³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

i think a very relevant article at an appropriate time where a wave of hatred has started against refrees....People are spitting venom against them....The author has presented both sides of the coin pretty well my question to the author is that inspite this high profile air pressure tight job being so controversial....1 wrong 'un can flare up the passions between two nations why has fifa in particular been resistant to the introduction of technology to further enhance the descision making capcility of the ref in crunching situations.....For eg the technological chip in a ball which gives us a sureshot answer to whether the ball has crossed the goal line or not......or to the one to trap offsides....also dont you feel that some refs are highly arrogant and egoistic that they suppose that their word is as good as the word of the almighty....they tend to be hesitant to consult their compariots on the ground & giv a sound earring to a players point of view....they also are scared of reversing their decision if they have realised their mistake in the split second as they are worried of their reputations getting tarnished but are unaware of the agony to follow in the aftermath....they also seem to have preordained notions about players and their charectars and a team as a whole which lingers at the back of their mind probably misleading them to make a wrong decision which comes back to haunt them ps.dont you think it'll be good if india is included in the system....a country of a billion can surely have some delectable talent......can feed the cash cow as well......pls be generous enough to reply

given but the amount of remuneration they recieve and the luxuries they are bathed in,as u have mentioned,dont think that footballers are entitled to fair decision....no bias...no prejudice....not that i'm justifying their histornics on the ground

A great article, it's good to see an article finally written from a different point of view regarding the referees in this country. I think it's fair to say that we do have a good standard in England, especially if a comparison is made to the standard in other European leagues.

However, I still think there are vast improvements that could be made to improve the standard further, and i think these changes need to start far higher up the pyramid than the referees themselves. A reason why referees get so much abuse at games is being they are the representatives of the FA at any given game, and in recent years, the way the FA have behaved with regards to their refs is terrible.

Inconsistancy is my personal main gripe, not just in decisions during games, but in the aftermath of decisions. The fact is, due to the nature of the job (and being a premiership ref is no easy feat), mistakes will be made. But cast your mind back to that gerrard/malouda tackle that resulted in a penalty a couple of years back. That poor decision was met by the referee in question being suspended from the Premiership the following week. Later that season, J Lloyd Samuel tackled Cristiano Ronaldo, it was a perfectly good tackle, yet a penalty was given. In the aftermath of that decision, the referee was not suspended for the Premiership the following week. Therefore the only conclusion that can be reached is that a mistake against a top four team is worthy of a suspension, but a mistake against a lower placed team isn't.

Another example of this inconsistancy is all over the website recently. Wolves being fined for fielding a weakened side against Man U. Now this is the same kind of thing that happens every single season when either Chelsea/Man U/Liverpool are preparing for a Champions League final. Youth players who havent played a whole game all season are reeled out in order to give the first team squad a rest. And doing it at the business end of the season could cause a team to be relegated. Yet have we ever seen a fine handed out to a big team?

And another final example of the FA's inconsistancy, particulary with regards to their referees on pitch actions, is their constantly changing approach as to what decisions are allowed to be made retrospectively. As a Bolton fan, a few weeks ago I saw a shocking challenge by Gallas on one of our players. The referee didn't see the incident and the game continued (causing Arsenal to score a goal, but thats another matter!). After the game, the FA was quizzed as to whether Gallas would be punished for the tackle, to which their response was "We do not re-officiate matches after they have happened"; an answer which greatly confused football fans, as we were previously all under the impression that if a referee did not see an incident, that would be the ONLY circumstance in which the FA could hand out a punishment retrospectively.

Now the question I want to put to you is, if the situation was that Kevin Davies had done that horror tackle on Fabregas, and the referee said after the game "I didn't see it", would the FA give the same response, or would Davies be hung out to dry?

The Referees are a representative of the FA. How can we "Respect" the FA and their staff, when it's abundantly clear that the FA have no respect for the integrity of the game, or fans of smaller clubs.

Obviously we all have our moments when we curse the referee but they do a pretty decent job most of the time. I think the key is consistancy. If each decision is treated in the same way then, even the bad ones, are likely to be a constant for all teams creating a fair backdrop the our game and allowing for fair competetion and sportsmanship to flourish.

Every fan will agree that all they want is consistency but that isn't always the case. Take the Arsenal Liverpool game the free kick that gerrard complained was hand ball should never of been given because gerrard blatantly dived and nothing was given yet earlier in the match bendtner dived (i'm not disputing it as an arsenal fan)and he was rightly booked. it seems that referees are willing to book foreign players for diving yet when it comes to top english players they won't because of fear of labelling them divers.
However overall the referees in the english league are very good and like most people will make mistakes thats life.
In my opinion i would like to see referees sometimes explain a decision to the media because then fans will respect there honesty and understand there decision process. E.g if ref came out and said he didn't give a penalty because he wasn't 100% sure people will respect them more.

