I thought we played well and was the better team. CP got the subs spot on. When cook come on i was a bit shocked and thought Church should have come on but I think Cook actually changed the game in our favor.
CP learned at the home game against Ipswich that they would deal with Yann and Church fine but put a pacey player up there they hated it.
I agree with JonnyK about Sordell. He looked dangerous and has more pace than anything else we have. I understand why he was dropped but he certainly was not s***e at Ipswich. Can't agree about Cook and Morro though. Cook had a couple of decent touches but didn't contribute enough to push for much more time imo.
I was pleased to see Cook though as it meant CP was trying something different to Church/Kerm which we know has its limitations. Having said that Church's lay-off to JJ for the goal was excellent. Deffo thought we were the better team. Played some football in difficult conditions and showed some spirit too.
There are some games where you have to go with pace - Powell clearly thought it important against Ipswich - hence bringing Cook on. I thought it was worth a go against Wednesday with Sordell on the bench, but we'll never know.
I'm interested in people's opinions of Atwell today. I wasn't at the game, so I'm genuinely wondering; Was his performance actually terrible, or are people viewing through Charlton coloured specs? We football fans (and I include myself) do have a tendency to exaggerate in our teams favour, but today's reports seem more critical of the ref than usual, suggesting that he really did have a stinker. So, if you were there, what do you think? Genuinely awful or maybe a couple of 50-50 decisions that just went the other team's way?
Genuinely awful. Ipswich fans were equally disgruntled when he turned down a decent penalty call for them early on (though not as blatant as ours) and were baffled when one of our players (may have been Stephens) stumbled and rugby tackled one of theirs to the ground, right in front of him. He gave nothing. Throughout it was just random decisions. The two big ones went against us, but Mr Atwell is worse than useless. A stopped clock is right twice a day, but he couldn't even manage that. A truly terrible ref that the FA fast tracked and now cannot admit that he is badly out of his depth and shouldn't be in the professional game.
I'm interested in people's opinions of Atwell today. I wasn't at the game, so I'm genuinely wondering; Was his performance actually terrible, or are people viewing through Charlton coloured specs? We football fans (and I include myself) do have a tendency to exaggerate in our teams favour, but today's reports seem more critical of the ref than usual, suggesting that he really did have a stinker. So, if you were there, what do you think? Genuinely awful or maybe a couple of 50-50 decisions that just went the other team's way?
Genuinely awful. Ipswich fans were equally disgruntled when he turned down a decent penalty call for them early on (though not as blatant as ours) and were baffled when one of our players (may have been Stephens) stumbled and rugby tackled one of theirs to the ground, right in front of him. He gave nothing. Throughout it was just random decisions. The two big ones went against us, but Mr Atwell is worse than useless. A stopped clock is right twice a day, but he couldn't even manage that. A truly terrible ref that the FA fast tracked and now cannot admit that he is badly out of his depth and shouldn't be in the professional game.
After reading this and other worryingly similar comments, it strikes me that there's a case for referee's assessments to be published. If they were State employees, they would be (at least after an FOI request). The principle behind that in the State sector is that we have no choice, so some open-ness provides an internal incentive to do your best. Well we are in the same situation here. There is a monopoly provider of referees, the FA. The customers deserve to have a bit more scrutiny placed on them.
The problem with Atwell is - if you are in a position where you have a shot at goal there is absolutely no reason to go down in the hope you get a penalty - Now you would expect him to apply intelligence to the situation but to be fair, maybe that is what he lacks. I don't like a lot of refs - when i played they were ar*****es and I know a few who are complete tw*ts and most I watch at Championship level are awful. They have an arrogance like they know the game and nobody else does- they know the rules, laws or whatever they want to call them (smug gits) but a lot of them don't know what it is like to play in a midfield having your ankles bitten and what goes on on a football field. The laws of the game don't help you there - because you can't read what is happening. What is the problem? I see it often when my son plays - a youngster who should be playing reffing!!!! If he wants to play then become a ref - great but learn more than the rules, learn the game. I'll get knocked by some ref sympathisers for saying this but they are part of a bigger clique than any in Charlton Life. The sooner ex players are fast tracked to becoming refs the better. Rant over - got that off my chest.
