The standard of refereeing in this country is poor. From the Premier League right down to the local leagues (Not park football, but leagues like the Ryman League and the Kent League).
Maybe we shouldn't be blaming the officials, but the people in charge. The match officials need more structure, more coaching and more help in general. A lot of them have never played the game. They know the laws very well, but they need to know what players and fans expect too.
To put it into perspective Saudi Arabia have more match officials on the FIFA list than England. That tells a story in itself.
Oi, I ref in the Kent League and line on the Ryman!!! ;-)
Present company excluded Spankie. ;-)
I went to watch Erith and Belvedere a couple of weeks ago and although the referee wasn't bad his two assistants were awful.
One was about 80 and although he tried his best, he just couldn't keep up with the young players in their late teens and early twenties. The other guy was very young, but looked like he weighed about 25 stone. He stood in the same position all game, and didn't run once. Let's just say the managers and players of both teams (politely) let him know what they thought at the end of the match.
Throw ins wind me up. It should be simple. On the half of the touch-lines where there's a lino, he should indicate the spot the throw is to be taken from, just like in rugby. The player doesn't take it from that exact spot, then foul throw, other team get the ball. Just this change would make it a lot easier to enforce the other half, players would get used to not taking the piss at least part of the time.
I am new to this sight, although have been reading it for the past couple of months. I have to agree that the standard of reffing this season is dreadful ! with them not even being able to get the simple decisions right. In most games we see now days , how many times do we see foul throws, not being pulled up on ? also what about where the throw is actually taken from ? in some cases players nick 20 yards ? I know this is the same for all teams, if you can get away with it etc... but it's not difficult is it. Because we've all become so used to it, no one complains.
I think some of the refs are new to sight as well.
Interesting point. I do think that refs letting things go and letting the game flow causes a gradual erosion of standards. The number of foul throws that are overlooked and the number of times keepers hang onto the ball for too long mean that those things are now seen as being ok.
You need a balance. If every other throw-in was penalised then the crowd would rightfully be in uproar but certainly letting every single throw in be it from the wrong place or not executed properly shouldn't be allowed either.
The standard of refereeing in this country is poor. From the Premier League right down to the local leagues (Not park football, but leagues like the Ryman League and the Kent League).
Maybe we shouldn't be blaming the officials, but the people in charge. The match officials need more structure, more coaching and more help in general. A lot of them have never played the game. They know the laws very well, but they need to know what players and fans expect too.
To put it into perspective Saudi Arabia have more match officials on the FIFA list than England. That tells a story in itself.
Oi, I ref in the Kent League and line on the Ryman!!! ;-)
Present company excluded Spankie. ;-)
I went to watch Erith and Belvedere a couple of weeks ago and although the referee wasn't bad his two assistants were awful.
One was about 80 and although he tried his best, he just couldn't keep up with the young players in their late teens and early twenties. The other guy was very young, but looked like he weighed about 25 stone. He stood in the same position all game, and didn't run once. Let's just say the managers and players of both teams (politely) let him know what they thought at the end of the match.
Trying to think who that could be! As level 4 refs we could get anything from experienced level 5s to 'passed last week' level 7s and anything in age from 16 to 80 on our lines. You just have to do the best with what you're given. Who were they playing? I have done E&B twice this season at Holmesdale and home to Greenwich Borough in the Kent Senior Trophy.
Trying to think who that could be! As level 4 refs we could get anything from experienced level 5s to 'passed last week' level 7s and anything in age from 16 to 80 on our lines. You just have to do the best with what you're given. Who were they playing? I have done E&B twice this season at Holmesdale and home to Greenwich Borough in the Kent Senior Trophy.
Thanks Plaaayer , I agree , sometimes you do wonder if they are watching the same game ? perhaps it's just that the game is so fast now, and the players are so good at trying to gain advantage by play acting / cheating , that it is impossible to tell ? although sometimes you do think the ref is blind ! or as my dear old dad says, how much have they paid you !!
Fuller could easily have walked on saturday for slapping their defender in the face. It was seen by the lino but no sending off.
Our second against Ipswich was very fortunate. I thought it was much easier for the ref to give the foul than let play go and Fuller got the winning goal.
We get fortunate decisions. The difference is we dont make use of that soft free kick or corner. Weve had soft free kicks outside the box and just not had the quality. If watford dont stick that free kick in and Jackson capitalises in a seperate, close game we walk away with 4 points rather than 1.
I suppose you have a point - in some cases you have to capitalise on the effects of a poor decsion to gain an advantage from it. Doesn't apply to wrong offisdes or penalty calls but does to some incidents. Still, I don't think anybody can claim that we have not been unuslaly unfortunate this season to date. I really hope it will change and we are owed a few bebefits of th edoubt going our way I think.
As for the standard of refs - one thing that annoys me is that when I watch a Premiership game, the refs there let far less go. Some Championship refs would let a knifeing go I suspect!! Then you have situations where premiership refs ref a Championship game- and ref it like a Championship ref. Is there an established different set of rules to referee in the Championship? It seems to me that some teams build there away tactics around this so there must be.
So why hasn't goal line technology been introduced?? With all the points taken into consideration on this thread, the cost to clubs, relegation etc why hasn't it been introduced? Perhaps it just suits certain officials of the game to maintain a 'Grey area'.....
Some might say Forest's opening goal wasn't a freekick either, but in fact a foul Solly. I wouldn't award any extra points on that though.
Yes and Forest should have had a player sent off - maybe two as should Leed shave last night - but I asked for something that went our way. Not sure the second at Ipswich really is that convincing an example but maybe th ebest there is available!
I have been obliged to ref in our old Sunday League games, so I know damn well how difficult it is to get it right. The problem in my view is much deeper than the refs. It is in the way pro football is run, and that is where we need to look for the solutions. The first thing is fundamental. We fans are customers, our money pays for the whole show. Football has a duty to customers to ensure that as many decisions as possible are correct - and are seen by the customers to be correct.
If that's accepted - and how can it not be? - then I believe the following things should be implemented without delay.
1. Added time must be transparent. The clock should be administered by the 4th official and this clock should be there for all us customers to see on a giant screen. It stops ticking whenever the 4th official deems that play has been halted beyond the normal flow. So it ends at 90.00, and then a giant automatic whistle sounds. Is there any good reason why this should not happen? Not least because that's basically what happens in ice hockey.
2. Similarly the 4th official watches and replays everything on video, and is in constant touch with the ref. The ref can still overrule the 4th official if he sees fit. At half-time the ref and his assistants can, instead of just talking among themselves, actually watch video replays of key incidents. They may then pick up on people like that Norris guy last night who was apparently at it the whole game.
3. Referees should be available to the media after the game to explain their decisions to the customers (but after having seen key video replays)
What's the big deal about any of those things, other than people's egos? The money is there, oh yes, the money is there...Our money!
Of course there is less chance of this happening than us owning a chunk of CAFC, but that does not mean we should not demand both, as they are both clearly good things...
The thing that always always winds me up about added time is the people who moan and complain if it doesn't stop dead on 1,2,3, however many minutes exactly. It is the MINIMUM of added time, the announcer says that quite clearly (well at the Valley anyway.) If either team starts timewasting in the added time, the ref is not only well within his rights to keep the game going, he should.
Agreed Prague- and a very good point about the added time. Players time waste because it works - you can't blame them. Refs never scientifically record how much play is lost and will always under estimate. Maybe the ideal is too radical - which is to shorten the duration of a game to 70 minutes, but have a seperate timekeeper stopping the clock every time the action stops. I don't think any match has 70 minutes of play at the moment so this will provide better value and prevent cheating.
Re pragues 2nd point. If the officials saw that Norris was "at it" all first half then surely they'd go out with a prejudged opinion for the second half increasing the chance of 2 wrongs trying to make a right.
I agree that I have been disappointed with the standard of refereeing this season. After some poor referees last year, I was hopeful that in moving up a division the standard may improve, but this hasn't been the case. If anything, it does sometimes seem that the faster pace of play can leave the referee one step behind.
BUT
I don't agree with the idea that we can somehow blame the referees for being 'only' 18th at present. Threads like this one remind me too much of the bad old days of 4-5 years ago. The idea that we are where we are because we've had a shed load of bad luck, and that soon our luck will change, just doesn't hold any water with me. I don't remember this many complaints about the officials last season - why was that? Was it because they were better? Was it because less mistakes were made against us? Or was it because, when something didn't go our way, we took another chance to take the points?
Some of the posts above have pointed to individual incidents that have 'cost us points'. Prime example - BWP's 'goal' against Palace which was ruled offside. At the time, I was absolutely incensed, and berating the referee and linesman along with everyone else. It's frustrating when these things happen. But I think, rather than blaming the referee for a poor decision which cancelled out our only clear chance of the game, we could perhaps better question why it was that we only managed to create one good chance all game.
At the end of the day, refereeing errors affect all teams. It's part of the game. I don't believe, on the whole, that referees are biased - I believe that they are genuinely trying to do the best job they can. There may be one or two exceptions, but this is the exception rather than the rule. Maybe we have had more decisions go against us so far this season, but that's life. I'd also say it's the ones that go against you that people tend to remember - and fans of all teams are the same.
In terms of poor decisions in our favour, there have been several. Despite the playacting from the opponent, Laurie Wilson did stamp against Watford, and should have walked for it. This would have been a very easy call for the ref to make, as he had already sent off Forestieri, but he kept his cards in his pocket. I'm sure that many Watford fans came away that evening thinking that the ref had been biased in our favour. Last night there was at least one clear foul by Wilson (which could have been a booking), but was missed by the ref. There have been penalty shouts against us not given (at least one at Leeds last night). I could go on...
