The referee thread: discuss referees and their decisions

Can't believed I missed this thread but I'll throw in my two cents. To me, it is one of the hardest jobs in the world. How do I know this? I was ref for a year after my playing days were over and my opinion of refs changed after that experience. The level of importance of a match didn't matter. There was always someone bitching about a decision I made. We always hear about the negatives when it comes to refs and their decisions. Rarely the positives. Would be nice if the guardian or some other publication put together a list of the best refs in Europe, instead of the usual best player/manager lists.
 
Your point of view is focused only at a certain type of situation - which, in fact, is just one of a billion possibilities and outcomes.

When we (and the referees) want to analyse (or make) a decision, we have to view the concrete situation as a single event - what happened before or after that should ALWAYS be irrelevant.

Not to give a penalty and a red card is a serious mistake. Whether it changes a game drastically or not, is indeed irrelevant.

Just to make a clear example, it's not right for a referee to compensate with more soft/wrong decisions for some earlier soft/wrong call that happened in the match.

To put it simply, whether a serious referee mistake is game-changing or not, doesn't make it acceptable.

Ergo, I agree with Beach about the replays being really necessary.
 
It's not about blaming referees - their job is horrible and almost impossible. It's about that fact.

If we know the current system is flawed - i.e. every single week there's a high profile, major refereeing error - the system should look to fix it. Not just say: well it's a tough job and they do their best.

All other major sports are moving that way, and with goal-line tech, FIFA have broken away from their previous 'excuse' which was 'we want football to have the same rules whether in the park or a 90k person stadium'. Unless your park is awesome.

All penalty incidents to be reviewed by the 4th official with a tablet. Ref blows the whistle when an incident occurs if no advantage is gained. If it was no foul, it's the keepers ball, if it's a foul, it's a penalty. Easy. Should only happen for penalties as that's the only thing in football that has an 80% chance of changing the result (scoring a goal).
 
I only gave that one situation as an example.
It is indeed one of a billions possibilities. That is the reason why a referee mistake can never be a decisive game changer.

You just have provided the ultimate argument for the point i was making.

Now what is football ?

A 100% fair sports where every single club has equali opportunities always and everywhere or a spectacle ?

Unfortunately it is a spectacle.

Replays will take the flow out of the game.
And besides that, how many replays will you permit ?

For every debatable decision or for a limited number ?

In the first case the match will suffer from it, it will be even worse than those matches where the referee punished every single foul. I guarantee you that after a couple of months, most football fans will hate this.

If you only permit a limited amount of replays, then basically, you will haveexactly the same problem as now. Managers and players will adapt. Let's say that every club has the right to 3 replays a match. After 3 replays, the other team wil become bolder and gamble, this might result in dives or cleverly hidden fouls.

And in what kind of match will one see the most discussion and thus replays ? Of course in the most important matches. Will the league be more fair than now ? Not at all...there will be exactly as much discussion as now. And perhaps that is a good thing. Otherwise we would not have a referee thread on this forum and instead of having this discussion we would be annoying our families and gril friends.


And perhaps the most important point of all: there are other more important issues for fair competition, they are financial and i'm refereeing to television money and the disturbed balance between leagues. That is the more important issue for a really fair competition.

In the end replays will either be nuisance or they will not change much. I'm against them.
 
Last edited:
I don't think money divided btw leagues is the same topic. How can a small European league goes on to get television funds. Why would a network purchase games ? EPL makes money due to the demand. I won't pay to watch a Russian League or Asia league. Those leagues are more of a package attach as incentive but the ones that are the main event are EPL n La Liga (France,Germany, Italy, Portugal etc. )are part of the package. Although in the states the EPL shares no other league matches they're alone w/ their own highlight shows, and so on. La Liga are behind due to the competitive (2) not sharing the funds.

The refs has no accountability for their errors. Unless they go on to a concert the same night lol . Besides that I 'd love for the ref to post their general views at the time. That or have a go pro attach to them :)
 
It is exactly the same topic, both are about fair competition.
What would you say if referees decided (openly) to advantages the team wit most fans when there is doubt ?

The difference in money between leagues is an even more fundamental treat to fair competition.

What annoys me most is that what is created now is something in between fair competition and an NBA-style super competition, a sort of international super league with all the big name teams! That is the ones that are dominating now and other big clubs like Benfica, Ajax, Gotheborg, Celtic, Rangers, etc...

Basically i wouldn't mind an NBA-style competition.
 
I only want replays for penalties. Of course other incidents impact the outcome of football matches, but in a sport where there's on average less than 2 goals a game, any incident that gives, say an 80% of a goal is likely decisive.

I just don't see a downside. How many penalty shouts are there each match, 2? 3? 30 seconds for each of them. More time is wasted each match for any substitution of a winning team, by the time the player has faked a cramp, shaken hands with the ref, and walked as slowly as possible from as far away as possible.

I would prefer a sport where a referees mistake isn't the crucial moment. If a player fluffs a chance, or a goalkeeper makes a howler - great, they're both part of the sportsmen on display, its their aptitude we should be focused on.

But almost every penalty decision is one of the most important moments of any match. And therefore I'd like to give referees every chance to get it right. Because in real time, with dishonest cheats playing the game, it's almost impossible for them.

Also, this is absolutely nothing to do discrepancy in wages and budgets. Not sure why you're trying to tie the two together. Let's start by introducing it in a World Cup, where wages don't even come into it.
 
gerd said:
It is exactly the same topic, both are about fair competition.
What would you say if referees decided (openly) to advantages the team wit most fans when there is doubt ?
Click to expand...
It would not be a debate...he could generalize his views w/o answering the call in question.
The difference in money between leagues is an even more fundamental treat to fair competition.
Click to expand...
sounds like a socialist ? :D should the EPL pay other leagues to divide their money? Who are responsible to allocate funds to the clubs. Would this fairness come from the respected FA?
What annoys me most is that what is created now is something in between fair competition and an NBA-style super competition, a sort of international super league with all the big name teams! That is the ones that are dominating now and other big clubs like Benfica, Ajax, Gotheborg, Celtic, Rangers, etc...

Basically i wouldn't mind an NBA-style competition.
Click to expand...

thing is salary caps and players picks help. They`re still loop holes I mean Kaka will be the highest paid player in the MLS club and that`s my local :SMUG: club. A newly promoted Club into the league that starts in the spring. If, there are numbers there arr ways to hide them.
 
@ Beach

I agree with you. Only for penalties is not a bad idea.
I'm still not sure that it would not be exploited, but giving it a try during a WC is a good idea.

Bebo,

As usual i scarcely understand your point. To be completely honest, after your outburst in the Arsenal thread, i don't really think a sensible discussion between us is possible as you see me as some kind of WUM. Let's just agree to disagree on everything and ignore each other in a civlized way. At first i wanted to react, but another Arsenal fan convinced me to just leave it. I think you are a funny guy and a very decent one, but it's clear that we don't really are able to communicate in a decent way. Might well be my mistake, but it isn't intentional.... No hard feelings whatsoever, but i've given up.
 
No worries gerd.I'm surrounded by ppl who could make you cry one day and laugh the next. I never EVER saw you as a wum. You can ignore me all you want :? . I will question a person`s post ,all for the greater good of understanding .

I never hold grudges to no one. I`m sorry you felt offended. That`s never my intentions I had the impression you could help steer the blind . The greater the knowledge ,the greater the responsibility.(That`s what I saw in you) Clearly I grab your balls instead of your shoulders :CONF:
 
Bebo, perhaps i shouldn't have posted the above post.
I can see by' your response that i misjudged the situation completely. It is me who should be sorry. I apologize.

It's true i felt offended by your post in the Arsenal thread. All i wanted to express was my bewilderment about fans behaviour towards Fabregas.

You also know that i don't understand rivalries. As a Spurs fan, i admire Arsenal's football. I just read the book about Bergkamp (one of the better football books i've read) and i also bought Amy Lawrences book about the invincibles. Never the less i'm a Spurs fan...i don't see why i couldn't like both clubs (or rather teams). That is perhaps the biggest difference between me and most fans. I love teams more than clubs...


You say that i have knowledge. Well i read a lot and i've a good memory, that should account for some knowledge. But unfortunately knowledge isn't the same as wisdom. Sometimes i feel stupid (now for instance) and at times i feel very clumsy in human contacts. I try to be honest with people, but i don't always succede. Perhaps you expected a litle bit too much of me, you clearly overestimated me.

I'm terribly sorry if i offended you, let's stop this ignoring nonsense....that was a serious mistake.

