Standard of Referees

andyd said:
But football isn’t a context free vacuum which is what you are trying to suggest.

In a game refereed by Jarred Gillett, in the way that it was, no, we shouldn’t have been crying out for it at the other end. That wasn’t a foul all afternoon, and to suddenly do an about face to make it a foul to chalk off a goal is disgraceful, whether it be for us or the opposition.

Now, if it had been a nitpicky game where slight contact was a free kick all game then, yes, of course we’d want it given, because to do so would be that magic word, consistent.

Isn’t consistency all we really ask for? It’s too much to expect across all the refs game to game, but it’s absolutely fundamental to the fairness of the sport that the rules are applied consistently across an individual game in isolation. That didn’t happen yesterday with our goal, and it would be equally unjust if the same had happened to Coventry.
Click to expand...
And here in is part of the problem with VAR, I haven't watched any of it back on any tv replays, but the ref did give the goal...so he was consistent up to that point, the issue comes when his VAR chums question it, and send him the to monitor. At which point we are all resigned, because like nearly all refs, he goes along the herd mentality, his judgment on weighing up of decisions from the rest of the game goes out the window...it is easier to follow the VAR guys advice, and if controversial, well "we are in it together".

The definition and interpretation of clear and obvious will be an ever lasting issue for VAR.
 
Strummer said:
If I did my job as inconsistently badly as many of the Referees from the (so-called) "Best League in the World" (™) I would have been sacked by now.

It really is as simple as that.
Click to expand...
You are probably replaceable, with all due respect (at whatever you do). There is no bottomless pit of referees to choose from. I've watched a bit of the Champo lately and the guys I saw are a notch down (as they should be). It's a very tough gig.
 
I'm appalled when I see a two handed push, such as the one on Neco, and it's judged 'fair' because the ref thought it wasn't hard enough. Just how hard to you have to push to unbalance a runner who is looking around for a place to pass the ball and also running controlling the ball? I'd say not very hard, just a well-timed push at the right moment will unbalance him enough.

The crazy rules at the moment are simply ruining the game. There was a rule of obstruction once upon a time. Now we see players shielding the ball to let it run out for a goal kick or throw in, about two yards from the ball with their back to it desperately wrestling the player away from the ball and that is judged 'fair'. In my day you had to be within playing distance of the ball.
 
PynchonForest said:
You are probably replaceable, with all due respect (at whatever you do). There is no bottomless pit of referees to choose from. I've watched a bit of the Champo lately and the guys I saw are a notch down (as they should be). It's a very tough gig.
Click to expand...
Incompetence cannot be cheerfully exonerated just because there is no one able to step in.
 
YellowBelly Red said:
I remember the days when you got your match programme, to read that today's referee is Mr George Harrison, 42yo, who is a history teacher at Kettering Grammer School.

Happier times.
Click to expand...
@Chairman Mo used to be a referee?
 
YellowBelly Red said:
I remember the days when you got your match programme, to read that today's referee is Mr George Harrison, 42yo, who is a history teacher at Kettering Grammer School.

Happier times.
Click to expand...
Indded.

And we used to moan about referees then as well.

But at least then you could understand it because George was an 'amateur' and prone to human mistakes.

Now they earn over £100k a year, have all sorts of technology and video support and not only do they still get it wrong but they've sucked the soul out of football in order to be worse.
 
I'd genuinely like to know what refs think as well.

In the good old days they'd be called a useless cheating **** during the game and then that was it.

These days they get called it for days to come because of VAR and social media etc.
 
Erik said:
Now they earn over £100k a year, have all sorts of technology and video support and not only do they still get it wrong but they've sucked the soul out of football in order to be worse.
Click to expand...
And they should make WAY more then that. Way more. The compensation for the job they do (compared to the wages of the people they try and control) is way out of line.
 
Much as I think most Premier League Referees should be boiled down for glue, that they are on a reported 150k GBP per year, when most of the players they have to officiate get paid that per week, tells you a little bit about the imbalance between players and those tasked with "controlling" the matches themselves.
 
Going to throw a good old hand grenade in here - if Man City have shown that they have no problem at all breaking the rules and paying staff and players under the table, would it really be that surprising to find out that they have no issue paying off refs as well?

Michael Oliver has a well-known 'consultancy' role with UAE doesn't he? I wonder which other refs are 'consulting' for them on the side......
 
Master Yates said:
Going to throw a good old hand grenade in here - if Man City have shown that they have no problem at all breaking the rules and paying staff and players under the table, would it really be that surprising to find out that they have no issue paying off refs as well?

Michael Oliver has a well-known 'consultancy' role with UAE doesn't he? I wonder which other refs are 'consulting' for them on the side......
Click to expand...

You'd have to go back to pre-2018 to analyse any potential favourable on-field decisions, because as dumb as PGMOL/ProRef are, they're not going to be involved in de-facto bribery once they knew (and they will have known) that the PL were investigating Man City in 2018.
 
Last night, at the U21’s game at Loughborough, we were sat behind a chap with a tablet computer with a screen displaying the match officials performance data entry software. We chatted with him at halftime and again at full time, before he left to go and meet with the ref and linesmen to discuss his evaluations.
He was one of the usually faceless evaluators logging minute by minute the ref and linesmen’s decisions.
He was there because the ref is currently accredited to EFL standards, and is an EPL linesman, who is being monitored to see if he is ready to step up to refereeing EPL games.
Obviously I helped him in his task pointing out how biased in to opposition’s favour the officials were 🤭🤓😂
 
So the 2nd goal is credited by someone whose last touch was with his elbow? But that’s not handball?
Apparently it’s inconclusive. They’ve shown that they don’t need conclusive proof now from our disallowed goal vs spurs
 
Timothy Pope said:
So the 2nd goal is credited by someone whose last touch was with his elbow? But that’s not handball?
Apparently it’s inconclusive. They’ve shown that they don’t need conclusive proof now from our disallowed goal vs spurs
Click to expand...
trying to apply logical thought processes to things which don't have logical thought processes
 
Anyone who doesn't think there is an agenda against Forest needs to give their head a wobble after today. Call it bias, corruption, or any other variation you like, but the consistency of the poor decisions affecting us is now bordering on the ridiculous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom