Don't agree with Ash Trays opinion on the ref. I think they are dead wrong. The refs need to admit that they made a mistake and look at where they have gone wrong. Then they can then make improvements.
Commentators said that the referee was very inconsistent and didn't know whether they are coming or going.
Just listening to Chris Powell, who also said that Wagstaff's second yellow was not a sending off. He even said that Danny Hollands was at most a booking. CP said that even the Oldham's players sending off was not dubious.
CP said that he was very proud of the players coming away with 3 points with 9 players.
He is right about that. Great spirit and fortitude in the team. It bodes well for the run in.
When I see a youngster refereeing junior football, no matter how potentially good they are it saddens me. They should be paying the game. I think it is one of the biggest issues in the game that a lot of officials don't know what goes on in a game. If they did they would officiate them better.
Leaving aside todays game, there are just far too many bookings and sendings off these days. More often than not it ruins the game as a spectacle for the supporters. Personally, I'm getting sick of it
Yes, me too. The rules have changed, but the players just fail to change the way they play. It's so frustrating.
Perhaps the rules need to be changed then. Either that or we make it a non contact sport, because as I see it, unless every tackle is timed to perfection, or perceived by the referee as being perfect, then a booking or sending of will inevitably result.
Ashtray. Just a question. Aren't you the one that sticks up for refs every game
I wouldn't say I stick up for them as such. I just think people get things out of perspective and fail to acknowledge their obvious bias as a fan of one of the teams involved. I am the voice of reason.
When both sets of fans, the players and managers seem to have fault with the referee I think it's reasonable to suggest that the fault lies with his officiating. Still pissing off both sides does demonstrate that he was consistent.
YEs, but as I say, all those you mention have a vested interested in the game. The impartial outsiders watching have all pointed blame at the players and the pitch.
He probably is more picky than most refs and we all come across people like that in our jobs, but as I say, it's his perogative to apply the rules to the letter. His performance won't make the news outside the context of the game and he won't be criticised by his bosses because all he did was apply the laws of the game as they are written.
He hasn't affected the result - as refs don't in 99.9% of occasions - which is my point 99.9% of the time where refs are concerned.
The commentary team suggested that Wagstaff slipped and accidentally fouled his opponent, so I'm not sure how that was applying the laws to the "letter".
It's fair enough to ask that referees adjudicate according to the laws, but you need a modicum of common sense in applying those laws. If the refeeres applied the laws mechanically then many matches would finish with seven/eight players left on both sides and numerous free kicks being given out for every bit of shirt pulling, obstruction or foul, no one wants to see that except pedants and jobsworths.
When I see a youngster refereeing junior football, no matter how potentially good they are it saddens me. They should be paying the game. I think it is one of the biggest issues in the game that a lot of officials don't know what goes on in a game. If they did they would officiate them better.
Trouble is, Mutts ....... when a player gets to the end of his playing days, mid-30s, it's a bit late in the day for most to train as a ref; by then, usually they've picked up a few war wounds, knees are shot, etc.
Incidentally, are League referees still forced to retire at 47.......?
The players are much to blame. There are just far too many petty little fouls, shirt tugs, off the ball obstructions, dives, play actings etc .. what is the referee to do ? .. If he sends off a few he's 'card happy' if he lets things go he's incompetent, biased or both. And as for managers standing in the 'technical areas' hurling advice and abuse, what IS that all about ? What needs to be improved a s a p is the law on offside and it's interpretation. It seems that neither officials, nor players, nor spectators understand the present regulations. Having said that, the abuse handed out to match officials is such that I am sure that only the seriously meglomaniacal or masochistic are prepared to do the job. Remember folks, refereeing from the armchair after 50 replays from 49 different angles is a doddle.
Leaving aside todays game, there are just far too many bookings and sendings off these days. More often than not it ruins the game as a spectacle for the supporters. Personally, I'm getting sick of it
Yes, me too. The rules have changed, but the players just fail to change the way they play. It's so frustrating.
Perhaps the rules need to be changed then. Either that or we make it a non contact sport, because as I see it, unless every tackle is timed to perfection, or perceived by the referee as being perfect, then a booking or sending of will inevitably result.
Yes, I agree. It has become very difficult to referee due, in part, to the rules....sorry, laws.
You could fast track ex players into referees, that is my point. You can teach them what they need to know but you cant teach a ref who hasn't played the game about the niggly little things that go on throughouit a game.
