Last night presented a perfect example where the use of further technology would help the right decision to be made by the officials without disrupting the game in any way whatsoever. In the Prem League the fourth official could always ensure access to a camera and video replay of any match incident, and on the request of the ref (easy now officials are miked up) review any incident and advise the ref on the correct decision taking the guesswork away. It might not always be practical to do this sort of review, but if the ball is out of play, or the match stopped like last night due to an injury, the ref would be able to work with technology and the fourth official to get the decision right without disrupting the game at all! Last night clearly Mike Dean, credit to him, listened to his assistant and gave a penalty and red card based on his comments alone. Both decisions were wrong but could have so easily been avoided. On reflection i'm sure now The FA would claim the introduction of goal line technology has completely eradicated any doubt whether a goal has been scored or not, and should encourage The FA to consider further extensions of technology. As a qualified ref myself, anything that 'helps' remove the possibility of incorrect decisions should be welcomed; and with the money in The Prem League I see no logical reason why technology could not be extended to help refs make those exceptional but all too important decisions. Welcome any comments?
Mike Dean told Brucey that he made the decision not the linesman. Mike turned round and saw Diame on the floor so assumed it must have been a penalty.
I totally agree. I couldn't see any foul by McGregor but then again I didn't see the hand ball either. Why can Fellaini get away with using his elbows just because the referee saw the incident but didn't understand it? We need to use technology certainly for all incidents when there is a stoppage and retrospective punishments for foul play and diving when there isn't a stoppage. This is the only way to get players to stop cheating and help to get fair results.
Always been a bit of Luddite where technolgy is concerned myself. After last nights horrendous desicions you have to wonder
The ref always make the decision, however clearly last night he was INFLUENCED BIG TIME by his assistant.
Its simple really, we can stick with tradition and reject the use of technology, but at the same time would have to accept that bad decisions will be made from time to time. Alternatively we can embrace the technology and let the game evolve like every other major sport has, but this isn't without it's problems. The main problem with the 4th official having access to video replays is that quite often people still disagree with incidents even having seen a slow motion replay from multiple angles. Obviously last night was a clear one that could have been sorted easily, but some are more open to interpretation, especially diving, ultimately we'd probably find ourselves moaning about the 4th official's decision instead of moaning about the referee's decision as we do now.
I could accept bad decisions much more easily if it wasn't for the fact refs are influenced by the relative status of the teams.
Every week the refs and linesmen are ****ing up somewhere. I see the linesmen right in front of me at the KC every week, and the amount of times they clearly just guess at throw ins and corners is a joke. The flag stays by their side for ages, they shuffle like a nervous toddler, then take punt. They don't concentrate, too busy dreaming about their tea or something. The standard of reffing is ****. They need all the help they can get.
Just get rid of them altogether and have someone in a control room with all the camera footage in control. That way it takes away big clubs advantage where players like Rooney get given the whistle and allowed to ref the game.
Agreed. I'm in favour of the goal-line technology we now have, but I'm not keen on the idea of reviewing video evidence during a game.
Not sure how true this is, it's quite easy when a big club gets a decision to say 'they got that because their a big club' but I think people focus on these decisions and blatantly ignore the bad decisions that go against big clubs. Plus we've had plenty of fortuitous decisions this season and we're one of the smallest clubs in the league. Quite simply the bigger and better clubs make more forward runs, have more possession in the final third and more runs into the box, therefore they are more likely to draw fouls from the opposition. I'm sure you could come up with an example of a player or club that got away with something and attribute that to who they are but chances are it had nothing to do with it.
It's not so much about the big decisions, it's about the constant soft free kicks that are given against you when you play the likes of Chelsea and Man City and it definitely happens.
I think the pool of Premiership referees are having a 'Manchester United' season! Every week we are seeing absolutely diabolical decisions from them (by 'we' I don't mean particularly Hull City). Last nights fiasco was only the latest incident, I think we would all be foaming at the mouth if what happened to Swansea the night before had happened to us. I tend to agree with El Tigre and OLM that there are far more bad decisions which favour the 'big' clubs and don't believe this to be sour grapes.
In rugby (league) referee's rely on it too much, they refer to the video ref to confirm their decision when they could have easily given it without. Another problem is that it doesn't always work, plenty of tries are given each season after the video ref makes the wrong decision.
I think part of the problem is how over analysed games are these days, 20/30 years ago if there was a poor decision it was annoying at the time but was forgot about the next day. Now we're forced to re-live every controversial decision, social media, tv replays, sky sports news on 24/7, various websites...etc. Controversial decisions get more air time than the actual football in the days after a game.
The lying current. It was plain for all to see the linesman told Mike Dean to send McGregor off. Dean allowed play on for a few secs. But after the Chelsea v. Arsenal game last saturday and now last night it is time for a 2nd ref to be in the stands looking at a tv monitor. Enough is enough.
Just heard Bruce's after match interview with Burns. Both agree the linesman did not flag the penalty. I did not notice at the time if he did or didn't. He then advises the referee who can't have seen the incident or rather has allowed the game to continue until he realized two players were down. So as the linesman didn't flag how can he advise later that it was a penalty If he saw the incident and believed it was a penalty why didn't he flag to begin with. Basically looks as if they weren't sure what happened so they guessed or talked each other into the decision
Didn't we get a dodgy penalty at the KC earlier in the season to beat Wet Spam? Sending off definately silly though.
Three shocking decisions in away games this season come to mind. Michael Olivers red card for Elmo and the penalty which cost us a point and which led to him being demoted or rested for a game. At Everton , 2 red card tackles by Barry unpunished and his subsequent flick at the ball to score whilst standing yards offside to cost us another point and last nights debacle at Upton Park. You could just about accept that referees make mistakes but what makes it worse is invariably these pillocks stand by their decisions afterwards. Have I missed anymore refereeing howlers against us ?