People like Sam Allardyce could learn a lot from Mr Clough. The prevailing fashion seems to be that if you lose you blame the ref, at least in public, which only goes to undermine their authority further whilst at the same time absolving you as manager of any blame. Its quite pathetic. I ref at primary school games and I hate it, its an impossible job even at that low level, fair play to those who do it professionally. I also watch some bad refs in league one but mainly because those refs are the ones afraid to enforce their authority. The top refs are the ones who take on the job of being what the FA call 'being in charge of the game' because that is what they are, THEY, and not the managers are in charge of the game. I guess the ego maniacs that call themselves premiership managers just can't handle that. If the FA had any balls they really would punish those who just blithely have a pop at a human being for making mistakes. What I would love to see, and I don't think I will in my lifetime, is a manager come on and go'Yeah, I got the tactics wrong and/or picked the wrong player there.'

80 grand a year. not bad, not bad at all. forget uni... i needs to gets me a whistle and some black shorts.

Matt I completely agree with you that refereeing is a hard job, however the amount of mistakes made by referees in BIG games is ridiculous. Now I know most players are; overpayed, spoilt etc. however some of the decisions made by referees can determine the greatness a club or player reaches! Had Mr Tom Ovrebo made the right decision in last years champions league semi final you could be looking at Chelsea as European Champions, and would Barcelona be hailed as one of the greatest sides ever?
Had Thierry Henry's handball been noticed by officials, would Ireland be in the 2010 world cup?
Again this week in the champions league both games on the Wednesday were marred by controversial decisions, Mr Ovrebo again made the wrong decision awarding Klose's goal and as for the decision by Mr Hansson to allow the quick indirect free kick against Arsenal, 'it was worse than a penalty' (Arsene Wenger, 2010)!?!
In my opinion there are to many weak referees (e.g. Ovrebo a ref who referees in the norwegian league exposed to the champions league semi final) in control of big games and consequently the wrong decisions are being made!
I personally have sympathy for the Managers and Players who are then fined for the comments they make after the games! I agree referees should be respected but some times respect has to be earnt. Pierluigi Collina is a great example of a referee who gained respect by doing his job properly!

football needs to get out of the stone age and sort out some video technology. give the poor dude with a whistle some assistance. don't see much point getting two more humanoids to patrol the penalty areas. humanoid error will still prevail.

i'm sick of hearing managers whinge about referees at the end of EVERY GAME! it's impossible for a ref to get every decision right. therefore, the losing manager just blubbers about how the ref cost them the win. it gets boring, let's talk about the footy for a change.

we can stop all this nonsense by bring in *** VIDEO TECHNOLOGY ***. no more offside goals, no more ghost penalties or whatever. the team who scores the most legitimate goals wins the game. it's a crazy concept but it just might work.

and best of all... NO DIVING! and i know it's unrelated, but forget this yellow card business for a dive. give em a three match ban and as if by MAGIC no more diving.

good article... i agree that refs should be allowed to come out to the cameras to explain a decision but this should not be compulsary. But, refs will only be asked to appear after a high profile error then get accused of having a large ego. But if refs come out to explain decisions, then should players also be not exempt from explaining contreversial desicions/ poor desicions from the match?

I know this will not happen because players are part of the team but why should refs have to explain themselves when a manager or player does not do the same. As said before, I wonder what percentage of matches when a team loses, a decision from the ref will be brought up as a reason why they lost.

I think the major problem is consistency of refereeing. I understand that some decisions are split second decisions that are made in real time and not subject to constant replays.

However, just for example, a pentalty was awarded against Man United for Portsmouth earlier in the season. Vidic was adjudged to have tugged a Portsmouth players shirt. Looked nothing to me, but fair enough, if this was applied across the board. A few weeks earlier, Man United played Chelsea at Stamford Bridge. If we look at the goal, we can clearly see that Drogba hauls Wes Brown to the ground and no foul is given. Both incidents were similar involving shirt tugging but yet only one was given as a foul.

Now look at the potential difference in the league table because of this incident. Man Utd would be a point better off and Chelsea two worse off, meaning Man Utd would be a point clear.

People say that these decisions even out over the course of the season, this is not true and is more apparent in cup games than league games.

It was a disgrace that Chelsea got knocked out of the Champions League semi last year, and the same ref awarded a goal for Bayern just a few days ago that was about two metres offside. It can not only cost clubs games, but a lot of money as well.

Gary Neville had the right idea, and I know a lot hate the player, but he suggested an elite pool of referee's to choose from for the big games. This may improve referee's standards as they attempt to get into this elite pool. We can only hope.

The FA not punishing Gallas for that challenge on the Bolton player REALLY annoyed me. Why?

- Rio Ferdinand is being punished for a very similar scenario. Ref missed it, but The FA reviewed it. Ban. He still is not allowed to play against Everton tomorrow.

- Emmanuel Adebayor in that inafmous game AGAINST Arsenal. Ref missed it. FA reviewed it. Ban.

- Didier Drogba throws a coin back into the crowd in a Carling Cup tie against Burnley. Ref missed it. FA review it. Ban.

Yet, Gallas gets away scot-free. PLUS, along with Mascherano after PUNCHING a Leeds player (just as Rio punched Chris Fagan), but again, inconsistency.

Technology, NOW!

Anyone remember Watford v Reading?
Player takes a shot...
"Ohh really close mate, but unfortunately you've missed and hit the side-netting and that'll be a goal ki-.... it's a GOALLL?!?!?!?! :S"

Madness.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Rather than having a go at refs, the pressure should be put on players.

