Chairman Mo Steams Into The Referee Debate

It will be interesting to see whether this goes anywhere. What I like is that he cares to write:-

Fulham Chairman Mohamed Al Fayed has spoken out by writing to both the Football Association and the Premier League, demanding, on behalf of all clubs, an immediate review of refereeing practices and the process of decision making.

Following the obvious penalty missed at Old Trafford on 26 March 2012 the Chairman felt compelled to outline, again, grievances felt regarding the entire operation surrounding the officiating of matches that are all too readily accepted by football’s governing bodies and wrote strong letters to both. However, the increasing inconsistencies and blatant errors made by Referees and officials at Premier League matches even more recently, has left the Chairman incensed.

Voicing his concerns of the costly mistakes that are happening all too frequently, he said: ‘The FA’s problem in addressing this pivotal situation is that it has too much power. Where else can decision-makers (referees) escape all responsibility to admit serious and blatant errors and have the protesters (the football clubs involved) fined on charges of misconduct?'

He continued: ‘The losses that we incur from such careless decisions have a huge impact and can have calamitous consequences. Referees are all too easily influenced by the more powerful clubs and individual owners which calls into question the integrity of both them, and the governing body that they report to.’

Mr. Al Fayed has been increasingly angered by further mistakes made more recently which could have huge consequences for the clubs involved and believes that the time to seek action regarding this issue is long overdue.

‘We need brave, pioneers in the Premier League, the FA and within the Premier League shareholder group. In the past I wrote to highlight the need for the Premier League to lead the way with the introduction of video technology. After many years, it appears that the Premier League has admitted I was correct all along.

‘It is time for the Premier League to wake up. They have been in a coma for a long time. Lots of clubs are suffering from such stupid decisions. Advanced technology is available and it is evidently being used in other sports.

‘Once again I call for action to review the standard of officials, and the transparency of the processes by which referees are allocated to games,’ he concluded.

Read more: http://www.fulhamfc.com/Club/News/NewsArticles/2012/April/ChairmanStatement.aspx#ixzz1rkr8H2QX

 

I think this is a very good point, and one I've been thinking about for a while. I do find it bizarre that referees are absolved of any wrong-doing or fallacy if they make any degree of bad decision. Is making refs unassailable to the games detriment? I think so, especially when they're as human as players and managers, who are held accountable at (nearly) every possibility.

 

Fair play to Mo, it was clear none of the governing bodies were going to do anything, thankfully Mo had the balls to step in and demand action, mind you he will probably be smacked with a fine for it or something.

 

The irony would be stunning.

 

I hope that Chairman Mo, along with others, can push the authorities to act responsibly. Although the irony of the FA slapping a fine on Fulham would be fantastic.

The FA needs to lead a proper debate, not stifled by Blatter et al. The FA/UEFA/FIFA need to have the balls to act decisively, not just refuse to see the bigger picture - Witness the FA’s decisions re Mario Balotelli and Shaun Derry, which suggest double standards.

Referees have a tough job, and by the job’s very nature, mistakes will always be made, so call it an impossible job. Frankly, technology has limited uses. It is a joke that football does not have goal-line technology (and maybe when the balls goes out of play – less controversial), but let’s forget the video replay on other decisions made - it will only undermine the game even more than present - all the stoppages, arguments, appeals, lawyers(?) etc. Maybe we should debate the role of the 4th official, to take more responsibility in real-time instead on just controlling substitutions and being located to be the butt of managers behaving worse than schoolchildren.

Let’s have some sensible debate, accountability for referees, and others. Referees should give feedback on their decisions and be scored accordingly. But let’s see if managers, players, the FA etc are prepared to join in a similar spirit of openness. I’m critical of bad decisions as much as the next supporter (see me at The Cottage sometimes!), manager, chairman etc. However, individual players make more mistakes in a game than the referee, managers don’t see things when it suits and use the officials to divert attention from their team’s errors. Then there is the conning – not just diving/simulation, but appeals for a throw/corner by players who KNOW they touched the ball last!