Sorry for the off-topic. But this was important to me.
 
i'm against replays, think it would be a disaster and make exactly no difference, firstly because it would waste so much time, fans pay to watch the game not a ref look at a monitor to decide if there should be a penalty, football should always be continuous, there are players that fake injuries and substitutions to waste time but not a lot can be done about that.
also say if a referee has made a decision based on looking at replay, he may have to watch it many times to make a definitive decision, they'l need to watch it from all angles, an incident from one angle will look completely different from another, this will probably take ages (at-least a couple of minutes), and even after all this, different referees will give a penalty at a situation when others wont so there still wont be any consistency.
this imo is why goal line technology works and replays wont, goal line tech has a definitive outcome, it is over the line or it isn't. you can have a thousand angles of a penalty incident and still not be able to made a decision that will please everyone, for example a little push in the box from a corner or a challenge where defender has got the ball but also took a bit of player etc..
 
Gerd :) we both learn, your a humble soul. No doubt!

I saw a penalty not given from Boyd vs Arsenal. A clear,hand ball inside the box over looked. He was the only booking in the match prior to the handball. A smaller team had the benefit twice (hull city 1st goal )at the Emirates. While Hazard soft penalty to win the match or at least take the lead was given.

I'm still not sure if replays will benefit the game . Imo it wasn't decisive enough. I think catching a replay will add more cards out. How come Newc fullback only saw a yellow when he should of gotten a red?
 
I wouldn't be against video replays for penalties, tho I'm sure there'd stilll be big controversies with them.

The issues would then turn to dangerous free kicks. Managers would bemoan a free kick not given just outside the box and we'd no doubt end up with people pushing for a 35 yard pitch marker with fouls within it being referred to video. There is an element of a slippery slope with all this and that's why I have always understood FIFA/UEFA/FA position on not bringing in video etc.
 
Even with replays about penalties, there will still be controversy around them. The only solution is zero tolerante for fouls
In the box.
 
Just seen Hazard's pen. Another example of how he creates 'fouls' by throwing himself at the defender. Great pen tho
 
Last edited:
I don't know what you're on about, that was a 100% penalty call.

Even if it (hypothetically) wasn't a pen, so what? He's been the most fouled player in the league for the last 3 years, he should have some decisions going his way at some point, otherwise it's just useless batter.
 
Crystal clear penalty. Stupid by Vargas and he did what Hazard expected him to do, but it was a penalty.
Chelsea are by far the best team in the league at the moment.
 
You are talking about both penalty case in the Manchester derby.
Well, the replay claerly showed that the second one (Rojo-Touré) was never a penalty.

For the Fellaini-Aguëro thing, replays will always be inconclusive.

My opinion:
In nowadays football that is too soft to be a penalty.
In an ideal world there is zero tolerance for fouls in the box. And then it's a penalty, but at the moment there is no zero tolerance...

In an ideal world this should be a penalty, but in 21st century football, it should not be one.


And this is a fantastic illustration that replays will not solve case like this one. Both sets of fans will have their own truth and could justify their case. This is not good.
 
gerd said:
Well, the replay claerly showed that the second one (Rojo-Touré) was never a penalty.

For the Fellaini-Aguëro thing, replays will always be inconclusive.

My opinion:
In nowadays football that is too soft to be a penalty.
In an ideal world there is zero tolerance for fouls in the box. And then it's a penalty, but at the moment there is no zero tolerance...
Click to expand...

its funny how you think Hazard one was penalty while Aguero one (fellaini hit him not all that soft tbh) its not also Yaya Toure one was a penalty , maybe even hand ball from Blind (he didn't mean to do so but ball was going in direction of goal) we see many times penaltys given when someone cross and player attending to blovk ball with feet/body touch ball with hand.

for me at least 2 penalty's for City not given
 
2 perhaps 3 pens (not seen the Carrick-Aguero again) not given.

Fair play to Utd for showing some spirit but the last 10-15 should not have been that nervy
 
I think Derby matches should only get 'stone cold' penalties . The soft ones are too inclusive imo. I think the ref did a reasonable job . I think the send off was the easiest decision of the match.
 
Yep both reds for me. First one easy. The 2nd one looks more innocuous but I've seen players have their leg snapped from kicks like that and not necessarily the player being fouled. When shins smash into each other like that it can be dangerous
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom