Referees.

[Spurf]

I know it's the popular belief that referees are not up to the job and we all know that Spurs have been on the wrong end of some pretty poor decisions, but I think in many ways they get a rough deal when it comes to the media.

It's a tough job, think how many decisions they have to make during the course of one game. That's what it's all about, a constant decision making process at high speed and all in the glare of the media spotlight, not to mention thousands of biased fans.

Watching the two CL semi-finals I was struck with how the two Spanish teams players (particularly Real Madrid) spent so much time on the floor. It seemed practically every time a player was tackled he fell, pole axed, to the ground. The two other teams were not innocent either with Drogba putting in a royal command performance in the first leg.

Some of the tackles would have floored anyone but not all, many were the merest of touches. It's funny how the player who ends up with ball is the one to stay on his feet while the loser is often rolling around as if shot.

It's difficult even with replays to sort out the dives from the genuine, but the ref has to do that all that in real time, it's not surprising they make mistakes. Then to make matters worse the media spend half their time analysing these decisions, putting forward their 'wise' after the event, slowed down, replayed version.

In my opinion it's not the refs who should be receiving our criticism so much as the players. The diving has become epidemic and accepted as part of the game. It has always there but it's reached ridiculous levels in the modern game.

Somehow the football authorities need to sort this out and it certainly needs more attention than it's being given now, the referees are being made the scapegoats, while the 'stars' are 'understood'.

 

[notsosmartspur]

Mornin mate

Play acting is nigh impossible to solve imo Spurf, you can make judgements about technical decisions, but a ref nor any official can decide if a player is in genuine pain or not just by looking at them. You can imagine the uproar if one time it was ignored and it turned into something serious, just can't take the risk it...and all players know that.

 

[Roo]

Nice post Spurf.

for me, it's 6 of one, half dozen of the other.

Yes, the players are to blame, but so are the Ref's. AND their assitants. let's not forget, there is 3 of them for domestic football, and 5 for CL football... and they are allowed to consult one another!

The players are clever at "fooling" the refs, or making the most out of something. Unfortunately it's become part of the game and could even be labelled as a "tactic". - (waste time, aggrovate opposition, break up play, have a breather etc etc)

But the referees (and the asistants for that matter) do not help themselves. there have been some ridiculous decisions over the years, which I don't need to name, we've seen one very recently.

It's a simple one for me. - Video Technology.

perhaps that video technology could even be used to punish players who are caught rolling around for nothing?

or maybe it could be used to assess the performance of the officials in each game, and give the officials a leaderboard over the course of a season, with winners being announced that have made the most accurate calls throughout a campaign? - a bit like a premiership table for Refs, who are rewarded?

 

[Spurf]

Roo, is that easy? I don't think so. Stopping to look at decisions with videos would ruin the game, unless you mean after the game. In that case it would weaken the ref further and just mean you have a committee deciding which is always worse.

I think we need to get away from blaming the officials and look much harder at the players and managers.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Refs don't make any more mistakes than players, managers or even pundits, in my opinion.
Not enough is done to help them out, though.
Punish the cheats and their teams, use technology where it's appropriate and apply appropriate sanctions against managers that try to manipulate officials via the press.

 

[No Kane No Gain]

I thought the referee last night did very well in that respect. He didn't buy any of Pepe's **** but the ones where you could say the Madrid player went down too easy he tended to wave on. Apart from Robben's dive on the edge of the box, which looked a stonewall freekick in real time, and one of Gustavos many fouls actually being a good tackle, I don't think he did much wrong which was high profile. Actually booking Alaba was ridiculous but they need to speak to referees to sort out what handballs are and aren't penalties because every referee has a different opinion.

The extra official seemed to rule out the second penalty shout for Madrid but it looked a bit of a dive until the second or third replay where you could see that he was slightly pulled back, then slightly tripped and then slightly pushed in the back. Granero went down easy though and if you do that you can't really complain when luck goes against you. Whilst the extra officials don't seem to do a lot it seems like a good idea to have an extra set of eyes for penalty decisions, you'd be there all day analysing replays if it came to that and apart from something as fundamental as whether the ball crosses the line then I don't think replays are needed.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Good point, YV.
I have to say, I think that handballs are now totally arbitrary.
There's no consistency at all and that's often in the same match, from the same official.

 

[Spurm]

I've said for years that the way to fix this is to introduce retrospective 3 match bans for players found to be diving. You'd soon find the managers instructing their players not to do it.
Surround a referee after a decision, 3 match ban.
No questions, no arguments.

I've always been proud that there isn't a diving culture at Spurs. However, its even creeping in to our team now

 

[No Kane No Gain]

Good point, YV.
I have to say, I think that handballs are now totally arbitrary.
There's no consistency at all and that's often in the same match, from the same official.

