Premier League Thread

[AL.]

Your reasoning is flawed. Someone shouldn't get sent off because previous incidents went unpunished or unnoticed? What utter bollocks. Every single incident isn't going to be seen or dealt with correctly. You seem to think referees should get every single decision right. Every week when I referee I get shouted at and moaned at for not giving something or giving a goal kick instead of a corner and I'm sick of the attitude of people that referee's don't have the right to miss things or have bad games. And a shove in the chest isn't violent conduct.

Not at all, just the majority, and they don't in this league. They are abysmal. There's no common sense applied, and a real arrogance shown by the officials in the professional game. Referees are always right and managers are always wrong to criticise. Sure, they get stick from the fans and some areas of the media, but they have so secure jobs. They can perform badly, and still be there next week. I'm not talking about people like you Tom, who do it as a hobby and obviously don't earn a living from it. These guys do this as their job, and quite frankly make so many dreadful decisions. I'm not saying they deliberately go out there and get things wrong, but the fact is, so many weeks we talk about how a game changed on a refereeing decision rather than wonderful football.

Just for the record though Tom, I though Jon Moss was excellent in the Palace/Liverpool earlier.

 

[Archers Road]

Whisky stays in the cupboard. Hull go on the attack. Too late chaps. Shouldn't have defended so deep. Bruce made a mistake in my opinion, of taking off Ben Arfa.

Lou Reed song does not get played.

 

[AL.]

Your reasoning is flawed. Someone shouldn't get sent off because previous incidents went unpunished or unnoticed? What utter bollocks. Every single incident isn't going to be seen or dealt with correctly. You seem to think referees should get every single decision right. Every week when I referee I get shouted at and moaned at for not giving something or giving a goal kick instead of a corner and I'm sick of the attitude of people that referee's don't have the right to miss things or have bad games. And a shove in the chest isn't violent conduct.

And I was just highlighting the lack of consistency, which could be applied to other incidents outside violent conduct.

 

[TheSecondStain]

Much as I like Eriksen as a player, he does look like a Telegoon character.

You must log in or register to see images

 

[- Doing The Lambert Walk]

Most Spursy thing ever.

 

[TheSecondStain]

And I was just highlighting the lack of consistency, which could be applied to other incidents outside violent conduct.

I understood what you were trying to convey. Tomw23 is right though. Refs should have the latitude to make mistakes. That should be properly acknowledged and technology should be brought in to aid the decision making process. The stakes are too high for futures to be decided in the head of one man and a couple of flag waving officials who generally aren't as good as the man in the centre.

 

[Le Tissier's Laces]

Harry Kane's a bit of a gormless interviewee bless him...

 

[AL.]

I understood what you were trying to convey. Tomw23 is right though. Refs should have the latitude to make mistakes. That should be properly acknowledged and technology should be brought in to aid the decision making process. The stakes are too high for futures to be decided in the head of one man and a couple of flag waving officials who generally aren't as good as the man in the centre.

I agree entirely. I can understand mistakes, but the big decisions, just seem to be given incorrectly too many times nowadays.

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

Mistakes aren't more common..it is just that you can view it from every angle and at slo-mo (which can be misleading). And having viewed it from every angle...people would still argue about it. Look at any post-match discussion.

 

[KillerCephalopod]

I agree entirely. I can understand mistakes, but the big decisions, just seem to be given incorrectly too many times nowadays.

Only because "nowadays we've got a million cameras replaying each decision from dozens of different angles. I doubt the standard is any worse than it ever was, it's just that ever decision is under more scrutiny than ever before.

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

We have human variation in decisions made live, who is going to assess video evidence? A robot?...no, a human being. And guess what, you will get human variation.

 

[- Doing The Lambert Walk]

Tweet from LFC fan: You just knew Lovren was a small time player the way he was licking our arse when he signed

 

[AL.]

Only because "nowadays we've got a million cameras replaying each decision from dozens of different angles. I doubt the standard is any worse than it ever was, it's just that ever decision is under more scrutiny than ever before.

From the spectators yes, but not from any one in authority to do something about it. Steve Bruce summed it up well. Not much common sense, and the question is, did the linesman need to get involved?

 

[- Doing The Lambert Walk]

Piers Morgan has phoned in to BBC 606...

 

[TheSecondStain]

I agree entirely. I can understand mistakes, but the big decisions, just seem to be given incorrectly too many times nowadays.

Not sure about these days, but one incorrect decision is one too many. Officials are just under more scrutiny than before. However, you'll get people putting up the tired age-old argument that technology will either be too expensive, too slow, no better than what we've got, can't be used at all levels, and so on. Forgetting completely the fact that technologists are imaginative folk and they won't come up with a system that isn't superior. In fact, I believe I read somewhere a couple of years ago that there are systems already out there that just need to have funding to be further developed and given the go ahead.

It will eventually come anyway. I welcome it.

 

[Sotonist]

Only because "nowadays we've got a million cameras replaying each decision from dozens of different angles. I doubt the standard is any worse than it ever was, it's just that ever decision is under more scrutiny than ever before.

Agree in general. That means the technology used has to match the scrutiny.

Either we give the officials better tools or we ban replays.

 

[fran-MLs little camera]

From the spectators yes, but not from any one in authority to do something about it. Steve Bruce summed it up well. Not much common sense, and the question is, did the linesman need to get involved?

I think linemen are there to get involved.

 

[tomw24]

I think linemen are there to get involved.

Exactly, they are there to help the referee.

 

[KillerCephalopod]

We have human variation in decisions made live, who is going to assess video evidence? A robot?...no, a human being. And guess what, you will get human variation.

Indeed, despite seeing the same incident from a dozen different angles supporters and pundits still disagree about decisions - technology can help, but it will never be a panacea.

Agree in general. That means the technology used has to match the scrutiny.

Either we give the officials better tools or we ban replays.

I'd welcome better use of technology, but it'll never eliminate controversial decisions; both rugby & cricket are proof of this. Actually, the first thing I'd do is mike-up referees and introduce a new law saying only team captains can talk directly to him (also, address him as "Sir", all like rugby does). Create player respect for refs & fan respect will follow of it's own accord.

 

[AL.]

I'd welcome better use of technology, but it'll never eliminate controversial decisions; both rugby & cricket are proof of this. Actually, the first thing I'd do is mike-up referees and introduce a new law saying only team captains can talk directly to him (also, address him as "Sir", all like rugby does). Create player respect for refs & fan respect will follow of it's own accord.

I would welcome that absolutely.