1. "no reason to go down" - Oscar yesterday ?? 2. People need differing skills for playing and refereeing. Playing equals playing skills, refereeing largely, but not solely, equals man-management skills. Some players may go on to be good referees, but it shouldn't be taken as a definite. 3. Finally, no referees, no football.
1. Oscar was a very unusual example - but I'll give you that one. But th eexceptioon doesn't prove the rule. 2. Agree that you need man managment skills and when I say play - I don't mean play in the Prmiership or Championship - it is just that with the greatest respect, a lot of refs don't know what goes on and so can't spot things. If they had played to a decent level, they would know. 3. I would take the refs that can read games - I can spot them a mile off and fast track ex players who have man managmnet skills to join them, so we would have lots of refs. The length of time it takes to be a ref makes it an elite club, but too many members of it are not up to the job.
I recall some years ago that the FA tried to "fast-track" ex players and nothing came from it: I don't know why. You mentioned that you played local football. My experience in this field is that players of teams at the lowest level seem to think all local referees should be of the "Howard Webb" standards. Local referees to me are in three camps: those young and learning their trade (and some go on to better things), Older referees who are on the way down the ladder and finally referees of any age whose skill-set don't allow promotion. Some are poor (in line with the standard of the players they are refereeing). I certainly enjoyed my many years of refereeing, none more so that being appointed as the 4th official for Charlton's first game back at the Valley against Pompey. Happy New year to you.
I haven't said at what level I played, but your response illustrates my point. Refereeing is a closed shop and clique where its members defend themselves. Can't you come out and explain why a ref like Atwell is still reffing - I'm sure lots of ignorant fans like me would like some insight as to why this is the case. If you were a 4th official at the Valley for that game, great , I was a fan watching in that game so what!
I don't think all refs should be great at lower levels btw - just making a point refs should take on board - that young refs need to play the game more to become better refs. I can't see why that is so difficult for refs to understand - except if they accepted it, it would underline a weakness in how they got where they are. Having said that some refs can become refs without this experience I'm sure- it is just that you see so many on a week to week basis in the Championship who need it.
1.4th official - I was trying to make a point that refereeing can be very enjoyable.
2. Best ask the FA about Mr Atwell. All referees are marked by a match assessor and I believe marked my clubs. As in all walks of life, the better rise to the top.
3. I have not defended Mr Atwell, I was not at the game. I was trying to make some general points about refereeing in general.
Muttley makes some good points, although I would disagree that players should become refs; many don't understand the laws and rules of football even though they play the game. Also, there would be too many accusations of bias or cheating against players who became referees.
However, there are too many refs out there who do not know the game of football well. They apply rules rather than logic. Let's take Yann as an example. Now, to my mind he is probably one of the most fouled players in the Championship. He is our talisman and opposition managers and players know this. On a regular basis he is fouled very early on in a game, and usually these are cynical and dnagerous fouls. Yet they go unpunished because the game is in its early stages. But a marker has been laid down nonetheless. He is often fouled when going for a header, yet little is given. Also watch how many times he is taken down when receiving the ball to feet on the halfway line.
The point here is that someone who knows the game and how footballers operate will sense very quickly that such behaviour is intentional and therefore needs to be clamped down on quickly. If one player is being fouled so routinely as Yann, then refs should clock it and deal with it quickly. However, his penchant for theatrics will count against him also.
I dont doubt it is a hard job and there are, in my opinion, no refs who go out to cheat or to favour one team. But too many do not know how footballers, managers and coaches think and the deceit that is prevalent in each game and they need to wisen up to this.
