Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Respecting referees

I didn't put this is the match review as I thought it would make an interesting point for discussion.
At the Watford game I noticed that the Watford players had very clear instructions when talking to the referee. Whether they were complaining to him or receiving punishment, every one stood away from the ref with their hands behind their backs and nodded. They only ever had two players talking to the ref and they were always very respectful.
This tactic had clear benefits. Whenever a Watford player went down they got the benefit of the doubt and they got a lot of decisions their way. Even when they did get booked they took it with the same hands behind the back attitude and the ref reacted to it.
I imagine if you are in a job where people constantly shout at you and surround you and call you names, when a group don't you react differently to them. Also I imagine the types of people who become referees love this deferential attitude. This alowed the Watford players to then take the piss.
Did anyone else notice it? I have spoken to a Brighton fan today and apprently Watford got a lot of ref decisions their way at their game as well so I imagine they have this as a set policy.
Personally I think its a great idea if you can get your players to be level headed enough to do it. The benefits are clear.

Comments

  • Interesting observation, which I didn't notice, and I think you are on to something there.
  • They were definitely doing this. Filthy tackles, ridiculous dives then stood in front of the ref taking their telling off, not moaning, hands crossed behind the back. Interesting observation.
  • Sure it wouldn't do any harm. Mind you, I'm still waiting for a ref to just book everyone within 5 yards of him when he gets mobbed Man Utd style.
  • Correct observation. However, I doubt it helps their cause. Man U, Chelsea & their managers etc do the complete opposite & this benefits them IMO.
  • Interesting Watford view here:

    http://bhappy.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/watford-3-charlton-athletic-4-01012013/

    Giving the impression that Charlton were rather 'robust' in the tackle but were allowed to continue by the ref due to the fact that it was the way we played and wasn't malicious.

    Guess we all see things differently!
  • It would be nice to see the rule about the Captain being the only player allowed to approach the ref was enforced but as it is such a main tactic for everyone's favourite cheats Man Utd nothing will ever be done.

  • It would be nice to see the rule about the Captain being the only player allowed to approach the ref was enforced but as it is such a main tactic for everyone's favourite cheats Man Utd nothing will ever be done.

    Agreed. I still cant beleive how many player still get away with laying their hands on the ref. If the ref has to walk backwards to get away from players then they should go.
  • Interesting point, and I picked up another v Ipswich. When Campbell scored, he and the rest of their team ran to the away bench and stood around having drinks and a chat etc, while N'Daw stood on the centre spot to stop us taking the kick off quickly. I suspected at the time it was a McCarthy pre determoned ploy to take the sting out of the situation for us wanting to get back into play quickly for an equaliser. Clearly Ipswich's play in the 2nd half was designed to waste time and disrupt the flow of the game, so I believe it was pre-meditated.
  • Not sure having ones hands behind your back does Watford much good- if anything it serves to re-enforce stereotypes as it is clear from their other actions that they are not averse to cheating. Doubt even Kettle would have fallen for that!
  • Football needs to have rules that everyone know's and get enforced which is why i think we need technology as it is an impossible job for officials to see and get every decision correct, i really don't understand how the number 1 sport in the world leave's important game changing decision to one man's personal view of how it happened and how harsh he deems it.

    We need black and white rules not open to interpretation IMO.
  • Sponsored links:


  • wickford said:

    Interesting Watford view here:

    http://bhappy.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/watford-3-charlton-athletic-4-01012013/

    Giving the impression that Charlton were rather 'robust' in the tackle but were allowed to continue by the ref due to the fact that it was the way we played and wasn't malicious.

    Guess we all see things differently!

    At least those guys are honest enough to admit that they have a bunch of diving cheats at their club.

  • It could be a strategic tactic by Zola. "If you're going to try and win free kicks by going down easier than normal and taking chances with other tricks, then counteract it in the eyes of the referee by acting like a pro when confronted by him".
  • last_line said:

    Interesting point, and I picked up another v Ipswich. When Campbell scored, he and the rest of their team ran to the away bench and stood around having drinks and a chat etc, while N'Daw stood on the centre spot to stop us taking the kick off quickly. I suspected at the time it was a McCarthy pre determoned ploy to take the sting out of the situation for us wanting to get back into play quickly for an equaliser. Clearly Ipswich's play in the 2nd half was designed to waste time and disrupt the flow of the game, so I believe it was pre-meditated.

    Yes, I noticed that one too. Saying that, I remember commenting in the first couple of minutes of that match that it looked like the keeper was time-wasting.
    I would love to see a ref give a keeper two yellow cards for time-wasting, I think it's a horrible tactic, even when we do it. Imagine the message it would send, if players got sent off for it?

    Saying that, I remember a win against Liverpool about a decade ago where we ran the ball into the corner for the last 10 minutes, and just kept it there, getting throw-ins, corners and free-kicks, and taking them all as short as possible. At the time, I found that hilarious.