Quite simply, every player should have a duty to tell the truth if asked by a ref. If he says "did you handball that Thierry" then he must answer honestly.

If he says "I don't know" or refuses to answer, then you ask one of the defenders "Did he handball it?". If the defender insists "yes, he absolutely did. Twice." then that is really that. It's not a goal, it's probably a yellow card for cheating.

The ref must note down or maybe record what the player says, and any player found lying to a ref is banned for a lengthy period automatically. Every player knows his actions are going to have been recorded by multiple cameras in a big game, and there will be nowhere to hide.

This would eliminate many of the bad decisions, from goalkeepers insisting a ball did not cross a line, to players clearly handballing denying it. But more than anything, it would emphasize the expectation of fair play and honesty. At present, the system is almost designed to encourage players to cheat if an opportunity arises. The gains can be huge (ask Thierry Henry) and the potential downsides minimal.

I mean, how can you have a 'Respect' campaign, if players are not even obliged to be honest with the ref?

One thing I dont understand is why other teams fans have a problem with the Gallas challenge? It was a late challenge. Thats all. Nothing happened to Mark Davies, he was playing the next game. It was a yellow card maybe not a red like some people are making out, what is there to review about that? Even OC looked at it later and apologised for calling it assault.
Although I agree with the Bolton fan earlier, if that was Kevin Davies on Fabregas there would probably have been a review and maybe a ban handed out and that does come down to reputation.

I have a simple rule. Never criticise a person in their job unless I am 100% sure that I could do a better job. And given that I don't run in 1 week what these men (and women) run in 1 hour, that instantly means I keep my trap well and truly shut!

Respect is something that is earned, and as far as I am concerned these referees have earned, and will continue to earn it, in spades!

Oh and just for the record, I am an Everton fan. Have been for 25 years now.

Rugby Union has a much better attitude to refereeing in general. On the pitch the players are not permitted to question the referee's decision. As the referee NEVER changes his decision based on what the players say this makes no difference at to the game in progess except to make it slightly more pleasant for all concerned and teaches the player some proper respect (something they clearly lack in most cases). Being mic-ed up he can also explain his decision to the TV if he wishes. Off the pitch any contentious decisions are referred to TV cameras if they're available and the referee is reprimanded for any poor decisions after the game. The referee is also allowed to confer with the off-field officials (counter to perhaps the stupidest of football's many refereeing rules).

As Cloughie shows, players and managers would engender more respect themselves if they were forced to show some publicly and stop acting like children who didn't get their way.

I have been an linesman, or assistant referee, for my brothers local football team, and goodness me, it's not as easy as some people may think.

Referee is a hard job, people like Neil Warnock, Alex Ferguson, most managers don't seem to be able to accept that people make mistakes.

That said, there are some refeeree decision's that well are poor, for example Klose goal in the champions league, it was so far offside, it was not even a Klose decision.

The main problem is that the rules of the game have become totally unclear - who knows what constitutes a booking and what constitutes offside anymore? That inevitably leads to inconsistency.

However, there are no repercussions for referees if they make big mistake - they just carry on.

Look at Mike Jones, the beach ball ref. Every time I've seen him he's made shocking decision after shocking decision yet he still refs in the best league in the world.

As a West Brom fan, I am embittered against Howard Webb, having seen him cost my team a place in the FA Cup final by missing Milan Baros' blatant handball in the semi final against Portsmouth (who, by the way, probably still haven't paid for half that team).

Also the fact that referee's get death threats from making such decision is a disgrace, remember Anders Frisk? Jose Mourinho comments forced him to retire from refeering early, Urs Meier, disallowed an England goal against Portugal, he got alot of death threats. Along with Overbo.

HotHeadWazza the difference between gallas tackle and rio, adebayor and drogba's incidents are that gallas was a missed time tackle which wasn't as bad as some tackles just a bit late where as rio threw a punch which is violent conduct, adebayor tried stamping on a players head violent conduct and drogba threw a coin into the crowd which could injury an innocent fan so it is violent conduct. Gallas tackle would not be classed as violent conduct.
i agree with you tho that mascherano got away with it but im also glad that rio got an extra game for appealing his ban because he clearly lashed out and if the ref had seen it he would of been off so why do man u think they can appeal the ban.

A long time ago, teams used to play fast football and then, at some point in the second half, tiring. A referee's job was easier. Also, a long time ago, a team was allowed two substitutions, while the squads used to be 13-15 first team players with the rest consisting of up and coming youth. Things have moved. The game is now a lot faster and teams are allowed three substitutions, while they now have squads of 20+ players. The only thing that was left unchanged was refereeing a match. And now we see the consequences. Referees making mistakes because they never got extra help from football federations, Uefa, Fifa.

It is a consequence perhaps that we see managers go over the line with statements making headlines. SAF recently called Willey(?) incompetent. Although I support the club, I couldn't believe SAF said that. it was wrong. And it is wrong that he bemoans frequently about time keeping. When the team doesn't manage to get a result in 90 + 3 minutes, it is not gentlemanry behaviour making a scene out of one extra minute.

