At the weekend a German referee was found in his hotel room, 2 hours before a game - having slashed his wrists. He obviously has problems ! - makes me wonder about the state of mind of some of the officials at Gills games over the years. How do some refs & linos not see things that everyone else in the ground can ? If it's that difficult, why don't we have a panel of 3 officials looking at tv screening of the game and who push a button to judge on fouls etc ( when 2 out of 3 make the same decision the ref on the pitch blows his whistle .) This would allow for accurate decisions on offsides and goal line judgements.
I think your "joke" about self harm is in poor taste by the way but I will also address the points you raise. It is alway easy for pundits and the likes on TV to have a go at the officals because they have the benefits of being able to review the incident many times and from every concievable camera angle, while the poor ref has only one chance at it and from only one angle. Who he can honestly say that they haven't been at a game where they see a decision that intially they disagree with but then see a replay on the tv and have to admit the ref made the right decision. The simple fact is that the ref decision is final and sometimes things go against you and sometimes with you (I would alos like to add that if the studied ref decisions that they are right alot more than they are wrong), it is all part of the game we love so much. And I am not even going to start listing the flaws with your "refereeing by democracy" idea as I do actually have to do some work today!
Fallible referees is part of the tradition of our game, we all enjoy getting on the refs case at home, when things are not to our advantage. However, despite all that and the fact we think the ref is a right w****r at the game,away from it I would never wish any ref harm and a refs performance is generally forgotten as quick as the next game. It saddens me if any ref took his own life due to football, I've not looked up this story and have no intention of doing so but can only imagine such an individual had deeper emotional issues. As for goal line technology and all the rest of it, do I want it, not really. We strive for everything perfect in life but some things need to just be left alone whether we win, lose or draw, because of a decision.
Having a judging panel like boxing or tae kwon do is ridiculous. however i am adamant we need goal line technology, its the only rule in football that is black and white and therefore is only rule where you HAVE to get it right every time
People who criticise refs really need to have tried it themselves before opening their mouths. I tried a bit of refing when i stopped playing and the thing that amazes you is how often you cannot see because someone enters your line of vision. Refs often have to guess especially when the lineo cannot help you. Refs may be closer but it does not mean they always get a better view than spectators. Just think what it is like sitting in the stand and the pratt in front stands up. thats what is is often like for a ref and it is just part of the game. Allowing a panel to decide would ruin the game but I accept entirely that technology could help with goal line decisions and penalties. As for the rest, it is all part of the excitement for the ref to make mistakes.
How many times in the past have I been sure of something at a match but only to have been wrong? I have lost count. As I fan I have a bias towards my team. As does nearly everybody. Refs have to do make the right call. A 100% accuracy rate is impossible. The standard of refereeing today is far higher today than at any point in history. If you look at the amount of things they get right to those they get wrong it would be a vast majority but the right calls are always ignored. As for goal line tech. I do think it would benefit the game but how often is it really needed?
To clarify The referee in question did not die and is on the mend.(I wish him happiness in the future. ) I was not making any joke about the situation - but expressed my douubt about the capability of some of the officials we've had at GFC. I was principally talking about some obvious incidents that ' somehow ' the officials have not seen. -- I appreciate that the speed of the modern game will always lead to ' mistakes ' relating to fine line decisions such as offsides.But sometimes decisions are so bewildering that it is easy to suspect bias - that's why I suggested a panel of 3 referees ( to achieve a majority verdict ), with a tv monitor and the benefit of instant replay. ( it happens, and is successful in plenty of other sports - so not so ridiculous an idea .) I'm not sure that football will embrace measures that would reduce wrong decisions by the officials - this is not my main concern - but incidents that the referee has not seen or obviously unfair judgements should be reduced - and all reasonable measures should be considered . I do not have all the definitive answers - but we should not keep our heads buried in the sand, like Sepp Blatter has been for so long ( goal line technology ? ) or was you happy to see a perfectly good goal by Lampard not given. Please forgive me if any of you were unhappy at anything in my original post - but I do have a pre-occupation with fairness ( in allwalks of life ) and hate to see any disparity especially against Gills
