Weak and s*** referees

Discussion in 'Pitchside - Football Forum' started by Elessar, Apr 1, 2017.

  1. Mascot88

    Mascot88 Yours for £1m. Need to make room for Dean Saunders Moderator

    Messages:
    13,681
    Likes Received:
    15,877
    Here is my five point plan for improving refereeing standards.

    1. Video Technology.

    Just get it done. There is no excuse.

    For all the fears about interrupting the flow of the game, it wouldn't necessarily make that much difference. The referee would manage the game as normal, but a second referee watches the game on a delayed feed. If there is a moment that is contentious, he or she can see a reply of the incident within seconds and radio the referee to say they have missed one. Most other situations where there is scope for a mistake - who got the last touch on the way out, did that goalscorer use his head of his hands - lead to a break in play anyway.

    2. Change the rules of retrospective punishment.

    It's ridiculous that retrospective action can't be applied when a referee has seen an incident. He might have seen it, but failed to clock the severity.

    While we're doing retrospective, I've never agreed with the way bans work. If a player cops a ban for an incident why should the team the following week benefit from this, and the team sinned against get nothing?

    3. Fuck context

    Most problems in refereeing are caused by an unequal application of the rules depending on where an offence was committed, is the fixture televised, what minute of the game the offence occurred in.

    Most referees consider their duty is to manage the game. It isn't. It is to the apply the laws of the game, and a foul should be a foul regardless of its context.

    How often do you hear a pundit say 'it would be a foul anywhere else on the pitch, but it needs a bit more for a penalty' or 'the referee has been sensible in keeping the game flowing'.

    If a player goes down the back of someone's leg on purpose in the first five minutes of a televised fixture, he should be off the pitch. Nothing is being ruined for the neutral. That's just the fucking rules.

    I'm sick of yardogs kicking the shit out of Coutinho because they know the referees will give them allowance for being shit at football.

    4. Forget about simulation

    I can't stand faux moralising in football. The very presence of a referee, a fixture in the sport for 150 years, suggests that players not being trustworthy to apply the rules on their own isn't a new thing.

    The moralising about diving (with its overt xenophobic undertones - notice how foreigners 'cheat' but English lads 'find contact'?) is hysteria over nothing, and I'd spare refs from having to make judgements on players intentions, when by far the easiest thing to do is give the penalty if it's a foul and just fucking wave play on if it isn't.

    If we're handing out cards for trying to con the referee, where do we stop? Is appealing for a throw in when you know you touched it last a yellow? How about pretending you are more injured when you aren't. Watch a match and note all the times the players try to deceive the ref. Focussing on one particular form of deception but not the others is daft.

    5. Obligatory post match explanations

    Shielding referees from scrutiny for their decisions does nothing to help them improve. Sitting referees in front of the media to explain their decision would humanise them and diffuse lower expectations that they must be all-seeing robots. When referees are shielded from scrutiny, and treated as unapproachable, that only breeds resentment, which in turn creates pressure and more mistakes.
     
    Rooster, inaiq and Scott Jones like this.
  2. Limiescouse

    Limiescouse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,912
    Likes Received:
    6,556
    The problem I have for number 4 is that there isnt the same sort of cost/benefit. That's why simulation needs to be addressed, and far more seriously than it is now, otherwise the disincentive to getting caught just isnt anywhere near strong enough compared to the rewards on offer for pulling it off.
     
    ShadesOfRed and inaiq like this.
  3. Elessar

    Elessar Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,061
    Likes Received:
    525
    I agree. The club should also be punished in some way and not only the player. For example docked one point after picking up five yellow cards for diving/cheating. A player that is sent off should also be banned next time he play against the same club.

    A club should also get docked one point after getting five red cards. Then they can't instruct players to injure the best players or at least make it more costly to do it. They should also get docked one point after picking up 50 yellow cards.

    It is not only up the players and the referees. It also up to the clubs.
     
  4. Rooster

    Rooster What a hit son

    Messages:
    997
    Likes Received:
    292
    VAR was used last weekend in the Australian A League Semi Final. I believe successfully.

    Sydney FC benefitted from 2 disallowed goals being overturned after video review. The video decision to allow the goals was 100% correct but guess what.......controversy raged after the game, not so much on the fact the right decision was made, but more whether the system should be used at all.

