The worst ref's decision ever....

The decision not to send off Koeman and then give a free-kick instead of a penalty, in our qualifier against Holland in 93/94 was worse in my opinion.
(It's the only one off the top of my head :lol: )

This one he made a simple error of judgement by thinking the player dived... a simple mistake.
The ref in the Holland game made 2 blatant errors after deciding a foul was made.
 
By far the worst i've ever seen was the Dutch referee (Corver???) who did not sent off Toni Schumacher after his karate kick against Battiston in the WC 1982 semi-final between a superb France team and Western Germany...
 
i remember that well, gerd - he didn't even give a free-kick!!

i think the ref ended up giving a goal-kick, if i remember correctly.

the two became good friends after that though, attending each other's weddings, etc...
 
gerd said:
By far the worst i've ever seen was the Dutch referee (Corver???) who did not sent off Toni Schumacher after his karate kick against Battiston in the WC 1982 semi-final between a superb France team and Western Germany...
Click to expand...

Battiston nearly died, his spine was fractured I think and not even a foul given for Schumachers blatent jumping into Battistons chest/face.

Absolute disgrace.

Battiston played again but not as an attacking player, he came back as a defender.

The bottom line is it has to be the worst because the guy nearly died as well.

Other notable mentions are a Clive Thomas I think it was who blew the final whistle as brazil crossed the ball and scored a goal and then rules the goal out. How on earth can you blow a whislt with a crossed ball in flight into the penalty area...mental.

I once saw Mark Hughes score for Man Utd at The Dell (Old Southampton ground). The hoardings were very close to the goal and I think he volleyed the ball in and it hit the hoardings and bounced out....the referee gave a goal kick INSANE!!

I have also seen a goal given in international footbal after going through the side netting, but can't recall the teams.

The one that gets me the most personally comes from the lying useless bastard that is Graham Poll.

In the Liverpool Everton derby.

Poll awards a free kick to Liverpool, he then allows the keeper (Westerveld) to take it quickly for advantage despite the fact that Hutchison is not ten yards away (walking with his back to the free kick about 8 yards away).

The keeper blasts the ball into Hutchisons arse and it bounces into the net...a whistle goes off and their is mayhem and Poll has apparently blew the whistle for...guess what?

Drum roll.............

The end of the game :shock:

Now Hutchison was not 10 yards away, but he let the keeper take it quick for advantage and Hutchison did have his back to the keeper and was moving away. If Westerveld's long kick sets-up a goal he would definitley let it stand. So if Westerveld seeing the position of Hutchison decides o take the kcik free kick for advantge that is upto him. Once he hit it into Hutchison that is just hard shit...no way is Hutchison interfering witht he correct taking of the kick.

So after the game Andy Gray questions Poll about this and poll gets out of it by saying, he had no problem with the free kick and did not penalise Hutchison, that it was fine and the ball in free play :shock:

So, let's get this straight he just happened to blow the whistle for full time when the ball is going to roll in....not think it worth waiting 20 seconds hey Graham?

Poll insists to Andy Gray who cannot believe what he is hearing that Poll felt enough time had been played. So Gray says to Poll so you blew the whistle to end the game. Poll says- YES.

Cut to footage of the incident and the ball roling over the line BEFORE POLL then blows his whistle.

So he was fookin lying as well!!!

He had no idea what he was doing and tried to bluff his way through the interviews with sky by lying. FACT he didn't give a free kick against Hutchison, fact the free kcik was ok. Fact he blew the whistle after the ball crosses the line to end the game even though the ball has already entered the Liverpool net..

Result Everton/we are screwed.

Now try beating that one for incompitence!!

sick.
 
vanzandt said:
Battiston played again but not as an attacking player, he came back as a defender.

The bottom line is it has to be the worst because the guy nearly died as well.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but that's both melodramatic and irrelevant.
If Battiston had have got up and walked away smiling, would that then have justified a yellow card?
You only penalise for the offence.
I know it was a terrible challenge and it was a disgrace... but lets look simply at the challenge and not what happened to the player.
2 players go for the ball... one wins it and the other backs out afraid to get hit and hits the head of the opposition player. This is how it could have appeared from the view of the referee and i'm sure the vast majority of people watching it as it happened.
It wasn't until the replays showed the extent of the incident and the condition of Battiston that it was decided, in hindsight, of being such a terrible challenge.

As I say, I am not excusing it at all, but as a decision from a referee's point of view I can understand if he was only booked.
(He should have been booked and a free kick awarded at least!)
If the referee had the benefit of hindsight like we had, then he would have said Red Card immediately.

vanzandt said:
Other notable mentions are a Clive Thomas I think it was who blew the final whistle as brazil crossed the ball and scored a goal and then rules the goal out. How on earth can you blow a whislt with a crossed ball in flight into the penalty area...mental.
Click to expand...