It happens every now and then doesn't it, when everyone just needs to sit down with the governing body whilst they explain it properly. Similar to linesmen with active/inactive where the rule was applied inconsistently then clarified and the wrinkles were ironed out. Everyone knows the rule now and there's no stupid calls for the rule to be changed to a freekick being given everytime someone's offside, "If you're not active then what are you doing on the pitch", etc. Trouble is there's no call from the media for consistency on this one and without that pressure the FA won't do ****.

 

[Roo]

Roo, is that easy? I don't think so. Stopping to look at decisions with videos would ruin the game, unless you mean after the game. In that case it would weaken the ref further and just mean you have a committee deciding which is always worse.

I think we need to get away from blaming the officials and look much harder at the players and managers.

The "stopping of the game" i was just suggesting for certain decisions, such as whether a ball crosses the line or not. - I think video technology is used very well in cricket (even better in tennis) and feel that the few seconds spent awaiting a decision from video technology is a must. those few seconds, or maybe even a minute, are vital IMO. There's too many "game changing moments" that are crucial to one of those 2 teams playing. - it should be at least tried out for a couple of years.

My suggestion of punishing those who dive, would be something where the video footage is looked at AFTER the game. a bit like when a ref sends of a player with a straight red, an appeal is made an the red card is recinded. If a process could occur where analysts look at an entire game, from the fouls, the cheating as well as the refs performance, it might cut out a lot of the "cheating" as the players know they can be caught out by "big brother", even if they manage to fool the referee at the time.

i see it as the only way of stopping what currently happens week in, week out.

Just moving on to the point about that handball penalty last night.

Firstly, I really don't think I understand the handball rule anymore. When i grew up playing footy, it was a penalty if it was hand to ball. not ball to hand.

that bayern player could have done nothing about that last night, it was smashed straight at him... and he got booked! IMO, perhaps video footage could be used for moments like this?

but as you guys say, it could get ridiculous and the referees might end up having no control whatsoever if they are undermined.

I agree with VT, but it's about finding the happy medium. it could take years to get it right.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

I don't think that Abala helped himself with the penalty, Roo.
The way that he went to ground made it look like he was trying to block the shot with his arm.
I can understand why the ref gave it.

As for the Ramos penalty...

You must log in or register to see images

 

[Roo]

I don't think that Abala helped himself with the penalty, Roo.
The way that he went to ground made it look like he was trying to block the shot with his arm.
I can understand why the ref gave it.

As for the Ramos penalty...

You must log in or register to see images

I see what your saying PNP, but at that sort of pace, how could the ref have been sure enough to give it? massive call in such a big game!

 

[vimhawk]

I've said for years that the way to fix this is to introduce retrospective 3 match bans for players found to be diving. You'd soon find the managers instructing their players not to do it.
Surround a referee after a decision, 3 match ban.
No questions, no arguments.

I've always been proud that there isn't a diving culture at Spurs. However, its even creeping in to our team now

I completely agree. However I doubt it will happen because what if it turns out that a dive-winning penalty actually won the game? If the diving player is subsequently punished (rightly) for that it brings the result into question. Goodness knows what the lawyers could do with such a situation! Even if it didn't, at the very least it undermines the refs authority (not in my opinion but certainly in the opinion of those with the power)... because I think refs are actually undermined by NOT being able to call on video technology. I also don't buy the two arguments that:

(i) You can't have video evidence as it isn't available at every level of the game, and all footie should be played the same (ye olde 'Hackney Marshes' argument). Well I played on Hackney Marshes and we only had one official. That's rather different from the PL isn't it! and
(ii) it would slow down the game because most bad calls are immediately obvious on video, and have you noticed how long it takes on controversial decisions if one team (not naming names!) starts harassing the ref, or even worse if the ref goes over to speak to a lino physically? Compared to that video evidence would be quick! But to safeguard against that you could always give a window (10 seconds?) in which the video ref has to tell the ref he has a concern and then perhaps another 20 seconds in which he has to make a decision? If the time runs out then the evidence by definition couldn't have been that clear cut and so the refs decision automatically stands.

 

[Spurf]

I think looking at video replays during the game would be a disaster for the sport. I disagree with you Roo I think technology has spoilt test cricket (which is the only form I care about) Umpires and refs will always get some decisions wrong but the media inquests are undermining them IMO. The media only does it because it is a cheap way to bring drama to their presentation, if they cared about the health of the sports they would resist. Unless it was an outrageous decision like Chelsea's ghost goal against us, that I think is fair game, but when every tackle is replayed often from several angles it does not help.

