One of the best has decided to retire, http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/28678139. It is a shame really, he was a very good ref, in what must be one of the toughest jobs around. Split second decisions being reviewed and criticised by either one of two camps and being told by fans that you are a planker, can't be easy. What, seriously, do you think could be done to improve the standard refereeing in our leagues? Personally, the inclusion of technology to enable reviews of 'big calls' could improve the standard. Maybe, attaching microphones, so viewers can hear the conversations with players and linesmen, might give the public more insight into their job. It would also, hopefully, stop players giving them too much stick. More communication with viewers is needed, a short interview after each game could also clear more things up.
The officials are supposed to work as a team, but how often is it that assistants don't flag for something that they've had a good view of that the referee hasn't?
I read somewhere quite recently that some referees instruct their assistants, , " only flag for offside or throw ins, leave the rest to me!"
I will post my thoughts giving a referee's insight once I'm on something other than my mobile. Assuming you're interested.
Personally think things should be left the way they are. They get the majority of the decisions right, and the only technology I really wanted was goal line, and thats in If there were to be any changes though, I would have the refs and lino's miked up/recorded - not necessarily a feed to the crowd like they do in rugby, but so maybe the authorities can listen to the abuse the refs have to put up with from players and maybe look at action after (although maybe if the crowd could hear, the players might be a little more polite on the pitch) Other than that, possibly a '1 appeal' by a manager. If they think the ref has made an incorrect decision, they can look at a replay. The main problem with that is it can be subjective - a matter of opinion. To one ref it could be a foul, to another a dive. A deliberate handball in one opinion, total accident in another. If it was brought in, maybe the only appeal they could do is offside where they have the technology to make an almost-instant decision
Why the need for technology at all when all they really need to do is make the rule clearer to both follow and administer? At the moment, it's neither.
Well I think the rule should go back to the basic one of if you're in an offside position, you're offside - if you're not intefering with play, then you shouldn't be on the pitch etc I don't mean use technology for that - but in the replay they show the line on the screen of whether the person is offside/in line. That is purely cut and dry whether they are offside or not, not an matter of opinion.
Agree with the first part - being a former member of the Goalkeeper's Union, I've always that the mere presence of opposition players in your penalty area is a distraction enough to warrant interference. As for the rule itself, I'd prefer to see the old 'two opposition players between you and the goal', rule ie clear daylight, not in line. And only in the penalty area - or final quarter of the pitch.
I'm sure I've made most of these points before but here goes... 1. The laws are written by those who have not and do not actually play the game. The 'blazers' that make the changes are of the same mind set that award world cup competitions to the likes of a desert nation in the middle of summer. They don't think it through properly. Once you understand that then everything else makes sense. 2. The offside law hasn't actually changed but the interpretation has. It is only in the last few seasons that the interpretation of the law has become ridiculous. Thank you Herr Blatter for sticking your nose in where it wasn't necessary. How can someone who's never kicked a ball have any real idea of interfering with play under today's interpretation? The whole thing is a joke. Next to violence against referees at grassroots level this to me is the biggest problem with officiating the game. 3. Assistants are often instructed to only give offside and ball in and out of play. Less so at higher levels but if a referee hasn't seen it then a lot of them don't want to know about it. I was hung out to dry by a referee's secretary for flagging for a penalty in the last minute of a cup final after the referee missed a blatant foul (not his fault either,we can't see everything) even though it was absolutely the right decision to make. Apparently AR's are to assist the referee to not see what he's already not seen. As the blurb goes- to assist, not insist. 4. I am also, like BB, a member of the goalkeepers union. I also think that offside is a position not an offence unless interfering. At the risk of repeating myself it's what actually constitutes interfering that matters and we see more and more obvious errors. 5. Referees are actively discouraged from playing. Atwell and Atkinson (met both at seminars) stopped playing at 14. I just can't help but think that even if they had played for their local pub team it would benefit them immensely. I think it's quite right that seasoned ex pro's are not put up for refereeing.... Robbie Savage with the whistle at the Vic, anyone? ..but to not have played any competitive football is ridiculous. 6. Bringing in technology means that the game is different at different levels. Not everyone can afford it. As we saw in Brazil it's also open to abuse. Personally I think better training for referees is absolutely necessary. Goal line technology at the top level has become necessary. And that's a real shame. 7. Howard Webb has indeed been our best official for the past few years. Difficult to see who his successor will be, particularly given what has been in evidence at The Vic since our last sojourn into the top flight.... from Everton and the Chris Powell penalty debacle through the ghost goal and Knockaert. It needs to improve.