 

Call me a cynic, but I don't see that there's a lot to be done here. GeraScores is right that - goal line technology apart - video review would be too disruptive to the game. It works very well in games that are naturally stop-start like tennis, cricket, etc, but not for football.

Everybody said that the introduction of full-time referees would improve things; I never saw why. If we take as a starting assumption that all refs are trying to get every decision right, then doing the job full-time won't improve their eyesight. Refs make mistakes; they call each decision as they see it, with reference to their assistants where appropriate. People complain about inconsistencies, so FIFA cuts down on the leeway refs have to interpret events and we then complain that refs don't use their common sense. Whatever refs and the authorities do, they get criticised.

The big question is how to stop refs being influenced by big crowds in favour of big teams. Holding out the prospect of retrospective punishment for making the wrong call isn't going to help there, because all refs know that Man Utd (or any other of the big teams) are a stronger voice in the authorities ear than Fulham, QPR, or whoever. The problem is that the Premier League is run by the clubs, and the biggest clubs have more clout than the rest, as can be seen by the way the money is 'shared' out. All refs know that they are going to get in more trouble for a decision that upsets Fergie than for a decision which upsets Steve Kean. Punishing refs' mistakes will make them more likely to play safe and not upset the big boys.

Again, I'm not saying refs are necessarily conscious of this - I genuinely believe all of our refs try to call it right every time - but on a subconscious level, the fear of punishment doesn't help them to do their job evenly.

 

I agree with everything you posted Captain, but what 'punishment' do the refs face? They might be demoted to the Championship for a month or so, but that's about it?

 

True, Bidley, it's hardly a severe punishment, but nobody wants the humiliation of their bosses publically saying, 'You messed up, so we're putting you on the naughty step. Don't upset that nice Mr Ferguson again.' I guess as well that all refs want to get the big games, and there's more chance of being passed over for the Manchester derby if you are known to be unpopular with one or other of the managers.

All football's problems can be summed up thus: the top clubs have too much influence and there's nobody who can bring them into line when necessary.

 

Although I don't doubt you Captain, but how much of the big clubs getting preferential treatment actually fact? How do we know refs don't get demoted for a bad decision in a game between, say Sunderland and West Brom? Sure, the big clubs' managers' moans are headline news the day after the match but that's as far as it goes.

Note I'm playing devils advocate; the big clubs get treated marginally better by the FA because they bring the money into the English game.

 

While it does often anger me no end when perceived 'small clubs' such as ourselves are on the wrong end of decisions in favour of big clubs, it doesn't ever surprise me and in some ways I don't attach to much blame to referees themselves, more the laws/rules which they FA follow. Obviously away at old trafford we were on the receiving end of a pretty shocking decision, as were wigan away at chelsea and these things happen, but what is of greater concern to me is the lack of accountability when refs make such mistakes. Take Balotelli, his horrific tackle on Alex Song will go unpunished because allegedly the referee's assistant saw it at the time and awarded a foul. If a ban can't be given for a tackle like this, when even the referee hasn't seen it, then when can it be done? The rule that the FA can't intervene when a ref gives a booking is bad enough, but for the FA not to intervene when the assistant gives merely a foul is appalling. This to me just suggests that referees have no one to answer to, are essentially their own boss and therefore will continue to give decisions in their own interest, i.e to avoid extensive abuse from 75 000 fans at old trafford. As long as such absurd rules are in place, it should be no surprise that referees are continually 'bottling' decisions when big clubs are involved.

 

Let's not forget that United were apparently on the wrong end of some bad decisions last night, against Wigan, no less. Not that they never get decisions their way, far from it, it's just probably more even than it seems.

Bad decisions should be punished, no matter who is on the receiving end.

 

I think it's a bit unfair to make the refs apologise if they get it wrong- if they want to fine, but they shouldn't be forced.