Better than 'getting away with' a clear red card? This is exactly the point I was making - you have challenged people to remember bad decisions which went in our favour, and the point is that people will only ever really remember the ones that go against us. Maybe you should ask fans of the other clubs we've played what their impression was?
Also, 'big calls' usually only become 'big calls' because of what happens subsequently. Perhaps if we'd taken more from set pieces then some of the soft free-kicks which have been forgotten about might have been remembered...
The thing that always always winds me up about added time is the people who moan and complain if it doesn't stop dead on 1,2,3, however many minutes exactly. It is the MINIMUM of added time, the announcer says that quite clearly (well at the Valley anyway.) If either team starts timewasting in the added time, the ref is not only well within his rights to keep the game going, he should.
No, you've got it wrong ! ;-)
We, the paying customers, are supposed to think the time added reflects time added on for stoppages etc and is therefore, as the prescribed message infers, merely a minimum. Whilst a few refs play it like that (old habits etc) the vast majority (particularly for european/international matches) think of a number near the end of a match and play that exact number of minutes extra time. It does of course vary slightly as they like to blow up as the ball is returning to play from a re-start. Rarely will they add time on for stoppages and time wasting after the normal 90 minutes. Its just another example of how the authorities have no respect for the customer.
Better than 'getting away with' a clear red card? This is exactly the point I was making - you have challenged people to remember bad decisions which went in our favour, and the point is that people will only ever really remember the ones that go against us. Maybe you should ask fans of the other clubs we've played what their impression was?
Well I would dispute it was a clear red card - the Watford player tried to manufacture it to look like a stamp IMO and was lucky not to be sent off himself. But it was a game we lost so not a great example all the same. As for the clear Leeds penalty - what one was that? - I heard no complaints from Leeds over it! There were a number of penalty claims for us I could have mentioned- you have to draw th elin esomewhere which is what I tried to do.
Also, 'big calls' usually only become 'big calls' because of what happens subsequently. Perhaps if we'd taken more from set pieces then some of the soft free-kicks which have been forgotten about might have been remembered...
I have acknowledged this aspect already - but think you have to be living in cloud cuckoo land to think we haven't been particularly unlucky this season - which really is the crux of my point.
How many times have the refs cost us now? I'd hazard a guess that had it been Cardiff, those decisions wouldn't have been given.
Vs Boro, we'd have got at least a point, vs Brighton if the 3 penalty shouts went in our favour we'd have got a point and yesterday we probably would have got a point. Did I miss any? Hudderfield foresteri kicked in the face right front of ref.
Better than 'getting away with' a clear red card? This is exactly the point I was making - you have challenged people to remember bad decisions which went in our favour, and the point is that people will only ever really remember the ones that go against us. Maybe you should ask fans of the other clubs we've played what their impression was?
Well I would dispute it was a clear red card - the Watford player tried to manufacture it to look like a stamp IMO and was lucky not to be sent off himself. But it was a game we lost so not a great example all the same. As for the clear Leeds penalty - what one was that? - I heard no complaints from Leeds over it! There were a number of penalty claims for us I could have mentioned- you have to draw th elin esomewhere which is what I tried to do.
My point exactly - very few decisions are clear-cut, most are subjective to some extent or another, and these things happen to every team!
Yes, I agree that we have been unlucky so far this season. But I think that focussing on individual incidents takes the focus away from the much bigger issue IMHO, which is the standard of refereeing in general (i.e. affecting all teams). I think the FA really needs to get a hold on this - I'm all in favour of the Respect campaign, but I think that refereeing standards have slipped in general and this needs to be addressed.
Comments
I went to watch Erith and Belvedere a couple of weeks ago and although the referee wasn't bad his two assistants were awful.
One was about 80 and although he tried his best, he just couldn't keep up with the young players in their late teens and early twenties. The other guy was very young, but looked like he weighed about 25 stone. He stood in the same position all game, and didn't run once. Let's just say the managers and players of both teams (politely) let him know what they thought at the end of the match.
WELCOME!
Our second against Ipswich was very fortunate. I thought it was much easier for the ref to give the foul than let play go and Fuller got the winning goal.
We get fortunate decisions. The difference is we dont make use of that soft free kick or corner. Weve had soft free kicks outside the box and just not had the quality. If watford dont stick that free kick in and Jackson capitalises in a seperate, close game we walk away with 4 points rather than 1.
As for the standard of refs - one thing that annoys me is that when I watch a Premiership game, the refs there let far less go. Some Championship refs would let a knifeing go I suspect!! Then you have situations where premiership refs ref a Championship game- and ref it like a Championship ref. Is there an established different set of rules to referee in the Championship? It seems to me that some teams build there away tactics around this so there must be.