There are plenty of players who drift out of the game in their early/mid-20s, mostly because they aren't good enough rather than because they are injured. Most of those who stay in the game do so as coaches or scouts, perhaps they could be offered an alternative career as a referee?
The commentary team suggested that Wagstaff slipped and accidentally fouled his opponent, so I'm not sure how that was applying the laws to the "letter".
It's fair enough to ask that referees adjudicate according to the laws, but you need a modicum of common sense in applying those laws. If the refeeres applied the laws mechanically then many matches would finish with seven/eight players left on both sides and numerous free kicks being given out for every bit of shirt pulling, obstruction or foul, no one wants to see that except pedants and jobsworths.
Yep, as I said, he possibly got the Wgstaff second yellow wrong, although Sky said he didn't. Regarding common sense, see my earlier post.
Good post Lincs, although it shouldn't surprise you that fans, players and managers don't understand the offside rule, as none of them have ever read the laws of the game. Actually, the rule is quite simple really in theory, but it is difficult to apply, which maybe takes us back to Queensland's point that maybe it isn't so much the refs that are the problem, but the rules that they are asked to enforced. Of course, the rules wouldn't have become so convaluted had the original ones been respected and not been challenged and bent at every opportunity by managers, players and pundits alike.
We need more accountability (we are the customers after all) but the quid pro quo is refs need more help.
Answer: 4th official actively assists ref using full video technology. After the game and a chance to view the key decisions, the ref must come out and take questions from the press. A few ego-maniac refs won't like that, well they are the ones we need to be shot of.
We need more accountability (we are the customers after all) but the quid pro quo is refs need more help.
Answer: 4th official actively assists ref using full video technology. After the game and a chance to view the key decisions, the ref must come out and take questions from the press. A few ego-maniac refs won't like that, well they are the ones we need to be shot of.
We need more accountability (we are the customers after all) but the quid pro quo is refs need more help.
Answer: 4th official actively assists ref using full video technology. After the game and a chance to view the key decisions, the ref must come out and take questions from the press. A few ego-maniac refs won't like that, well they are the ones we need to be shot of.
It would be interesting, but I suspect fans would still be left frustrated as they see things which the more impartial professionals of the media wouldn't see as relevant. For example, before Van Persie scored his (shinned) volley at the valley, I was convinced he should have been sent off. BBC didn't show it on MOTD and instead creamed themselves over the goal. I emailed them to ask why and they simply responded; 'We saw it as a yellow and that the ref got it right. We didn't see it as a relevant highlight'.
Ashtray. Just a question. Aren't you the one that sticks up for refs every game
I wouldn't say I stick up for them as such. I just think people get things out of perspective and fail to acknowledge their obvious bias as a fan of one of the teams involved. I am the voice of reason.
When both sets of fans, the players and managers seem to have fault with the referee I think it's reasonable to suggest that the fault lies with his officiating. Still pissing off both sides does demonstrate that he was consistent.
YEs, but as I say, all those you mention have a vested interested in the game. The impartial outsiders watching have all pointed blame at the players and the pitch.
He probably is more picky than most refs and we all come across people like that in our jobs, but as I say, it's his perogative to apply the rules to the letter. His performance won't make the news outside the context of the game and he won't be criticised by his bosses because all he did was apply the laws of the game as they are written.
He hasn't affected the result - as refs don't in 99.9% of occasions - which is my point 99.9% of the time where refs are concerned.
Hopefully, Ash Tray, you stayed listening to Radio London and heard your "impartial outsiders" tearing the ref to pieces. Who you gonna trust now ? ;-)
I spent 6 years refereeing matches at various levels. I thouroughly enjoyed virtually every minute of it. I knew the laws like the back of my hand and always tried to keep a game flowing and felt I could always spot a bad tackle from an honest attempt to get the ball. I always felt I knew when a player was play acting or not.
I spent the whole game talking to the players and tended to let the game flow as much as I could. If there was an incident I would play the advantage as long as I could. I talked to Captains and Linos constantly if I felt there was an issue that needed to be dealt with.
It's what's called being a referee.
However, I was constantly pulled up by assesors and every Tom, Dick and Harry who felt they knew better than the man on the spot or saw things differently from me on the sidelines. I was constantly reminded of the Laws and how I should act on the pitch and how I had made 'poor' or 'ineffective' decisions.
I was constantly marked down by assessors, but ALWAYS given good to great scoring by the Clubs where I officiated.