In midweek, Wenger called the referee of the match in Porto incompetend or dishonest. That took the mikey because Wenger is a man who sees what he wants and has no second thought of calling opponents' players sort of criminals (see Birmingham City) or an entire town a town of thugs (see Stoke City). It is a breath of fresh air having such articles available for people to read and remember how the game should be played and how teams and managers should behave.

Brian Clough may have been outspoken and eccentric but he was a gentleman. I remember a program on TV, where a now famous England ex footballer said how unthinkable was for the then Nottingham Forest to play dirty football, aiming at kicking opponents and how Clough reacted when a player, new to the club, showed such signs. Reading the part of the interview he gave to the Guardian 30 years ago, makes fans think and wonder why is it so difficult to have gentlemanry behaviour in football pitches nowadays.

I remember the Gallas incident the Bolton fan mentioned. It was cruel, unacceptable and unpunished. Yet, Wenger never saw it, I suppose. In Stoke, an ex Wenger star, the infamous Viera behaved the way men don't behave, with regard to the Whelan incident. Comentators of the match joked. Perhaps Viera believes that such attitude makes him a 'tough' midfielder and a good player. I wondered at the time if it had anything with tuition in the Wenger school of good football.

It puzzles me why Uefa, FIFA, whatever, don't establish video replays in top divisions in football. This would be a positive step forward, helping the referees to make the step forward and provide more accurate football results. Adding two extra officials behind the line is not the solution. It only adds confusion.

Perhaps it would be a good thing to prepare a course out of Brian Clough's life and make all premiership managers take the course, in order to learn how to behave when their team takes part in a football match.

To the author of the article: congratulations!
This was an excellent article!

Further to the previous comment about Rugby Union, I would also like football to follow their system of citing. This would purely be for card-able fouls, such as handballs, violent conduct etc, not disputed goals. These citings would have no bearing on the result, but could be used for yellow or red cards. I know there is something in place at the moment, but it only seem to be for the biggest games or most public incidents. If teams, via the manager, had the ability to cite a player after a game, with the footage to be reviewed by a committee including ex-players and referee's, this may help clean up the game, even if only to a small extent. Referee's are human and will make mistakes or not see everything, that's natural and gives us all something to talk about. The camera's do see a lot more and always will, they should used more to help officials, but it would be too slow during a game. Although using it for checking if a ball went over the line or not may work, as checking a try in rugby does.
Respect is another big difference with rugby. I remember seeing Scott Quinnell, all 18 stone of him, talking to a referee as if he were a schoolboy and the ref a teacher. There was no swearing, he wasn't shouting and screaming an inch from the ref's face, he was polite throughout. If a player that size, in such an aggresive, physical game can be polite and respectful to a man half his size, why can't a footballer? In American Football, the players cannot even touch an official. I saw a player put his hand on the officials arm to get his attention, and he was sent off and no-one complained or disputed it. We see too much arrogance in football, especially when compared to previous decades. When you compare the attitude of players from the 60's and 70's particularly to the modern player, it is a very marked difference. It was admittedly a very different era, one huge difference being the money involved. When the players were still living in the same streets as the fans, before they started receiving the huge wages, there seems to have been a lot less arrogance. When you compare the modern player to say, Emlyn Hughes, there does seem to be a very large difference in attitude to the game and the fans. I know the world has changed as well, but I'm sure we were all taught manners as children.
I was only born in the 70's, so my view of the players and the game in that period is not firsthand.

Nice blog, Matt, and one with which I can empathise with, as an official in another sport myself. For the last 2 years I've been involved with American football officiating here in the UK, and can sympathise with the refs. I can't profess to having got every call I've made on the field right, and there have certainly been times I've copped some serious flak from the sidelines about a particular penalty I've given or something I've missed.

The problem with football is that dishing out yellows is a very subjective issue. 3 persistent fouls might be the trigger for one referee but another may give it for 5. In American football it's a lot different because there are set rules on what is and what isn't a penable offence.

Professionalism, though, I don't think has necessarily raised the standard of refereeing in football. What it has done is made the referees a lot fitter so they are in a better position to make a call, but you still see plenty of dreadful decisions week in, week out. It's also turned them into a minor celebrity status because people know who they are. The best referees are ones where at the end of the game, you wonder where he was.

The problem with refs is not the refs themselves -most of the time although yellow carding a play 3 times can hardly be blamed on someone else! - but the custodians of the game themselves.

Goal line technology would be easy to implement but they keep saying "too expensive to implement at every tier of the game" why do they insist that if we have it in the PL the Sunday league must too? They say the rules should be consistant but I challange anyone to show me consistancy in the application of the away goals rule in various competitions, is it applied after 90 mins? After Extra time? Not at all? Well its all, depending on the competition! Now if they can have one rule for the FA cup and another for the League cup why not Goal line tech? It is the simplest to implement and eliminates obvious errors.

Replays are an entirely different story, you could watch it from 30 angles and still not be sure, so thats more tricky, then there is the implementation, the cricket versions was implemented farcially and so turned into a farce, replays are much more difficult.