With all the points taken into consideration on this thread, the cost to clubs, relegation etc why hasn't it been introduced?
Perhaps it just suits certain officials of the game to maintain a 'Grey area'.....
The first thing is fundamental. We fans are customers, our money pays for the whole show. Football has a duty to customers to ensure that as many decisions as possible are correct - and are seen by the customers to be correct.
If that's accepted - and how can it not be? - then I believe the following things should be implemented without delay.
1. Added time must be transparent. The clock should be administered by the 4th official and this clock should be there for all us customers to see on a giant screen. It stops ticking whenever the 4th official deems that play has been halted beyond the normal flow. So it ends at 90.00, and then a giant automatic whistle sounds. Is there any good reason why this should not happen? Not least because that's basically what happens in ice hockey.
2. Similarly the 4th official watches and replays everything on video, and is in constant touch with the ref. The ref can still overrule the 4th official if he sees fit. At half-time the ref and his assistants can, instead of just talking among themselves, actually watch video replays of key incidents. They may then pick up on people like that Norris guy last night who was apparently at it the whole game.
3. Referees should be available to the media after the game to explain their decisions to the customers (but after having seen key video replays)
What's the big deal about any of those things, other than people's egos? The money is there, oh yes, the money is there...Our money!
Of course there is less chance of this happening than us owning a chunk of CAFC, but that does not mean we should not demand both, as they are both clearly good things...
If the officials saw that Norris was "at it" all first half then surely they'd go out with a prejudged opinion for the second half increasing the chance of 2 wrongs trying to make a right.
I agree that I have been disappointed with the standard of refereeing this season. After some poor referees last year, I was hopeful that in moving up a division the standard may improve, but this hasn't been the case. If anything, it does sometimes seem that the faster pace of play can leave the referee one step behind.
BUT
I don't agree with the idea that we can somehow blame the referees for being 'only' 18th at present. Threads like this one remind me too much of the bad old days of 4-5 years ago. The idea that we are where we are because we've had a shed load of bad luck, and that soon our luck will change, just doesn't hold any water with me. I don't remember this many complaints about the officials last season - why was that? Was it because they were better? Was it because less mistakes were made against us? Or was it because, when something didn't go our way, we took another chance to take the points?
Some of the posts above have pointed to individual incidents that have 'cost us points'. Prime example - BWP's 'goal' against Palace which was ruled offside. At the time, I was absolutely incensed, and berating the referee and linesman along with everyone else. It's frustrating when these things happen. But I think, rather than blaming the referee for a poor decision which cancelled out our only clear chance of the game, we could perhaps better question why it was that we only managed to create one good chance all game.
At the end of the day, refereeing errors affect all teams. It's part of the game. I don't believe, on the whole, that referees are biased - I believe that they are genuinely trying to do the best job they can. There may be one or two exceptions, but this is the exception rather than the rule. Maybe we have had more decisions go against us so far this season, but that's life. I'd also say it's the ones that go against you that people tend to remember - and fans of all teams are the same.
In terms of poor decisions in our favour, there have been several. Despite the playacting from the opponent, Laurie Wilson did stamp against Watford, and should have walked for it. This would have been a very easy call for the ref to make, as he had already sent off Forestieri, but he kept his cards in his pocket. I'm sure that many Watford fans came away that evening thinking that the ref had been biased in our favour. Last night there was at least one clear foul by Wilson (which could have been a booking), but was missed by the ref. There have been penalty shouts against us not given (at least one at Leeds last night). I could go on...
We, the paying customers, are supposed to think the time added reflects time added on for stoppages etc and is therefore, as the prescribed message infers, merely a minimum. Whilst a few refs play it like that (old habits etc) the vast majority (particularly for european/international matches) think of a number near the end of a match and play that exact number of minutes extra time. It does of course vary slightly as they like to blow up as the ball is returning to play from a re-start. Rarely will they add time on for stoppages and time wasting after the normal 90 minutes. Its just another example of how the authorities have no respect for the customer.
Originally Posted by ForzaWatford
How many times have the refs cost us now? I'd hazard a guess that had it been Cardiff, those decisions wouldn't have been given.
Vs Boro, we'd have got at least a point, vs Brighton if the 3 penalty shouts went in our favour we'd have got a point and yesterday we probably would have got a point. Did I miss any?
Hudderfield foresteri kicked in the face right front of ref.
Charlton foresteri sent off for slipping.
Sound familiar?
Yes, I agree that we have been unlucky so far this season. But I think that focussing on individual incidents takes the focus away from the much bigger issue IMHO, which is the standard of refereeing in general (i.e. affecting all teams). I think the FA really needs to get a hold on this - I'm all in favour of the Respect campaign, but I think that refereeing standards have slipped in general and this needs to be addressed.