Thanks Sir John - That is my point. I think ability varies but non league, even sunday league players would be possible candidates. I'm not saying make them all refs - they of course need other attributes such as man management, but they will have some inkling of things that go on, because what you have described goes on at all decent levels of the game. Of course the ones that don't understand the laws and can't be taught them should never be refs.
I think the problem is - for whatever reason - some refs do become good refs - but they get the good gigs etc... because they have risen to the top and the current system doesn't produce enough of them. Atwell was seen as having potential but a series of clangers showed he hasn't got what is required. So what happens - he can ref Championship games but can't ref in the Premiership. That is insulting to teams like Charlton and Ipswich who have as much right to a decent ref as any other side. I have known a few refs over the years and without exception they have been pedantic prats. The current system seems to attract that sort of person.
Of course when you point this out, and question, the ref's unionn comes out. They know this and they have done that - It's laws not rule blah blah blah. Well what should be happening is they should be challenging themselves and asking why the standards of so many are so low!
Seems the Ipswich fans agreed with us about Attwell:
"He missed 2 pens , one of which Chambers could have been carded for and failed to notice Berra pulling back a Charlton player, in a decent position after he had been booked!! Glad he had a bad game."
Seems the Ipswich fans agreed with us about Attwell:
"He missed 2 pens , one of which Chambers could have been carded for and failed to notice Berra pulling back a Charlton player, in a decent position after he had been booked!! Glad he had a bad game."
How that guy was fast tracked to the Prem is beyond me.
Thought we played well yesterday, it certainly shows the benefit of having Solly & Wiggins in the team.
I didn't like the cheering from some of our fans when Sordell went down, regardless of what you might think of him he didn't deserve that.
Great to see a deflected goal for us at last and also something against a team managed by McCarthy, neither of which happens very often.
Derby County applied the tactic of fouling an opponent everytime he passed them - nothing major- niggly but cumulative and cheating. But the ref seemed oblivious to this. The fact they are doing so well suggests that thi sis a tactic that most refs are missing or that they only played this way against us.
Quite a few teams have done that this season. Leeds and Wigan did it also. Give fairly cheap fouls away around the centre circle and they tend to go unpunished, particularly if it is a team tactic so one player is not totting up lots of fouls. There is vary rarely an occasion that the stats show us fouling more than the opposition.
This is an example of what we are saying about refs being savvy and taking responsibility early for stamping it out. It seems they do their research on players who dive or have a propensity to be aggressive but not on which players are targetted or fouled regularly.
Yes agree about leeds and Wigan, although I thought Derby weren't subtle at all in their application of it - Part of the problem is that refs don't have the confidence to address this and take control of the game.
I know the crowd looks empty in that shot but it was busy upstairs so they have must have shoved everyone upstairs. Then there was a group of young kids down at the front who you see bouncing around for the goal.
The best ref i have seen this year was at a game between Eastbourne Town and Hartley Wintney in a preliminary round of the FA cup. Not only did he practically give a running commentary to the players when they were tackling, informing them of no fouls he was very clear to each player that one more like that they would be booked, and another one like that you would be off.
He made them take throws where the ball went out and not 20 yards further up the pitch, informed players that if he caught anyone pulling, pushing an opponent in the penalty box, he would give them that - a penalty. Made them stand a proper ten yards and not 7 or 8, spoke to captains when there players were getting a bit lippy.
He also stated clearly the reason for making his decisions so everybody knew.
Result - an even flowing game with no silly penalty box incidents, although he did send two of Eastbourne players off for continually fouling and a two footed lunge, well he did warn them.
Most of the refs we have had this year have been diabolical, worse one Stroud at home to Leeds.
Comments
CP learned at the home game against Ipswich that they would deal with Yann and Church fine but put a pacey player up there they hated it.
I was pleased to see Cook though as it meant CP was trying something different to Church/Kerm which we know has its limitations. Having said that Church's lay-off to JJ for the goal was excellent. Deffo thought we were the better team. Played some football in difficult conditions and showed some spirit too.