    It will come in no doubt and now it is part of the game in tennis, cricket, rugby etc. The challenge for football is to what extent to usage will be (eg just for offsides and line technology, or for tackles in the box etc). I'd hate to see the game slowed down due to constant referrals to video. Or the thrill of a goal awaiting 30 seconds for a review like a rugby try.

    Keep trialling it for now though.
     
    Hope in your heart likes this.
  5. Hope in your heart

    Hope in your heart Loyalty and patience, two undervalued concepts... Admin

    Messages:
    19,547
    Likes Received:
    12,838
    I watched the recent France - Spain match, in which it was tried out. There were two key decisions which the ref was wrong about: one goal from Griezman he accepted, but which was then not given because of an offside position, and a goal scored by Delofeu which he wanted to call off, but which was then given after looking at the video replay. Both incidents took about twenty seconds to be decided. That's far less than the usual controversy you'll see in such occasions, which can last sometimes a few minutes before the game takes place again.

    Having watched this match, I'm 100% convinced that it is the right way to go forward. When a ref gets a key decision wrong, the fourth ref can overrule it by watching the video replay. It's fair, and it doesn't slow down the game at all.
     
    Anfield rd Dreamer and Rambler like this.
  6. mattyhurst

    mattyhurst TIA Regular

    Messages:
    10,667
    Likes Received:
    4,229
    I think trial the eff out of it make sure that the majority of decisions don't take about 5 minutes.

    I actually would rather limit it to the challenges like in Cricket.
     
    Scott Jones likes this.
  7. Rambler

    Rambler Bootle Boy

    Messages:
    1,802
    Likes Received:
    1,086
    I am all for the technology but think each side should have say 2 challenges per match otherwise you could get multple referrals. If the referral was always to come from the refs then the weaker ones would be constantly asking for reassurance on decisions.

    Limiting it to 2 would ensure that there would be a limited number of spurious referrals... Also like Rugby, the timekeeping should be transparent. It would be obvious when the clock has stopped for timewasting, injuries etc. The time added can sometimes seem pretty arbitrary. There would in fact be no added minutes. The game finishes when the clock gets to 90 minutes....could even think about bringing in the rule as in Rugby that the game ends after 90 minutes when the ball next goes dead unless it is a free kick or penalty.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2017
    inaiq and Arminius like this.
  8. Rooster

    Rooster What a hit son

    Messages:
    997
    Likes Received:
    292
    Apparently it is a yellow card if a player pleads with the referee to review. But imagine the managers and the 4th official....Maybe Wenger can't blame the referee post match and that would be a first.
     
  9. Arminius

    Arminius FSG PR plant Moderator

    Messages:
    14,981
    Likes Received:
    11,490
    What drives me crazy about this line of argument is that the game is constantly slowed down as it is. Celebrations of a goal routinely take over a minute, most games see all kinds of little deliberate delays, play is stopped to allow players to get squirted with magic water - and the time added back for trainers coming onto the field never equals the net loss.

    Meanwhile, in the NHL, every single goal is reviewed, most of the time no one knows that it happened. Average time of review is apparently just under a minute, and I would suspect it is more difficult to review the average ice hockey goal than footy (mainly due to obscured sight lines and the size of the puck relative to a player).
     
  10. Hope in your heart

    Hope in your heart Loyalty and patience, two undervalued concepts... Admin

    Messages:
    19,547
    Likes Received:
    12,838
    Why implementing challenges? Football isn't a game like say, tennis. All you need is to give the fourth official the right to overrule the ref's decision if he's wrong on a major decision (awarding a penalty or not, allowing a goal to stand or not, sending off a player or not). If the ref gets it wrong five times in a match (as can happen from time to time), then he'll get overruled five times. This, alongside the goal-line technology already in place, should be enough to considerably increase fair refereeing in football games at top level.
     
    Anfield rd Dreamer likes this.
  11. Arminius

    Arminius FSG PR plant Moderator

    Messages:
    14,981
    Likes Received:
    11,490
    A challenge is a mechanism that will slow down play, but does so by forcing a close look at it - in most sports, by all officials, not just the video ref. The NHL essentially has both challenges and what you describe, but avoids having the video ref being the de facto real referee, confining that automatic review to major decisions but letting the on-ice officials make the vast majority of calls. But if a coach thinks a player was offside in a play that led to a goal, he can use a challenge.
     