It is no longer about adjuticating a match it is now about complying with the Laws regardless of the situation. And if a ref wants to progress in the professional game, then that's what he does.
I never doubt the integrity of one of them. They will make mistakes, but they are just mistakes. I do doubt the FA and how they instruct Refs to do their job though. All they want is automatoms who do as they're told.
The commentary team suggested that Wagstaff slipped and accidentally fouled his opponent, so I'm not sure how that was applying the laws to the "letter".
It's fair enough to ask that referees adjudicate according to the laws, but you need a modicum of common sense in applying those laws. If the refeeres applied the laws mechanically then many matches would finish with seven/eight players left on both sides and numerous free kicks being given out for every bit of shirt pulling, obstruction or foul, no one wants to see that except pedants and jobsworths.
Yep, as I said, he possibly got the Wgstaff second yellow wrong, although Sky said he didn't. Regarding common sense, see my earlier post.
Good post Lincs, although it shouldn't surprise you that fans, players and managers don't understand the offside rule, as none of them have ever read the laws of the game. Actually, the rule is quite simple really in theory, but it is difficult to apply, which maybe takes us back to Queensland's point that maybe it isn't so much the refs that are the problem, but the rules that they are asked to enforced. Of course, the rules wouldn't have become so convaluted had the original ones been respected and not been challenged and bent at every opportunity by managers, players and pundits alike.
No, the problem is the refs and the linos. Rather than thinking themselves to be gods that make all decisions correctly, they need to understand their limitations in getting certain decisions right - offside being the most obvious.
Yes, I heard a bit and I was surprised at their change of mind. During the game Frogatt clearly stated the ref got most decisions correct. Maybe he succumbed to pressure from the crowd around him. Maybe he'd had a word with SCP, whho I believe is a good mate. Not sure.
Hi Prague, thing is, what 'full video technology' is available at Oldham v Charlton in the third division? Probably one camera in the stands with no replay failities other than rewinding the tape and having a look back. From my tiny knowledge I think Addickted has it about right. Putting cameras in front of referees, I can understand tonight why we want to do that but what will it improve? And do you think broadcasters will run all the footage of where the ref or assistants were correct?
Just seen an unbelievable offside decision given by the lino in the Forest Bristol City game.
Andy Reid rolled a corner to another player who stopped it dead then Reid swung over a cross - only for the lino to flag him offside. ONly the ball never went forward at any time - it went back and was then stopped dead.
There are plenty of players who drift out of the game in their early/mid-20s, mostly because they aren't good enough rather than because they are injured. Most of those who stay in the game do so as coaches or scouts, perhaps they could be offered an alternative career as a referee?
Learning to be a referee takes a bit of time to 'learn the trade', putting in several seasons of game time at Junior level, gaining experience as you gradually progress through the non-league football pyramid.
Nobody is going to pay you more than 'expenses per match' - so all through the years you are doing that, you need a job!
You could fast track ex players into referees, that is my point. You can teach them what they need to know but you cant teach a ref who hasn't played the game about the niggly little things that go on throughouit a game.
Never been convinced by this. Who do I think would do a better job - an experienced ref, who has been doing it for maybe 20 years by the time they are 35, or an ex-player, just out the game. Two completely different jobs and don't necessarily have transferable skills.
Why would a player want to be a ref and take the abuse they have been dishing out to them all their career anyway!
There are plenty of players who drift out of the game in their early/mid-20s, mostly because they aren't good enough rather than because they are injured. Most of those who stay in the game do so as coaches or scouts, perhaps they could be offered an alternative career as a referee?
Learning to be a referee takes a bit of time to 'learn the trade', putting in several seasons of game time at Junior level, gaining experience as you gradually progress through the non-league football pyramid.
Nobody is going to pay you more than 'expenses per match' - so all through the years you are doing that, you need a job!
I'm not suggesting that they go straight into refereeing matches from a playing career, but some willing candidates could be identified and be fast tracked via junior leagues rather than left to drift out of the game.
A lot of ex-cricketers are given this as an option when they retire, and spend a year or two officiating in league and minor county cricket before going onto the FC register.
It has been tried, but there is no evidence that ex-footballers make better refs. I think we have the best we can and aside from simplifying the rules to make them easier to apply, we have to get on with it and accept that in reality, teams win and lose games; refs don't.
Even willing candidates would still need a full time job, while they are reffing their way through the system, BFR......they'll no doubt have families and mortgages, just like the rest of us.
And as we only too frequently see, there's more to reffing than just learning the laws of the game.