1. "no reason to go down" - Oscar yesterday ??
2. People need differing skills for playing and refereeing. Playing equals playing skills, refereeing largely, but not solely, equals man-management skills. Some players may go on to be good referees, but it shouldn't be taken as a definite.
3. Finally, no referees, no football.
I don't think all refs should be great at lower levels btw - just making a point refs should take on board - that young refs need to play the game more to become better refs. I can't see why that is so difficult for refs to understand - except if they accepted it, it would underline a weakness in how they got where they are. Having said that some refs can become refs without this experience I'm sure- it is just that you see so many on a week to week basis in the Championship who need it.
2. Best ask the FA about Mr Atwell. All referees are marked by a match assessor and I believe marked my clubs. As in all walks of life, the better rise to the top.
3. I have not defended Mr Atwell, I was not at the game. I was trying to make some general points about refereeing in general.
4. Still, Happy New Year to you!
However, there are too many refs out there who do not know the game of football well. They apply rules rather than logic. Let's take Yann as an example. Now, to my mind he is probably one of the most fouled players in the Championship. He is our talisman and opposition managers and players know this. On a regular basis he is fouled very early on in a game, and usually these are cynical and dnagerous fouls. Yet they go unpunished because the game is in its early stages. But a marker has been laid down nonetheless. He is often fouled when going for a header, yet little is given. Also watch how many times he is taken down when receiving the ball to feet on the halfway line.
The point here is that someone who knows the game and how footballers operate will sense very quickly that such behaviour is intentional and therefore needs to be clamped down on quickly. If one player is being fouled so routinely as Yann, then refs should clock it and deal with it quickly. However, his penchant for theatrics will count against him also.
I dont doubt it is a hard job and there are, in my opinion, no refs who go out to cheat or to favour one team. But too many do not know how footballers, managers and coaches think and the deceit that is prevalent in each game and they need to wisen up to this.
I think the problem is - for whatever reason - some refs do become good refs - but they get the good gigs etc... because they have risen to the top and the current system doesn't produce enough of them. Atwell was seen as having potential but a series of clangers showed he hasn't got what is required. So what happens - he can ref Championship games but can't ref in the Premiership. That is insulting to teams like Charlton and Ipswich who have as much right to a decent ref as any other side. I have known a few refs over the years and without exception they have been pedantic prats. The current system seems to attract that sort of person.
Of course when you point this out, and question, the ref's unionn comes out. They know this and they have done that - It's laws not rule blah blah blah. Well what should be happening is they should be challenging themselves and asking why the standards of so many are so low!
"He missed 2 pens , one of which Chambers could have been carded for and failed to notice Berra pulling back a Charlton player, in a decent position after he had been booked!! Glad he had a bad game."
http://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/291969/stuart-attwell/#6
How that guy was fast tracked to the Prem is beyond me.
Thought we played well yesterday, it certainly shows the benefit of having Solly & Wiggins in the team.
I didn't like the cheering from some of our fans when Sordell went down, regardless of what you might think of him he didn't deserve that.
Great to see a deflected goal for us at last and also something against a team managed by McCarthy, neither of which happens very often.
This is an example of what we are saying about refs being savvy and taking responsibility early for stamping it out. It seems they do their research on players who dive or have a propensity to be aggressive but not on which players are targetted or fouled regularly.
Cheers MOG
He made them take throws where the ball went out and not 20 yards further up the pitch, informed players that if he caught anyone pulling, pushing an opponent in the penalty box, he would give them that - a penalty. Made them stand a proper ten yards and not 7 or 8, spoke to captains when there players were getting a bit lippy.
He also stated clearly the reason for making his decisions so everybody knew.
Result - an even flowing game with no silly penalty box incidents, although he did send two of Eastbourne players off for continually fouling and a two footed lunge, well he did warn them.
Most of the refs we have had this year have been diabolical, worse one Stroud at home to Leeds.
Seeing this again reminds me why I called Atwell's decision "unbelievable".