How about the actual laws themselves though? There used to be a saying that the only play who truely understood the offside laws was Ruud Van Nistleroy, the offside rule is difficult to interpret and requires an offical to not only have a clear view to the player who is alledgedly offside, but also to have his other eye on the player playing the ball in! Now until we genetically modify linesmen to give them eyes on stalks they are not going to get all these decisions right! It is pyscially impossible for their eye to be on 2 places at once, yet the law requires them to be. A player may be on/off side for only a fraction of a second, but that fraction could be when the linesman is watching the player with the ball! Many other laws are equally poorly worded and difficult to have a consistant line on, is it a bad tackle when someone doesn't even touch the player but gets the ball (ala Nani) or do we punish based on what might have happened? Why is a two footed challange a foul if you don't actually touch another player? Football is a non-contact sport and if there is no contact why is that punished? These inconsitancies in the rules make the job of a ref much harder.

Finally there is the FA/UEFA/FIFAs attitude to refs. They make rules so they can't be critisied but there is no appeals process. How is that fair? No wonder the managers feel like they are getting robbed! As do some players! Why can't a manager after a game submit a report to the FA with his observations on the refs performance and launch an offical complaint against them if needed? That would not only give the managers and players an outlet for any genuine grievences, but it would help improve the referees performance by having mistakes highlighted back to them. This doesn't need to be done in the medai glare, when asked about a ref a manager could then say "i'll be launching a complaint" and thats it, any further and they still get punished. Until they do this the FA will always be blamed for defending the refs no matter how bad they are, because that is quite simply what the laws say.

Managers are expected to attend press conferances, they are hounded by the media, but they can't talk about a ref! The FA are ruining the game and until they sort themselves out, have genuine grievance progams against refs, simplify some of the laws to help refs and start using technology that can help refs without disturbing the game they will keep ruining it.

All the above suggestions could easily be implemented, the only reason the FA don't is because the like the status quo, who knows why but they do, they see themselves as the custodians of the game and its history, but really they are prison wardens trying to keep the game under their control for their financial benifit.

I guess many will think that if you earn £80,000 plus the perks for doing your job, you should be very competent at it. My problem with referees is that they don't allow enough physical contact. The slightest little nudge and the player falls over and it's a foul. If they let more of those go, the players might not be so fast to fall to the turf. I also get the impression referees don't actually play the game enough to understand what is a tackle and what is not. I know the rules don't help. Yes, a tackle intent on hurting someone or a professional foul should be punished harshly, but a yellow card for taking your shirt off? Come on!

At last, a sensible article on what really is at the heart of most fans' hearts...fairness on the field. I remember with great fondness the times and antics of Cloughie, and wish we could switch back the clock to see how it's supposed to be. Referees DO NOT go out to spoil any team's chances. The players need to get a grip on their own behaviour. I would like to see the scenario where the referee goes into each dressing room before the start and tells the Managers and all the squad players " Guys, today we're gonna play properly by the rules...anybody diving, giving me lip, stealing fifteen yards on throw-ins, NOT GETTING BACK TEN YARDS immediately when I blow for a freekick is gonna get booked. If we end up with seven a side, so be it. " That would set the tone. Carry that into a couple of weekends' fixtures, and it wouldn't be long until the game was cleaned up. As for the dismissed players, missing games is missing earnings, that will also sink in kinda fast. We do have the best refs in the world in the Premier League. I wish we could say the same for the conduct of the players and managers.

Excellent article. Forget England manager, the hardest job in football these days is referee - closely followed by assistant referee.

The "siege mentality" style of management which seems to be the norm these days seems to prohibit taking any blame upon the team when things go wrong. Instead the manager deflects attention towards the match officials, ably supported by the pundits with their dozen slow-motion replays.

A brilliant example was Arsenal in midweek. Fabianski threw one goal into his own net and then picked up a back-pass leading to the second goal. Wenger's reaction? "You have to accept you lose as a team and win as a team. Any individual performance has not to be analysed publicly."

I suppose that's fair enough, castigating individuals rarely achieves anything. Unfortunately the same Wenger in almost the same breath went into great detail on what he deemed an error by the referee.

Just for the record, I'm as big an idiot as the next man when it comes to moaning about decisions by the match officials. I just think professional managers should have a little bit more class than the average yob like me in the stands :)

13. At 01:33am on 20 Feb 2010, HotHeadWazza wrote:
The FA not punishing Gallas for that challenge on the Bolton player REALLY annoyed me. Why?

- Rio Ferdinand is being punished for a very similar scenario. Ref missed it, but The FA reviewed it. Ban. He still is not allowed to play against Everton tomorrow.

- Emmanuel Adebayor in that inafmous game AGAINST Arsenal. Ref missed it. FA reviewed it. Ban.

- Didier Drogba throws a coin back into the crowd in a Carling Cup tie against Burnley. Ref missed it. FA review it. Ban.

Yet, Gallas gets away scot-free. PLUS, along with Mascherano after PUNCHING a Leeds player (just as Rio punched Chris Fagan), but again, inconsistency.

Technology, NOW!

