone who's 6'6" gets toppled over by a slight nudge in the back, but if they don't the defenders get away with the push.

I agree it's the players cheating that causes most of the issues because it makes the refs job harder than it needs to be. You'll always get tackles that are genuine attempts to get the ball but end up as fouls etc, and so there is a need for someone to ref, but the diving and cheating that goes on makes it impossible for a ref to get everything correct.

One thing that does wind me up though is fans and pundits saying a player going to ground is either a foul or a dive. Sometimes it's neither, and sometimes what looks like a dive is just the momentum of a player at full tilt getting the slightest of touches which can send you tumbling.

Having said that some refs seem to have decided it's a non contact sport, particularly at International and Champions league level, which just makes the games tedious to watch.

Agreed.

[Hoop Blah]

Spot on Hoop Blah. Clattenburg quote and scenario is a great example of what I am getting at. He is happy with how he dealt with it because in the heat of the match he believed he and his team got it right. Start admitting you get lots of decisions wrong each game would mean that you would go through refs like I don't know what as they all be under suspension.

It's finding the right balance though. Clattenburg has done himself no favours in sticking by his original decision after being presented further evidence from the TV cameras. That will weaken his reputation more than getting it wrong in the first place.

Perhaps the solution is for Refs to be given the chance to watch the full 90 minutes of their game on TV before submitting their report. They can then reveiw all their own decisions and take any further action deemed necessary.

That can happen across all professional leagues as their all filmed these days. Keeping it in-sync with park football is irrelevant these days because their not administered the same way (eg a park player might get a 6 week ban for a sending off whereas a league player 1 game).

[Terminal Boardom]

I agree it's the players cheating that causes most of the issues because it makes the refs job harder than it needs to be. You'll always get tackles that are genuine attempts to get the ball but end up as fouls etc, and so there is a need for someone to ref, but the diving and cheating that goes on makes it impossible for a ref to get everything correct.

That is why I was of the opinion that the red card awarded to the QPR player against reading recently was a dreadful decision. I could see no malice or intent to foul. This was a case of a mistimed tackle exacerbated by Kebe's pace. Whereas, the blatant trip from behind on MacAnuff in the second half (by Connolly iirc), was far more cynical and that is the sort of foul that gets my goat.

Sadly, since the word "intent" was removed from the rules, we are stuck with match officials who have no option but to officiate to the letter of the law - eg yellow card for goal celebrations when the player goes into the crowd. One point to add on that though. It is a cautionable offence to either enter or leave the field of play without the referee's permission. This being so, why doesn't the referee caution ALL the players who celebrate with the goalscorer whenever they leave the field of play?

[Hoop Blah]

The current thinking as that any tackle that is reckless and where the player isn't fully in control is endangering the player their tackling though.

His tackle was mis-timed but also arguably out of control and reckless so I can understand why, in the current climate, he saw red. It's trying to protect players from those 'leg breakers' which actually aren't really leg breakers at all....but that's another debate!

[Svlad Cjelli]

There is a disconnect between FIFA & The FA causing some problems here.

FIFA want to have no appeals for anything whatsoever - i.e. whatever The Ref did/didn't see stands and that's it. The only exception is video punishments for simulation, ISTR.

The FA already allow appeals for red cards, and for replay evidence to be used when when the ref missed an original incident - FIFA hate these, and want The FA to change them. The FA has said no, which means that it'd be really difficult for them to make any changes to what they have now.

[Hoop Blah]

That's an odd one then because FIFA are the ones who allow for it in their regulations and aren't they the ones who allowed the replay of whatever game it was a few years back after a technical error by the ref (that might've actually been the local federation of course).

[handbags_harris]

The current thinking as that any tackle that is reckless and where the player isn't fully in control is endangering the player their tackling though.

His tackle was mis-timed but also arguably out of control and reckless so I can understand why, in the current climate, he saw red. It's trying to protect players from those 'leg breakers' which actually aren't really leg breakers at all....but that's another debate!

With you on this one. Ephraim was never going to win the ball with his challenge but still went through with it, malice intended or not. A player at any level knows whether they are able to get the ball or not and has the opportunity to back out of the challenge but instead chose to go through with an ugly lunge on Kebe. In fact, we'd seen a similar challenge by Clint Hill on Karacan in only the 2nd minute which, another example of a challenge that Hill was never going to win but, in this case, there is the significant factor of QPR's manager who always sends his teams out to tackle hard.

[Ian Royal]

There is a thinking time and emotion element involved as well HH that means that sometimes you genuinely believe you will make it until it is already too late, or that you gamble on the other player bottling or otherwise arsing it up.

It really is genuinely hard to pull out or stop what you are doing if you are already heading that way at full pelt.

[handbags_harris]

There is a thinking time and emotion element involved as well HH that means that sometimes you genuinely believe you will make it until it is already too late, or that you gamble on the other player bottling or otherwise arsing it up.

It really is genuinely hard to pull out or stop what you are doing if you are already heading that way at full pelt.

Personally speaking, I have no problem making that judgement which is why you will rarely see me give away a free kick when I'm playing and why I've only ever been booked once in Sunday League football in 10 years of playing (and that was for dissent). Bear in mind that I've played a significant proportion of my days at left back and left wing, so plenty of tackling opportunities to judge.

[Ian Royal]

There is a thinking time and emotion element involved as well HH that means that sometimes you genuinely believe you will make it until it is already too late, or that you gamble on the other player bottling or otherwise arsing it up.

It really is genuinely hard to pull out or stop what you are doing if you are already heading that way at full pelt.

Personally speaking, I have no problem making that judgement which is why you will rarely see me give away a free kick when I'm playing and why I've only ever been booked once in Sunday League football in 10 years of playing (and that was for dissent). Bear in mind that I've played a significant proportion of my days at left back and left wing, so plenty of tackling opportunities to judge.

Some are obviously better at it than others... but also modern professional football is played at a totally different pace and intensity to Sunday League stuff.

[handbags_harris]

There is a thinking time and emotion element involved as well HH that means that sometimes you genuinely believe you will make it until it is already too late, or that you gamble on the other player bottling or otherwise arsing it up.

It really is genuinely hard to pull out or stop what you are doing if you are already heading that way at full pelt.

Personally speaking, I have no problem making that judgement which is why you will rarely see me give away a free kick when I'm playing and why I've only ever been booked once in Sunday League football in 10 years of playing (and that was for dissent). Bear in mind that I've played a significant proportion of my days at left back and left wing, so plenty of tackling opportunities to judge.

Some are obviously better at it than others... but also modern professional football is played at a totally different pace and intensity to Sunday League stuff.

Fairly obvious, but then those players that play league football should be able to make a judgement based on their own ability. Ephraim's was an ugly lunge, no doubt in my mind in some form of fear that if he pulls out of it he gets an earful from Warnock. You have to factor the manager's mentality in this case...

[Ian Royal]

I think frustration and a rush of blood to the head are more to blame than thinking about Warnock.

[Super_horns]

Officials just need to be stronger like they are in rugby then maybe this petty abuse from managers and players will stop.

It seems the big names can get away with most..if one of ours had elbowed somebody in the head off the ball would they?