What can't be taught is awareness and judgement - refs gain that through experience, across several seasons working their way through the non-league pyramid.
Hi Prague, thing is, what 'full video technology' is available at Oldham v Charlton in the third division? Probably one camera in the stands with no replay failities other than rewinding the tape and having a look back. From my tiny knowledge I think Addickted has it about right. Putting cameras in front of referees, I can understand tonight why we want to do that but what will it improve? And do you think broadcasters will run all the footage of where the ref or assistants were correct?
Take your point which brings me to my wider theme. Power and money needs to be taken back from the illegitimate Premier League and given to a new overall body to replace the FA with competent professional people. the fairer distribution of money will pay for this technology and also better pitches than the one we apparently had to endure today.
We as customers deserve nothing less, we pay enough.
Comments
Commentators said that the referee was very inconsistent and didn't know whether they are coming or going.
Just listening to Chris Powell, who also said that Wagstaff's second yellow was not a sending off. He even said that Danny Hollands was at most a booking. CP said that even the Oldham's players sending off was not dubious.
CP said that he was very proud of the players coming away with 3 points with 9 players.
He is right about that. Great spirit and fortitude in the team. It bodes well for the run in.
Says it all.
It's fair enough to ask that referees adjudicate according to the laws, but you need a modicum of common sense in applying those laws. If the refeeres applied the laws mechanically then many matches would finish with seven/eight players left on both sides and numerous free kicks being given out for every bit of shirt pulling, obstruction or foul, no one wants to see that except pedants and jobsworths.
it's a bit late in the day for most to train as a ref; by then, usually they've picked up a few war wounds, knees are shot, etc.
Incidentally, are League referees still forced to retire at 47.......?
What needs to be improved a s a p is the law on offside and it's interpretation. It seems that neither officials, nor players, nor spectators understand the present regulations.
Having said that, the abuse handed out to match officials is such that I am sure that only the seriously meglomaniacal or masochistic are prepared to do the job. Remember folks, refereeing from the armchair after 50 replays from 49 different angles is a doddle.
Total incompetent!
Good post Lincs, although it shouldn't surprise you that fans, players and managers don't understand the offside rule, as none of them have ever read the laws of the game. Actually, the rule is quite simple really in theory, but it is difficult to apply, which maybe takes us back to Queensland's point that maybe it isn't so much the refs that are the problem, but the rules that they are asked to enforced. Of course, the rules wouldn't have become so convaluted had the original ones been respected and not been challenged and bent at every opportunity by managers, players and pundits alike.
Answer: 4th official actively assists ref using full video technology.
After the game and a chance to view the key decisions, the ref must come out and take questions from the press.
A few ego-maniac refs won't like that, well they are the ones we need to be shot of.
I spent the whole game talking to the players and tended to let the game flow as much as I could. If there was an incident I would play the advantage as long as I could. I talked to Captains and Linos constantly if I felt there was an issue that needed to be dealt with.
It's what's called being a referee.
However, I was constantly pulled up by assesors and every Tom, Dick and Harry who felt they knew better than the man on the spot or saw things differently from me on the sidelines. I was constantly reminded of the Laws and how I should act on the pitch and how I had made 'poor' or 'ineffective' decisions.
I was constantly marked down by assessors, but ALWAYS given good to great scoring by the Clubs where I officiated.
It is no longer about adjuticating a match it is now about complying with the Laws regardless of the situation. And if a ref wants to progress in the professional game, then that's what he does.
I never doubt the integrity of one of them. They will make mistakes, but they are just mistakes. I do doubt the FA and how they instruct Refs to do their job though. All they want is automatoms who do as they're told.
Andy Reid rolled a corner to another player who stopped it dead then Reid swung over a cross - only for the lino to flag him offside. ONly the ball never went forward at any time - it went back and was then stopped dead.
The lino was three feet away. Shocking.
Nobody is going to pay you more than 'expenses per match' - so all through the years you are doing that, you need a job!
Why would a player want to be a ref and take the abuse they have been dishing out to them all their career anyway!
A lot of ex-cricketers are given this as an option when they retire, and spend a year or two officiating in league and minor county cricket before going onto the FC register.
And as we only too frequently see, there's more to reffing than just learning the laws of the game.
What can't be taught is awareness and judgement - refs gain that through experience, across several seasons working their way through the non-league pyramid.
Ask Spankie, on here.
We as customers deserve nothing less, we pay enough.