------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. At 10:15am on 20 Feb 2010, william wrote:
HotHeadWazza the difference between gallas tackle and rio, adebayor and drogba's incidents are that gallas was a missed time tackle which wasn't as bad as some tackles just a bit late where as rio threw a punch which is violent conduct, adebayor tried stamping on a players head violent conduct and drogba threw a coin into the crowd which could injury an innocent fan so it is violent conduct. Gallas tackle would not be classed as violent conduct.
i agree with you tho that mascherano got away with it but im also glad that rio got an extra game for appealing his ban because he clearly lashed out and if the ref had seen it he would of been off so why do man u think they can appeal the ban.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
@23 (William) Having reviewed both arguments, I think you are wrong.

The argument is about whether the FA should be reviewing decisions that a referee missed and it should be either a yes or a no. Not yes, if we don't like the player/club and no if it's our favourite player / club.

In all cases, the referee missed the incident and they should all be reviewed. You cannot apply one law to a set of people and apply another law to others. You lose credibility.

The FA should decide whether they want to review incidents after a game or not. In my own opinion, they should not. To the extent that they cannot award a goal a referee correctly ruled as offside or rule out an incorrectly awarded one, why should they be able to make other decisions affecting the game?

When a game ends, that should be that. This post-review stuff only allows the FA to selectively punish people as they like and give off a show of power. Very very wrong.

AS someone else rightly said, how many incidents involving the bottom clubs e.g. Hull Vs Wolves do you see coming up for an FA review?

I am not a referee.
Good blog - once again though, it just heralds the re-appearance of the same old rather ignorant/blinkered/(stupid?) comments above/below regarding referees decisions. Please, someone tell me how a mistake by a referee is in any way less meaningful than say a penalty miss/open goal miss/ slip by a defender/bad pass/bad tackle/rubbish shot ALL of which can lead to a team winning or losing a game. They're ALL just as meaningful, yet never do you hear a fan (or a manager) complaining about them - or listing them as a reason as to why they "lost" a game. Mistakes happen - and managers make them as much as anybody - maybe in the way they talk to/encourage players, or use rubbish tactics. Its all part of the randomness which makes football so dramatic. The chances are that over a period of a season the mistakes all tend to even out - with the best team really the ones who made the least mistakes - as in any other sport. But many fans/pundits/managers are somewhat retarded when it comes to remembering the things which benefit them. Warnock is clasic example of that.
Referees have a lot of power and they should certainly be consulting their other officials and make a lot more "referee team" decisions. Lets face it most (all?) mistakes are not done intentionally. If players and managers were vilified as much as referees for making silly mistakes then there might be some balance in the situation. However most managers/pundits were once players and they seem to to be able to ignore those "big" player mistakes with nothing more than a wee smirk and a knowing shake of the head. Many fans are the same.
Next time you watch a howler (whether it be goalie/defender/midfield or striker) on MOTD just listen to how differently its covered rather than a dodgy referring incident.
Perhaps all players/ managers should be made to do a few hours refereeing experience as part of a "professional footballers license". That's probably another discussion.
As another separate point, I think also a ten yard rule for dissent as in rugby would be an interesting development. This would certainly benefit all those non-league/amateur refs out there and would in turn encourage players to concentrate more on their own game rather than getting annoyed at someone else.
Rant over.

A great article, it's good to see an article finally written from a different point of view regarding the referees in this country. I think it's fair to say that we do have a good standard in England, especially if a comparison is made to the standard in other European leagues.

However, I still think there are vast improvements that could be made to improve the standard further, and i think these changes need to start far higher up the pyramid than the referees themselves. A reason why referees get so much abuse at games is being they are the representatives of the FA at any given game, and in recent years, the way the FA have behaved with regards to their refs is terrible.

Inconsistancy is my personal main gripe, not just in decisions during games, but in the aftermath of decisions. The fact is, due to the nature of the job (and being a premiership ref is no easy feat), mistakes will be made. But cast your mind back to that gerrard/malouda tackle that resulted in a penalty a couple of years back. That poor decision was met by the referee in question being suspended from the Premiership the following week. Later that season, J Lloyd Samuel tackled Cristiano Ronaldo, it was a perfectly good tackle, yet a penalty was given. In the aftermath of that decision, the referee was not suspended for the Premiership the following week. Therefore the only conclusion that can be reached is that a mistake against a top four team is worthy of a suspension, but a mistake against a lower placed team isn't.

Another example of this inconsistancy is all over the website recently. Wolves being fined for fielding a weakened side against Man U. Now this is the same kind of thing that happens every single season when either Chelsea/Man U/Liverpool are preparing for a Champions League final. Youth players who havent played a whole game all season are reeled out in order to give the first team squad a rest. And doing it at the business end of the season could cause a team to be relegated. Yet have we ever seen a fine handed out to a big team?

And another final example of the FA's inconsistancy, particulary with regards to their referees on pitch actions, is their constantly changing approach as to what decisions are allowed to be made retrospectively. As a Bolton fan, a few weeks ago I saw a shocking challenge by Gallas on one of our players. The referee didn't see the incident and the game continued (causing Arsenal to score a goal, but thats another matter!). After the game, the FA was quizzed as to whether Gallas would be punished for the tackle, to which their response was "We do not re-officiate matches after they have happened"; an answer which greatly confused football fans, as we were previously all under the impression that if a referee did not see an incident, that would be the ONLY circumstance in which the FA could hand out a punishment retrospectively.