Ok I am going to bite... How do you see this "panel of three" system working? Three people sitting behind a bank of tv screens , stopping the game for five minutes everytime a foul / throw / corner is conceeded?! That simply won't work, the free flowing nature of football doesnt have any natural breaks in play to allow for video refereeing. I also should point out that fans are surprisingly ill informed regarding the ruled of the game and if you see any decision that is "blatantly unfair" I suggest that you do not fully understand the rule / decision
QUOTE=BSG;1733840]Ok I am going to bite... How do you see this "panel of three" system working? Three people sitting behind a bank of tv screens , stopping the game for five minutes everytime a foul / throw / corner is conceeded?! That simply won't work, the free flowing nature of football doesnt have any natural breaks in play to allow for video refereeing. I also should point out that fans are surprisingly ill informed regarding the ruled of the game and if you see any decision that is "blatantly unfair" I suggest that you do not fully understand the rule / decision[/QUOTE] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I have officiated at football matches ( including refereeing ) - so please allow me a little credit for knowing the rules. I also understand that there are impediments to line of vision. Incidents that are missed lead to ( at times, grossly unfair ) decisions - such as the Lampard goal v Germany. ( I'm not so sure that the officials behind the goals have really helped .) Before I continue I have to say that I totally agree that the referees do tend to get most decisions correct and I do not envy their job. I've said that I don't have all the definitive answers. I would still want the existing format of officials on the pitch. Any ' panel ' of 3 officials could have a tv screen ( with virtually instant replay - so there isn't any waiting for 5 minutes ! .) There are not so many incidents (usually) that would require tv examination - so it shouldn't fragment a match - and what English man wouldn't have waited 5 minutes for that goal ? In my last post I admitted to a pre-occupation with fairness. I do not believe that referees ( all natural mistakes aside, )are always being fair in their decisions - you might call it cheating ! (yes, I know players can be guilty of this.) AND there are times when the referee seems to 'lose the plot' and lose control of the game - and emotions appear to dictate decisions. The ' panel' of referees would allow the man in the middle to 'control' the match - but, when 2 of the panel disagree with him, they could let him know. I admit that initially matches may become a little stop-start. But, I believe that, in time players would eradicate most of the cheating that currently exists - this would allow for far less 'tv panel scrutiny' and fewer ( if any ) stoppages. The healing process won't happen overnight. Any system to promote fairness ( from everybody on the grass ) will not totally eliminate 'rare' incidents - for which the referee in the middle will usually make the correct decision - if not (tv....) The rules of sport ( including football ) have evolved over time. Fairness has been a prominent feature as a reason for their progression - that's why we, thankfully do not see the same level of thuggery on the pitch that has previously existed. ----------- That's NOT part of the game - I'll watch my boxing in a ring thankyou ! I REALLY hate it when anyone on the pitch cheats - and even more so when I believe that the referee is guilty. I do not advocate change for its' sake -but if there are ways (that, in time may not be unreasonable,) to eradicate unfairness from all participants in each sport, we should explore the measures - even if only during a trial period, after which and with due review, the measures can be repealed. I'm ALL for a fast flowing game - but only if it's Fair. I will continue to watch the game - warts and all - BUT- I'd rather go to Swindon (sorry for swearing) and see Gills lose 5-0 (fairly) than see us win any game by cheating. .......... I 'put' up with it at the moment because of all the times that Gills have suffered from cheating /unfair decisions....but two wrongs do not make a right. It is as much the responsibility of those at the top to continually review the situation and consider any measure to improve all aspects of sport.
BSG I've tried to add a post script ( not being accepted for some reason )...........I wasn't looking for a bite from you. I appreciate your articulate posts, and mostly agree with them. On other forums ( without discussion ) I would expect to be invited to go forth and copulate. PPS I'm fully aware that things are not going to change any time soon .