  12. Rambler

    Rambler Bootle Boy

    Messages:
    1,802
    Likes Received:
    1,086
    I think it might become a bit farcical if overrules are unlimited. Imagine a game that has 10 or more overrules.

    Also if the referrals are not requested such as a penalty not given and the play quickly goes up the other end and a goal is scored...then the play has to be taken back up the other end for a penalty to be taken. Could be chaos....It needs to be carefully thought through.
     
  13. Limiescouse

    Limiescouse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,912
    Likes Received:
    6,556
    That is what I think the biggest obstacle to it is, and why VAR probably needs to be employed live rather than waiting until a natural stoppage for the main ref to go and review it. Maybe there could be some system where it is used to live feed information to the ref for him to decide what to do with it.
     
  14. Kopstar

    Kopstar ★★★★★ Valued Member

    Messages:
    6,275
    Likes Received:
    9,660
    Perhaps the captain or coach are able to signal for a challenge to a particular incident. The referee is notified by a signal to his watch and the advertising hoardings around the pitch change to a colour (around the edges maybe so sponsors don't object) indicating a team has challenged the interpretation of an incident and although play is continuing any outcome of that phase is subject to the determination of the challenge. That way the players and the fans know that whatever might result at the conclusion of that phase of play is subject to the determination of the challenge.

    I would limit challenges per team to say 1 unsuccessful challenge for every 30 minutes that if unused can be carried forward into the following 30 minutes. Teams would have a further challenge available for extra time.
     
  15. Arminius

    Arminius FSG PR plant Moderator

    Messages:
    14,981
    Likes Received:
    11,490
    I think continuing play after a challenge would be untenable, which is why the number of them has to be limited and the turnaround time has to be limited. A panel of video officials should be live and in progress the whole match, moving ahead of challenges. If the game official is the one who makes the call, it should be on the basis of viewing information the panel has put together for review.
     
  16. Limiescouse

    Limiescouse Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,912
    Likes Received:
    6,556
    To lose an important game because of something obvious the ref missed is one thing. To lose one because you were out of challenges and couldn't review yet another obviously poor decisions is considerably worse. I think the focus needs to be on finding a way to make the right decisions, not on adding bureaucracy that looks good on paper.

    I think the best way to do it is to have someone watching and in communication with the ref. That way, when he blows his whistle for the Rashford penalty he can be told "just so you know, the keeper didnt make any contact with the player at all" and give him the opportunity to overturn his original decision. If there is a possible hand ball the ref didnt give there are many reasons why he might not have done so, however if he can be quickly told that it definitely struck a player on the hand/arm he can then use that information to make a better decision, and still leaves the ref in charge of deciding intent and context.

    I think one of the big stumbling blocks, is what happens for an incident like Sterling against City 3 years ago? How do you make right a clear goal scoring opportunity you have wrongly prevented by blowing the whistle?
     
    Anfield rd Dreamer likes this.
  17. Kopstar

    Kopstar ★★★★★ Valued Member

    Messages:
    6,275
    Likes Received:
    9,660
    Ah, but the Sterling scenario might not have occurred precisely because of VAR as the referee might be more inclined to let the situation play out in the knowledge that if Sterling really was offside it would be reviewed anyway.

    That might indicate that referees and assistant referees become more reluctant to make any decision where they have any doubt - whether that's a good thing or not I'm not sure.
     
    Anfield rd Dreamer likes this.
  18. Sound as a Pound

    Sound as a Pound TIA Midfield General

    Messages:
    1,784
    Likes Received:
    511
    The standards are certainly got worse imo, in pretty much every game now there are glaring mistakes for both teams, refs are so easily led by the home crowds and cant seem to wait to blow up for a non foul or ignore blatant fouls! I cant recall many or any games now where refs have good games. They certainly need help from technology - its gotta be the only way forward.
     
    Anfield rd Dreamer likes this.
  19. Prolix

    Prolix Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,988
    Likes Received:
    1,753
    Alternatively, we should strap GoPro cameras to the referees heads, and then allow television audiences only one replay of incidents from the ref's perspective and at real time.

    No more of this "How could he have missed that?!" after the fifth replay of three different angles at quarter-speed.
     
  20. Irishanfield

    Irishanfield Active Member

    Messages:
    106
    Likes Received:
    142
    Surely if you put a camera on the ref then the linesman/assistant ref should get one as well so at least we can see where they are looking
     

Share This Page