    I've just noticed that I have digressed somewhat from the original thread. I think it's because I'm trying to do some work.
  • Saying that, I remember a win against Liverpool about a decade ago where we ran the ball into the corner for the last 10 minutes, and just kept it there, getting throw-ins, corners and free-kicks, and taking them all as short as possible. At the time, I found that hilarious.

    I don't have a problem with that sort of play because the ball is in play and the opposing team can at least try to do something about it. What I hate, and it's something that really puts me off Hamer, is when players waste time when the ball is out of play and the other team are forced to rely on the officials to do anything about it.

  • DRF said:

    I didn't put this is the match review as I thought it would make an interesting point for discussion.
    At the Watford game I noticed that the Watford players had very clear instructions when talking to the referee. Whether they were complaining to him or receiving punishment, every one stood away from the ref with their hands behind their backs and nodded. They only ever had two players talking to the ref and they were always very respectful.
    This tactic had clear benefits. Whenever a Watford player went down they got the benefit of the doubt and they got a lot of decisions their way. Even when they did get booked they took it with the same hands behind the back attitude and the ref reacted to it.
    I imagine if you are in a job where people constantly shout at you and surround you and call you names, when a group don't you react differently to them. Also I imagine the types of people who become referees love this deferential attitude. This alowed the Watford players to then take the piss.
    Did anyone else notice it? I have spoken to a Brighton fan today and apprently Watford got a lot of ref decisions their way at their game as well so I imagine they have this as a set policy.
    Personally I think its a great idea if you can get your players to be level headed enough to do it. The benefits are clear.

    Very good post.

    I qualified as a class three ref ages ago. So firstly I both get and don't get the idea about 'the types of people who become referees love this deferential attitude'. Firstly I became a ref because as a player when the ref doesn't show or isn't available somebody has to do it, and i was deemed better at it that the others (it helped that I was also one of the crappest players), I carried on after playing, not because I was an egotist wanting deference, but because I wanted to stay involved.

    However I found I wanted a kind of deference from players because that attitude is essential if a referee is to be able to actually do their job. Constant abuse and challenges is what referees hate the most. Fawning crawling is not what referees want, an acceptance that it is supposed to be a sport, and someone needs to be in charge is what they do want.

    So when you take charge of a game, if a player, or a team, seems to accept your decisions, are polite and respectful, you're likely to 'like' them more than the snarling tossers who constantly have a go. If you get sarcastic 'good decision referee' stuff you think 'tosser', but the polite look at you to ascertain the correct position for a throw or free kick, the quick acceptance of your decision (even if you have doubts about it yourself), the general spoting nature of a player or a team will (because of human nature) work in their favour. It may also lead you to make a crucial 50/50 call in their favour too, and influence the result of a match.

    Incidentally, I would be amazingly impressed if ANY of those Watford players had even read the laws of football. Mark Kinsella on the 5th told me he had never actually read the laws which is honest. I used to have a copy of the laws down my socks like shinpads when I reffed locally, and if a particularly arsey player wanted to have a go about how I was wrong, I used to offer him the book and ask him to prove he was right and I was wrong!

  • If football time-keeping was actually sane then it wouldn't be possible to time-waste. Obviously you could still run the clock down by passing it square across your back four ad-infinitum, or holding it in the corner, but all the petty time wasting tactics, particularly used by keepers, would be pointless.

    Regarding players surrounding the referee, the referees and the FA are far too scared of the big players/clubs to ever do anything about it. Fergie pioneered it whilst at Aberdeen to great effect and brought it south with him. Now virtually every club does it and it's despicable. The FA really should clamp down on it, if they cared about the game at all they would. It's fair enough at the top level to a certain extent, there's big crowds and TV cameras. But at the lower levels of football the players ape the mega-stars, surrounding and abusing referees where there is absolutely no protection at all. The FA (and the professional clubs/players) have a duty to stop this behaviour, a duty they spectacularly and constantly fail at.
  • I keep reading all these Watford fans moaning about our players dirty challenge’s but I can’t recall one occasion during the game where their fans were angered by it.
  • I think you have a more than fair point DRF , unfortunately i was too busy disrespecting the referee to notice.
  • cafctom said:

    It could be a strategic tactic by Zola. "If you're going to try and win free kicks by going down easier than normal and taking chances with other tricks, then counteract it in the eyes of the referee by acting like a pro when confronted by him".

    I can only assume it was strategic because they all did it and I've never seen a player do it before. Does anyone remember if he did this himself as a player.

    And I have to disagree slightly with Randy. Yes it is up to refs and the FA to enforce the rules but is it not also up to clubs, managers and players themselves to observe the rules? Football seems to have an odd acceptance of a low level of constant cheating or at least bnending of the rules. Zola (if this policy has come from him) has found a way to instill a bit of polite-ness into his playing staff even if it is to gain an advantage in other ways. I would like to see us adopting a similar policy.

  • I don't think you're disagreeing with me DRF, I say in my last sentence that the clubs and players share that duty and failure.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!