Its worrying that there have been so many poor decisions for all the teams this season, its not just one or two moments but officials have been consistently poor. I do wonder what the observers have to say after some of these games, do they simply pat the ref on the back and say well done, or do they actually sit them down and educate them so the mistake doesnt happen again.
Probably the same with the players - either a bit of a telling off but like the players they cannot just be dumped like people in ordinary jobs would be. Ofcourse like in any role there will be some useless ones who get away with making basic erorrs - maybe the worse get hightlighted with the extra coverage. Afterall no-one really care about a good performance.
An ideal referee is one who goes un-noticed through the entire match, rather than the ones who need to be the centre of attention! If a referee controls a match in the correct manner, he will gain the respect of the players. No-one should have to be told to give respect, it should be earned!
Well I am not sure about that because managers and players moan and appeal about/for anything - even throw ins. More to gain an advantage ofcourse than just because they don't like the ref. They should be allowed to communicate in public afterwards like everyone else explain their decisions.
Or they should be forced to do that! Let them view a video of their contentious decisions, then explain them - if they can.
I can't imagine why any human being, with average human sensitivities, would choose to be a referee. Do it well and people say you're invisible; do it badly and you're seen as little better than a criminal.
Ok folks. Pull up a sandbag, and I will tell you a story. Many years ago, when I was young and relatively fit (calm down H ) and could actually run, I managed to get up to being a class 2 referee. Two of the 'regular guest' speakers to visit us were George Courteny and Keith Hackett - some of you older fans might remember them both. They said that when you gave a decision, the easiest thing to do was to actually explain and talk to the players about WHY you gave that decision, and not lecture them. As they said, although everybody on the pitch was human, the main difference was that the players were under more pressure to perform well, because it was their living, whereas at that time, refereeing was a paid hobby. I personally don't remember getting that much abuse from players when I was refereeing, (although at kids games, the abuse I got from parents was unbelievable), and was trying to think that when the powers that be made referees professional, they made a mistake. There is now a lot of pressure on referees, even more so with all the camera angles highlighting their every mistake, and of course the amount of money that is involved in Football. Referees do get the blame and managers accuse them of costing their team the match etc, but how many times does a player get blamed and villified (had to look that word up) for missing an open goal that would either win the game for his team or get them a point which would make all the difference, or for missing a penalty (apart from Beckham), or for scoring an own goal? None of those players intend to get it wrong, and the referees don't either. I used to shout at referees and verbally abuse them, but when I took my referee's course it opened my eyes to a whole load of extra things that many people don't realise, unless they try them for themselves. I guess what I'm trying to say is that referees do get a bad press, but if they maybe had a bit more understanding from the media etc, then some of them might not possible use the arrogance as a kind of self defence mechanism. Also, the FA tinkering with the rules all the time doesn't help Hope this makes sense. It did as I was reading it when I typed it anyway PS. I certainly didn't do it for the pay back then, but I would consider it now. Beats teaching a group of year 9 anyday
Something to chew on there Maestro, thanks and I completely agree with you, they shouldn't be abused as much as they are. Still, I feel as though the FA should give them support and perhaps take some pointers from other sports. Football is definitely the worst for having a go at the ref and I think they should be asking what do Rugby, Cricket, hell... even American Football do so well so that their refs don't get hurled abuse at.
Good one Maestro. I did read that linos who are paid £600 per game are actually 99.3% correct when their decisions have been checked out. Unlike a PL grade ref, they are not full time professionals. A PL ref will be paid something just over £70,000. I wonder if the difference in status is shown up when you watch the reaction between the officials? My last trip to the Vic did have me watching the lino dashing up and down in front of me, but not once did he raise his flag to indicate who had a throw in until after the ref had made the decision. Sometimes you can see a team at work, other times a ref and a couple of bystanders.
You have a point Maestro. I think the trouble is that, as you say, refs don't explain their decisions. it's interesting (and probably frivolous) to note that almost all championship refs at the vic this season have been short. Often it is remarked that the ref has 'small man syndrome'...and when you watch them, it seems the comment has some basis. Meanwhile, the linos seem completely incompetant at times, and as Mr Frenchie points out, they never use their flag unless the ref makes the decision first...in many cases. I do think the FA need to do something about the problem and the inconsistancies, more training doesn't hurt surely! But, having said all that, i do appreciate refs have a tough job, but without the aid of the other officials, there's not much chance of getting it right often.
That's what I was told when I was on my course. The linesman was also a qualified referee at the same level. Messirs Courteny and Hackett both said that they always told the linesmen that they were all a team and therefore should share the responsibilities. They said they found it easier when they were the 'team captain' so to speak, to tell the linesmen sort the throw-in on their own side of the pitch and they would do the rest. If, however the linesmen saw something he thought may have been missed, then to wave, and at a suitable moment they would go over and discuss it briefly to make a decision. Good teamwork. However they both said that just before the 86 world cup, they were both given more matches as linesmen, and they said they found it harder as they were used to being the man in the middle, and it was quite difficult sometimes, when the ref had a different interpretation to what they would have. Also I have noticed that referees today, don't seem to use the diagonal method, which to me seems to make their job even harder.
I wont go into detail as you guys dont have the time at this late hour. But lets just say I think the Nfl model is a bloody good model, and the officials seem to be untouchable which causes all kinds of issues. I will elaborate more tomorrow.
Back when I used to play in Oz, there was one ref who was recognised as the best around & who simply patrolled a straight line from D to D - always claimed that he could see anything that happened on the field from there. He was an ex-player of some note, and knew every trick in the book - more importantly, everyone knew that he knew them, so didn't try them.
Maestro, I must admit I'm surprised they don't use the diagonal method. There's a certain referee from years ago who I'm not sure whether he considered himself part of a team of officials - "The Book". Considering when he was refereeing and had that nickname, imagine how few on each side there would be at the end of the game if he was refereeing now.
I did try the 'straight' method a few times BB, but it wasn't for me. I preferred the diagonal method. I found more of the pitch was covered, but I guess it is down to the individual.
Clive Thomas by any chance Jsybarry? I would think there would be more abandoned matches through lack of players, than there would be completed matches
At least the players knew where they stood with him. Nowadays the players seem to try to guess what the ref might do, and what mood he is in
Right, now im awake i can elaborate on what i was going to say last night. I think the idea of having the officials explain their decision at the time of the incident, either via the PA like they do in the NFL, or just by a set of universally recognised signals. This would hopefully prevent the confusion, afterall he sees things from a different level and angle to us fans and might see something we dont. Also as most of us fans have not taken the referee's exam, we dont know what is required or constitutes a foul or cardable offence, so if we see a coming together of players, we might simply think it is a good challenge, but the ref might deem it careless and therefore a free kick. Failing that, maybe they should be accountable after a match. They are untouchable currently and will not be hald accountable for the mistakes they make and will continue to make the same mistakes over and over, untill they are taught not to. That is my biggest gripe with the system, the mistakes are allowed to be made over and over. If an official makes a mistake he (or she) needs to be brought to task over it and taught how not to make the same mistake. Following on from the point about teamwork, i have spoken to a "qualified" official and he has told me that he often tells his linesmen not to flag for an infringement that occurs, unless it is directly in front of them, he feels that he is better placed to see the offence if it is on the opposite side of the field and therefore if he misses it then it didnt happen. I had to stop myself falling over when he said this, what a joke. If a lino sees somethingm then surely he should flag to draw the refs attention to it, if the ref doesnt agree then he overrules and they move on.