1. As I understand it, the law makers of football is the IFAB, who are supposedly independent from FIFA. FIFA and any of the continental associations are allowed to recommend changes, but it's ultimately the IFAB that decide. However, any rule changes that are turned down, the proposer can trial them in one of their competitions - it will be classed as a regulation of that competition. They can re-submit them the following year if it has been successful. If it is then turned down, it cannot be re-submitted by that association, but it can be submitted by another one. 2. I completely agree with you on this one. At grassroots level where you have club linesmen, how are they supposed to know the interpretation re phases of play? Also, the stats show a reduction in those becoming referees because of the problem of violence or extreme verbal abuse towards referees. Luckily, I never encountered that but one of the first things you are told on a referees course is that the game can't take place without you, which is why some referees at PL/FL level seem to have an over-inflated ego (even going back as far as Clive "The Book" Thomas). 3. The issue I referred to in my previous post concerns things like a foul taking place right under their noses and not signalling for fouls in the box at corners - the assistant at that end goes behind the goal-line exactly for that purpose. How may penalties would be given if the assistants (or the additional officials in those competitions they are used) actually did that? 4. I was a left-back and as I didn't play any club football past U-12 level and only played occasionally at school level, I can't really comment. 5. I'll defer to your superior knowledge with that point but a lot of referees take it up as they're not very good but still want to be involved, so they may not have played anyway. As for your point about ex-pros, I agree with you although I think any ex-pros who go into the media should be made to do the referee's course and referee a couple of games at the same level as other newly qualified referees. It would be interesting to see how the attitudes would (or not) change if they had to do that. A similar thing could be put in place on the coaching badges, with the level of game increasing with the level of coaching qualification. This might then filter through to attitudes at grass roots level if it was regularly stated in the media how difficult the officials job is. 6 & 7. I agree apart from the issue of goal line technology. However, if there was a way of having a similar system to that in ice hockey with a goal judge behind the goal, I would prefer that.
You are quite right about the set up in 1 but it is the experience and the mindset that is the problem. Also have you heard some of the more ludicrous suggestions by the likes of Platini? A fantastic player, yes, but he has no idea about how or why the laws are written. In my younger days I'd take off side away from club officials. I'd make sure the players knew that I had and made sure they knew that the attacking team got the benefit of the doubt on offside and I would not tolerate dissent on my offside decision. I think I cautioned maybe 6 players over 12 years.... the one sending off (over this) was in the very first Sunday game I did. I soon learned. All assistants are qualified referees in their own right although they no longer middle once they get to a certain level. What annoys me is that so many of our 'top' officials do not implement the law correctly. Whether a tackle is a foul and what the sanction should be is one thing (in the opinion of the referee, and all that) but where the law is black and white (the laws are written to take out 'common sense' and to ensure (or try to) the same implementation throughout) and they still get it utterly wrong defies belief. One such memorable incident was Deeney v Wolves a few seasons back where he got his shot away and was fouled outside the box, for the referee to give a penalty and a red card for a DOGSO. All similar to the Chelsea v Arsenal debacle... mistaken identity, the shot missing the goal anyway so no Denial of a Goal Scoring Opportunity etc. etc. As to a goal judge behind the line, this is what is in place in the Europa League. From what I've seen it doesn't work. My opinion is that, unlike previous years, the gulf between the ability of the players and the ability of the referees has widened considerably - therein lies the major problem at the professional level.
I actually have no problem with the offside rule in its current guise as long as it is enforced properly. The problem is really highlighted by the ex-footballer 'experts' who don't understand the rules and rile people up on tv incorrectly. This could suggest playing the game might not actually help make better decisions!