Now the question I want to put to you is, if the situation was that Kevin Davies had done that horror tackle on Fabregas, and the referee said after the game "I didn't see it", would the FA give the same response, or would Davies be hung out to dry?

The Referees are a representative of the FA. How can we "Respect" the FA and their staff, when it's abundantly clear that the FA have no respect for the integrity of the game, or fans of smaller clubs.

4. At 11:55pm on 19 Feb 2010, james wrote this. I am a Man United supporter and I cannot dispute what you have written.

The FA seem to use the process to selectively punish players depending on their mood or how eagerly they want to show off their power

"Webb is good"!!!! Which games have you been watching? He is by far the worst referee I have seen this season, and that includes the pathetic Andre Marriner. I saw Webb referee Sunderland v Stoke recently and couldn't believe how poor he was. Dean Whitehead kicked Cana off the ball right in front of him but he chickened out and only gave a yellow card. Stoke's wrestling of Kenwyne Jones was ignored all night and, to be fair, he gave goal kicks to Sunderland when they were clear corners to Stoke.

It is the inconsistency of referees like Webb which infuriates and they often apply different rules to different teams. There is no way a "big four" team would have had their goal disallowed the way Stoke had against Man. City last week.

By contrast I watched York v Luton in the Conference this week and the referee was excellent, probably the best I have seen for a long time. This was a tense, top of the table match but the referee let the play flow, whilst being quick to stamp out any foul play. He only gave one yellow card all night however. The difference with this referee and the likes of Howard Webb is that they don't play to the gallery and are not influenced by the media. Premier League referees are paid too much, their profile is too high and they subconsciously favour the "big clubs". We shouldn't even be aware of the likes of Howard Webb, but the era of the celebrity ref. is well and truly with us now, and has been since the days of that self-publicist Graham Poll.

Thanks for the article. Shows how much we take for granted how refs have one of the hardest job in football.

What really annoys me about analysing refs' decisions and particularly MOTD (sorry don't have cable/satellite) is that I'm sick to death of looking at slow-mo replays when its all to easy to disect an incident.

You can blame their positioning and their view/sightline but with the pace the game is played the ref has to make an instant decision with people left, right and centre calling for blood.

Yes, the refs needs help.

I Am surprised Howard Webb has been singled out. Within the last 3 years he was the best referee in the league but this last 18 months
he has for some reason turned into one of the more fussy and inconsistent refs. Old Ma Reilly is absolutely useless and unable to control any competitive game. Phil Dowd has settled down to become one of the better Refs, he used to be sending off champion of the world but he has gone the other way from Webb. The 4th official is the worst job on the pitch as you constantly have the Whinger in your ear whining about everything and Ferguson just as bad. Managers should not be allowed to speak to either the 4th official or the referee. Bring on Hawkeye.....

Wouldn't it be wonderful to see, 10 mins after a game, the referee explaining exactly which rules Sir Alex doesn't seem to understand; why Arsene might want to have a look at the replay before giving his views on a particular incident; or that Neil Warnock would probably be better off coaching his defenders than trying to find somwone else to blame.

Just a few observations

Theres a fine line between being firm and being arrogant in refereeing

Why dont the FA Authorities take the responsibilty of time added on out of the referees hands...?

Why dont referees HAVE to appear after the game to answer questions regarding their refereeing of EVERY game...?

Why cant technology be used for retrospective punishment AND the rescinding of punishments never mind the bulls**t about whether the officials have issued cards or not.....?

Why cannot the officials be taken to task by the issuing of official statements from their governing body......?

Any answers from you officials out there......??

Any sympathy I had for referees disappeared when I watched Arsenal v Hull with a referee of reasonable standing (and by chance a mate of the referee on the pitch that day). I made a simple remark (as so many of us do) "doesn't that go to show that they have to introduce video help for the referee" the basis of my argument is that he'd just picked the wrong two players to book. His answer contained two points:-

1. That it didn't matter that he'd booked the wrong players, all that mattered was that he booked someone, and one from each team made it fair, and

2. "I completely disagree with video evidence being used, I would wouldn't I, I'm a referee".

I hadn't considered that before but for this referee it was all about not giving up any control to anyone else. His statement inferred all referees would think the same. If that's true, then referees themselves are presumably part of the problem, and the cuase of the glacial pace of technology introduction.

dont agree at all,
too many times refs cost goals and get away with it, with this new respect campign it should be renamed "get away with murder"

cos refs dont answer to anyone apart from FA now, who will back them whatever they do,

you utter a refs name - ban and fine, you complain to ~FA about a ref - ban and a fine,

ref gives in to club because theyre in the top 4 and they surround him - nothing gets done about it, but you dare voice your concerns and your certainly in trouble,

referees your decisions are getting worse and worse because the pressures off, disgrace

I'm a qualified referee and want to point out the following:

A referee has 2-3 seconds to make a decision based on one angle. TV pundits have as long as they need based on twenty angles.
Referees are human. Humans make mistakes.
Video technology is a bad idea unless you can find a way to implement it in every game and in every level of the pyramid.