No looking at videos is a cop out the real problem is with the players cheating and that has to be addressed properly. One way is to hit them or their team in the pocket by docking points or money. Yellow cards with a fine? Red cards recorded against club and player, with repeat offenders losing money and points perhaps. OR hit the managers they control the players after all, they dictate the policy. Yes that perhaps would be the best solution percentage of income fines for the managers whose teams are offending. The managers need to stop their players from offending, at the moment, it's part of the philosophy. Make sure you go down and so on.

Change the minds of managers and we have half a chance.

 

[Spurm]

I completely agree. However I doubt it will happen because what if it turns out that a dive-winning penalty actually won the game? If the diving player is subsequently punished (rightly) for that it brings the result into question. Goodness knows what the lawyers could do with such a situation! Even if it didn't, at the very least it undermines the refs authority (not in my opinion but certainly in the opinion of those with the power)... because I think refs are actually undermined by NOT being able to call on video technology. I also don't buy the two arguments that:

(i) You can't have video evidence as it isn't available at every level of the game, and all footie should be played the same (ye olde 'Hackney Marshes' argument). Well I played on Hackney Marshes and we only had one official. That's rather different from the PL isn't it! and
(ii) it would slow down the game because most bad calls are immediately obvious on video, and have you noticed how long it takes on controversial decisions if one team (not naming names!) starts harassing the ref, or even worse if the ref goes over to speak to a lino physically? Compared to that video evidence would be quick! But to safeguard against that you could always give a window (10 seconds?) in which the video ref has to tell the ref he has a concern and then perhaps another 20 seconds in which he has to make a decision? If the time runs out then the evidence by definition couldn't have been that clear cut and so the refs decision automatically stands.

I see where you are coming from, but the fact we are even considering the effects of lawyers is bad in itself. Its a game, yes a game with massive financial implications, but a game. Refereeing decisions are part and parcel of virtually every game (well, sport at least). Any attempt to bring in lawyers should just be turned away by some magic authority (i haven't thought it through that far as you can tell)

If a cheating dive won a penalty to win a game then that is tough, really tough, on the receiving team. Just like it is tough now. But at least the player in question will find himself with some time off and be publicly outed as a cheat.
At present if you are retrospectively "caught" diving the worst that happens is someone on match of the day says "ooh, that isn't very good. Our next game is...."

 

[Chirpy rides again]

THe answer is to play on until the referee stops the game. If the player REALLY needed treatment he would be off the pitch anyway. Head injuries result in the ref automatically stopping the game but otherwise he uses his own judgement. If individuals, like Drogba, simulate, then their team loses the right to professional courtesy and the opposition kicking the ball out. Play on until they stop cheating. Lose a couple of times due to this and it will soon stop. Players as well as refs know when there is simulation. Kicking the ball out has got way out of control...

 

[Spurf]

THe answer is to play on until the referee stops the game. If the player REALLY needed treatment he would be off the pitch anyway. Head injuries result in the ref automatically stopping the game but otherwise he uses his own judgement. If individuals, like Drogba, simulate, then their team loses the right to professional courtesy and the opposition kicking the ball out. Play on until they stop cheating. Lose a couple of times due to this and it will soon stop. Players as well as refs know when there is simulation. Kicking the ball out has got way out of control...

I thought that too Chirpy, just ignore the incident completely and let the game pass them by. The only trouble is, as Smart pointed out, if a player really is hurt and the ref ignores it he would be in all kinds of trouble.

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

Unless it was an outrageous decision like Chelsea's ghost goal against us

Which one?

As I'm sure I've pointed out somewhere else, there have been three of these decisions that featured Premier League teams in recent years that I can remember.
The first was in Liverpool's defeat of Chelsea in the Champions League 04/05 semi-final.
The second was last season at Stamford Bridge against us and the third was at Wembley between the same sides.
William Gallas was on the losing side on all three occasions.
It's clearly his fault!

 

[PleaseNotPoll]

I thought that too Chirpy, just ignore the incident completely and let the game pass them by. The only trouble is, as Smart pointed out, if a player really is hurt and the ref ignores it he would be in all kinds of trouble.

They should just do what's done in other sports and allow the physio to come on, while the game continues.
If the physio feels that the game needs to be stopped, then do so, but make it so that the player then has to be removed from play for the rest of the game.

 

[Spurm]

They should just do what's done in other sports and allow the physio to come on, while the game continues.
If the physio feels that the game needs to be stopped, then do so, but make it so that the player then has to be removed from play for the rest of the game.

I'm all for this! If anything the physio/injured player would be less in the way in football than in rugby unless they are in the goal area. In one of the 6 nations games (i think) the physio/injured player nearly ended up in a ruck and had the ball whizzing right over them.