I understand why Big Mo has got one of his English graduate interns from Oxford to pen a letter to the FA on behalf of him, but everyone on that football pitch will make a mistake- so if the referee has to start apologising for every decision then the players should be out apologising too. The end of the game should just be a series of apologies from each individual.

Should Zamora have been allowed to go unpunished for that horrific miss against Everton this season? That damaged the club right there, ruined my week, and he just got to go home and forget about it. He should have been out on the pitch at the end on his knees begging for forgiveness and his salary.

I think that the referees are held to account in the same way the police are- behind closed doors with little transparency or explanation.

It's difficult to see how video technology could be integrated, would the referee play advantage- and if so for how long?

 

I didn't really mean make them apologise, but you have a good point about being punished for poor performance. They just need to be made accountable, certainly if they're open to blackmail as some are suggesting.

 

Agreed silks. And what happens if say an offside decision is shown to be wrong and the player wasn't - how is play re-started? It's a bit like the boat race where the side with the advantage ends up losing out.

What really gets me is the the use of yellow cards. Two examples, on Monday Mirelles commits 3 cynical fouls before he gets one, Murphy 1 cynical foul and he gets one immediately. On Tuesday Flannigan (L'pool) gets 1 and then commits what was obviously a bookable second and gets off with a warning (presumably because another would have meant red and the ref took pity on him). It's all together inconsistent. More to the point, does a yellow during a game add up to much anyway when a player has to accumulate 10 before any action is taken? What I'd like to see is the introduction of the 'sin bin' (as in rugby and ice hockey) - say off the pitch for 10 minutes if a yellow is given.

So what if more than one player from the same team is off at the same time - that would soon stop the cynical fouling and cheating that goes on.

Also I'd suggest a red card is only given for dangerous foul play. Not for things like 'the last man and a goal scoring opportunity',which can be open to interpretation. In this case again make the penalty the 'sin bin' - say 20 minutes off the pitch.

 

I would certainly enjoy it if they brought in the sin-bin rule. You'd end up with games like Stoke v Wolves where there were only 22 players on the pitch in the first 10 minutes. It might end up 9 v 9.

I think retrospective yellow carding is probably more likely though. I'm not sure how a significant change to the game could work unless it was adopted by all the major European leagues simultaneously. Then again maybe one country needs to lead the way on it- I'm not sure the FA would find much support from FIFA though!

Bizarrely, it reminds me of an old Sensible Soccer on either the Atari or the Commodore. In hindsight the game was in poor taste, but in one option you lined up Germany v England and the ball was a bomb. Every minute or so the bomb would go off and whoever was around it would die. The game would finish 3 v 4 on a full sized pitch.

 

I agree with everything you said Cappy apart from this. Major decisions such as penalties, red card offenses etc happen once, twice or a maximum of three times per game, stopping play for the referee to consult a video review would take no longer than two minutes, to make a decision that a team's PL survival or title win may well hinge upon.

 

What we need are Cyborg Linesmen with laser technology in their eyes linked to a computer system
that flashes a red light on their skull when an offence is committed

I think most teams at the top of their divisions get accused of getting more of the breaks from officials
then those struggling. I know we got a lot of decisions that went for us while we were climbing
through the divisions.
The argument is top teams are more attacking, so will have more decisions, but I'm sure some Refs and assistants
are starstruck, other Refs want to be personalities on the pitch in front of cameras.
For me the worst are ball over the line, and stopping cheats like Suarez gaining penalties for diving and sounding like they've
broken their leg.

But everyone knows until the technology comes in and can be replayed in a instant, then there will always be controversy
and technology won't solve everything, but it will help.

But....
If you take the Fulham v Chelsea penalty incident, even the commentators and panel couldn't agree if it was a penalty after
seeing numerous replays.
Sky commentary team said definite penalty against Murphy, BBC said no penalty, Clattenberg is supposed to have said he
gave it against Kelly for a trip, Gary Neville then said Kaluo had clipped the back of Kellys heal so in that case no penalty.
And the BBC pundits said no penalty.
So will it depend on who is reviewing the incident and who they support ?