i like the inconsistency of football. it makes it all the more exciting and unpredictable, the players are inconsistent, the managers are, and the crowds react in different ways to the same event. it teaches life lessons that are bigger than the game and gives us lots of debate after the event. on the whole refs do a pretty good job without the technology. the FA / UEFA / FIFA should use tv retrospectively to punish players who cheat, maradona in the hand of god incident should have been banned from the final, thierry henry against ireland in the recent world cup play off game should have been banned from the 1st two games of the world cup. gallas possibly against bolton. the only technology that should be introduced is the ball across the line chip. otherwise i find it astounding that everyone blames the ref for missing the incident when the cheat is not really vilified. what does that say about where we are as a society. if you commit a crime and are not caught its ok, blame the copper who didn't catch you its his fault. technology is already unofficially in use - the zidane final sending off, but its not really the answer, the players themselves at some point have to take responsibility, the win at any cost ethos the permeates our society, big business, banking and sports, along with the abdication of any personal responsibility that technology would inevitably bring, is not really the answer. its about getting perspective and moral judgement back into the game. just as clough said. ultimately, football is a great sport that teaches kids a good deal about the lessons of life that the professionals would do well to remember, and other than that its just pure unpredictable entertainment.

forget refereeing; forget football, the problem's about a cultural change in the uk that has seen respect for other people fall off the radar. i quit the uk 7 years ago and moved to france. the difference in attitude that i have found here on such issues is quite unbelievable.
this is not a sermon about "broken britain" this is just the facts as i see them in practice.
i watch live football via canal+, which covers italy, spain, and france, as well as england. the players and managers of foreign clubs get just as frustrated with poor refereeing decisions (the premier league does not have a monopoly on big money), but the after match reaction in press / tv interviews is totally different. on the pitch, the player reaction in general is more tolerant and respectful towards the man in control.
also, why not look at the players and managers in the premier league who are the worst examples - in general, they are british - would anyone single out benitez, ancelotti, or zola as the worst examples - i think not! obviously these are generalisations (wenger would try to blame the weather on the ref and no-one could be more polite and respectful than roy hodgson) but i believe that the problem in the premier league says something about the british attitude to authority in general rather than football or refereeing specifically.

Mate, you have seriously missed something here. Stop talking about the big four. Why don't you go Molineux every week, or for that matter any other smaller club in the Premier League. If you can persuade me that ALL referees in the Premier League are not biased winkers who have no guts then ill tip my hat to you because frankly you've got funking no chance. They are quite obviously favouring the bigger teams with the bigger egos and the bigger names. The Premier League is not a level playing field, and most people can't see it because they are fed shadowed truths by the media. THAT is an actual disgrace. Ive spelt some words incorrectly because the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ being the model organisation are not allowing me to use profanity

42. qweasd111 wrote:

..... A referee has 2-3 seconds to make a decision based on one angle. TV pundits have as long as they need based on twenty angles.
Referees are human. Humans make mistakes.
Video technology is a bad idea unless you can find a way to implement it in every game and in every level of the pyramid.
-------------------------
Not sure about your first point, years ago when watching television football I'd be adamant a player was offside UNTIL the replay proved the opposite. These days I'm almost invariably proved right by the replay when I question a decision watched in real-time. Either my perceptions have improved over the years, or referees make more mistakes.

Your final point I'm afraid is rubbish, I've seen amateur fotball played without linesmen (sorry, assistant refs), and without netting in the goal. The game goes on regardless and to try and insist that officiating top class football is handicapped because the lower leagues are, is just pathetic.

As a home and away season ticket holder I have attended all 26 of Wolves premiership games so far this season. I am totally disgusted by the current level of bias in top flight refereeing to the extent that I am questioning if I will even bother to renew my home season ticket next season. I used to watch Wolves back in the to flight back in the 1970's-80's so I can compare with the days of Clive Thomas, Keith Burkinshaw, Jack Taylor. Wrong decisions and mistakes by officials are nothing new but the level of bias that is shown week in week out usually in favour of the bigger teams just did not exist in days gone by in my opinion.

But there are mistakes and then there are inexplicable deicisions. As an example that many people will have seen on TV take the high profile Arsenal v Liverpool game recently when Fabregas raised his arm in the wall to to block a Gerrard free kick. Liverpool were arguing it should have been a penalty, replays show it was on the edge of the box but Howard Webb gives neither penalty nor free kick and later claimed not to have even seen the handball as his get out of jail excuse for a really bad decision.

Well sorry but just I don't buy that he didnt see it. He has got himself into a position of his choice to supervise the free kick. He knew a shot on goal was likely to happen. He surely must have seen it but for some reason didnt give either a free kick or penalty and book Fabregas for deliberate handball. Why not ..... only Webb really knows.


I've got my own gripes with Howard Webb this season, in particular with failing to award Wolves a penalty against Pompey for the most blatent and deliberate handball I have ever seen. As it was in open play I can just about accept that there is a small possibility that Webb was at a bad angle to see it but I am not really convinced.

Premier League .... the worlds best refs?? .... No way!