Mate, you need to change your name. You're very wrong. Let me give you just a few reasons why: 1. Even a "virtually instant" replay is not good enough. The decision has to be instantaneously, not waiting for any replay, no matter how quick - the game moves too fast now. And how many times are you able to judge correctly a borderline call first time, even on TV? 2. We dont have enough refs as it is, so adding an extra 3 to each game would either mean we didnt have enough to cope with the 40-50 professional games every weekend, or at the very least send non-league, pub league, and junior football back into the officiating dark ages where one of the managers does it. 3. A panel of 3 judging every referees decision is going to remove any authority a referee has. What you're proposing turns the ref into a 45-minute egg-timer with a whistle. Effectively, it would be a message from the FA saying "we don't think our referees are good enough to see an acceptable amount of on-pitch events anymore". Refs will almost certainly hate it. 4. Refereeing decisions are part of the game, and probably constitute half the post-game debate in the pub or in the tv studio. With the obvious exception of "phantom" or "ghost" goals, you can't get rid of them. (And in many cases, you physically CAN'T get rid of them)
Carras_Prodigy Thank you for your thoughts. 1. Please do not take my username too literary - I think that is applicable to most usernames. 2. I have made it quite clear that I do not have THE definitive answers. 3. I respect that most decisions that referees make are correct. 4. I have no desire to see the authority of officials undermined - I would like to see it augmented - by embracing some measures ( such as goal line technology ) 5. I do not think that it is practical to stop-start a match to adjudicate on every passage of play. 6. I can appreciate that ' mistakes ' are very much a part of the game -- and that the current situation will probably not change -- and, as such, I would not wish that it would. -- and I can forgive honest mistakes. 7. My main concern is about fairness and incidents where, in my honest opinion a referee may have shown bias as opposed to the correct decision. 8. I don't know how to redress point No.7 without turning the officiating of matches upside down - and I really do not want that to happen - because I feel that football would then lose a lot of its' appeal. 9. The status quo is probably the best available. I do embrace ' honest ' mistakes as a natural point of discussion in the pub etc. 10. I do have my opinion about No. 7 and would not force it on anyone else. I welcome other ( contrary ) opinions - but challenge anyone who would not wish to see more fairness ( in all sports ) Any way up the Gills.
alwaysright - I have read a lot of what you have wrote and have already posted my view on it. However, in your last post I appear to be noticing tones towards a completely different matter in the questioning of maybe certain referees... Quote: '7. My main concern is about fairness and incidents where, in my honest opinion a referee may have shown bias as opposed to the correct decision.' I'm just curious to what examples you base that statement in this area on? Finally surely we are not suggesting that any refs in L2 fall in to such a category?
The worst decision that springs to mind is QPR at Preistfield when we were in the Championship. Player on the floor in our area picks up the ball and throws it into the goal, only 3 people in the whole ground, including the opposition, thought it was a goal. Unfortunately the 3 where all in black and Gills lost by that 1 goal. will technology work to improve the game? why not trial it in something like the league cup, paint pot trophy and make a decision based on that.
Alwaysright I didn't mean any insult by implying that you didn't understand the rules. Your experienced having officated for games would put you better stead than some of the people I hear complaining about refereeing decision but with all the FA edicts and the like which are issued to referees by the FA, on what seems a weekly basis, unless you are privvy to these I would suggest that you, like many fans are alway one step behind the "offical reading of the rules" as dictated by the FA. The main issue I have with your post is your implication that referees are delibrately cheating to favour one team of the other. This is, in my opinion, a ludicrous claim. I agree that sometimes refs get it wrony (very wrong sometimes) but to imply this is done on purpose as opposed to a genuine mistake is unfair (and probably libelous)
Brb-------------- I've been watching the Gills since 1963 ( yes, I'm an old fart ! ) I've been going to virtually ALL the games, home & away for several seasons - I have seen far too many such incidents to start naming individual ones - and I would not insult your intelligence to suggest that you do not know to what I elude. I would submit that every Gills fan has seen matches where some decisions by the referee have been so outragous that ( in my, perhaps cynical opinion ) the referee must have been cheating - because I could not believe that his ability was so poor ( giving all consideration to honest mistakes ) I know that things will probably not change - I accept it because I love to watch the Gills more than it makes me sick to see obvious unfairness against them.
alwaysright - I thought you was suggesting to a much greater level, which was my reasoning for asking for examples. As for the old fart comment, young or old, no one gets judged by age on here. I think you will also probably remember a particular European tie back in 1984, we all knew something was not right... http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...anatomy-of-a-game-that-was-fixed-1242108.html
Like I have said - I do not want Gills ever to profit from any ' cheating ' I use the word cheating because I am unable to accept that, at (crucial) times the referee's performance is so bad - that ( in my mind ) I suspect something more sinister. I was aware that even Sepp Blatter has relented regarding goal line technology - a good start ! Who'd be a referee - what would we have to talk about ?
One point of redemption that I will make in favour of English league referees is that, having seen much football, on Sky, from around the world, our referees are not that bad !
