Maybe in his mind he thought it was a clear red card for Cha - no need for consultation. Victor's was a clear red card by the letter of the law- no need for consultation. Two players looked like they tackled Sammy - hard to tell who to send off - consultation needed.
I believe refs will support a football team... I can only assume they grew up watching football - hence they became refs (couldn't become players). They will obviously have leanings towards teams but being purely biased - no. Infallable - no, they make mistakes. They need to make snap decisions in most cases - mistakes are made!
If I have created the impression that I think differently, then it is unintentional. You may very well be correct but what I am saying is that right or wrong, the decisions were made very quickly. Big Decisions. In saying that, I am passing no value judgement on the validity of the decisions themselves.
I think most people do the same as I did before I became a referee - overplay how much of a bias certain referees might have. For example, Willie Collum. Despised by Celtic fans - actually a pretty big tim. Has been since he was young enough to know about it. The best argument I have heard since becoming involved was from a referee doing sunday league pub level - "If the players I'm reffing are sunday league level, they make 10 mistakes each per game. Why should I be any different from them?" So take any SPL player. If he makes 3 or 4 mistakes a game (which is generous to say the least), why should a referee make any less? The only thing I will say about Calum's decisions that I think is ludicrous - Cha's red card. He was given the option to decide if he felt he had made a mistake when the appeal was made. He decided he had made the right choice. So it went to the 3 man panel to decide. And they upheld the decision. Calum was given a 5 out of 10 rating for his performance on sunday for 2 reasons by the referee's performance administrator. The reasons why only 5 out of 10? He was marked down for giving the foul against Cha. Not the red card mind you, because as soon as the foul is given, it has to be a red. But in their eyes it wasn't a foul to begin with (I've already stated on here how referees were briefed on this last week). And secondly, because for the Bocanegra foul, it wasn't even his linesman who told him who had committed the foul. It was Ian Brines, the 4th official over 50 yards away, who had to inform him. Now, I'm not Calum's biggest fan. But how can we honestly have a system that punishes him for wrong decisions on one hand, and yet refuses to reverse those mistakes on the other?
How does the scale work? I thought it was a 7.9 for making a **** up? Where did the 5 come from? Is that a new grading system?
Good, interesting, post. The only obvious comment I would make is, of course, that mistakes made by a player can be atoned for in the course of the game and generally do not have quite the same absolute devastating effect on the result as red cards mistakenly shown by a referee - which is why I think a comparison cannot really be made but if it can, in terms of numbers of mistakes made, then for the good of the game, the referee's performance needs to be superior to that of a player. If I may ask, where did you obtain the information on the rating of the referee's performance and the reason for it?
who`s the mason in the black ? you shouldve never let on....Im genuinely astonished you havent had more of this since admitting your ref secret
Pud Your contribution was rather pathetic. C3ltic, I cannot see how you can accuse me of following the flock. I am not sure you know anything about football or this forum. Dev is bending over backwards to find reason is to forgive Murray. I thing that its a pity the referee did not try as hard to appease Celtic as Dev does to come up with an excuse for Murray.