Again, it's irrelevant when or where you blow a whistle for full-time or half-time during open play.
It matters not one little bit.


The Poll decision was just plain stupid, but after all the guy is a complete prick anyway.
 
Sorry mate but we are going to have to agree to disagree on all this as I think you are dead wrong on everything you have said.


steevio_uk said:
Sorry, but that's both melodramatic and irrelevant.
If Battiston had have got up and walked away smiling, would that then have justified a yellow card?
You only penalise for the offence.
I know it was a terrible challenge and it was a disgrace... but lets look simply at the challenge and not what happened to the player.
2 players go for the ball... one wins it and the other backs out afraid to get hit and hits the head of the opposition player. This is how it could have appeared from the view of the referee and i'm sure the vast majority of people watching it as it happened.
It wasn't until the replays showed the extent of the incident and the condition of Battiston that it was decided, in hindsight, of being such a terrible challenge.

As I say, I am not excusing it at all, but as a decision from a referee's point of view I can understand if he was only booked.

(He should have been booked and a free kick awarded at least!)
If the referee had the benefit of hindsight like we had, then he would have said Red Card immediately.
.
Click to expand...

The offense was VERY clear when I watched it and it was VERY clear to the whole French team and most of the people watching the match as far as I am aware.

The fact is the nature of the challenge was despicable. Schumacher made no attempt to play the ball and gave no care whatsoever for the safety of Battiston and it almost cost him his life.

The referee should have sent Schumacher off for an immediate red card!!!

Also Schumacher should have been banned from international football; that for me should have been the end of his international career.

How on earth you are talking about this as being a challenge I have no idea at all. It was no more a challenge as me taking out a knife and stabbing a player. When there is no attempt to play the ball and it is clear that a player is attacking another player in this manner it is assault. If this had occured in modern day football it would have been a court case as have other far lesser assaults.

And that is not melodrama.

steevio_uk said:
Sorry
Again, it's irrelevant when or where you blow a whistle for full-time or half-time during open play.
It matters not one little bit.
.
Click to expand...

You would NEVER make a referee with that attitude mate you would get yourself into a world of crap, just as Thomas did. The whole point of not blowing a whistle when a ball is in the final third and being crossed or on a corner etc, but when the ball is in the middle of the picth or cleared, is to precisely avoid these types of INSANE mistakes.

Even in the coding of cpu football games algorithms of this nature are put in place to reflect real football.

You are 110% wrong here.

steevio_uk said:
The Poll decision was just plain stupid, but after all the guy is a complete prick anyway.
Click to expand...
The point is what then?

I raised the decision, because it is one of the worst decisions ever from a ref and this is a thread about such...

So what is your point exactly, how is anything I have said invalid or off the topic etc?

I mean your language suggests I shouldn't have mentioned/brought up the dcision, so why not?

I swear down you have just tried to antagonize me by being awkward here.

It is difficult to believe that you can believe the rubbish you are talking here mate…..sorry if that causes offense, I guess it might because I am being strong in the language but I honetly think you are talking crap in your above post.

If you are offended by me being honest on this one sorry...we can just forget about the subject and move on..
 
Last edited:
vanzandt, I had written a long post as a response, but in reflection I just cannot be bothered to get into it all with you, so have therefore amended it to this.
I think it's better for both of us and the topic that we don't go completely overboard and turn it into an unrelated mess.

For the record, whislt I disagreed (and still do) with your first 2 points and politely said why,- I completely agreed with you on the last point by saying the decision you speak of in the Everton v Liverpool game was a stupid one and that Poll is a complete prick anyway.

As I say, I don't want to go all over it, but you have been hypocritical by telling me I am wrong and telling me I am speaking crap and accusing me of antagonising you, when this is the 1 thing you hate other people doing to you.
Also with the last point you have obviously read it completely wrong and again got ultra defensive as a result.
 
Last edited:
Vanzandt, while i agree with you on the Schumacher -Battiston incident (i.e. an atrocious foul that should have been punisherd much more severe and decided the match),allow me a few rectifications:

1 Battiston's injury was not as bas as you think, he "merely" had a severe concussion...

2 Battiston already was a defender at that time...i don't think he ver was a forward...it just was that kind of match were defenders came head to head with the opponents goal keeper...
 
steevio_uk said:
vanzandt, I had written a long post as a response, but in reflection I just cannot be bothered to get into it all with you, so have therefore amended it to this.
Click to expand...

Ok, let’s see what it is then….

steevio_uk said:
I think it's better for both of us and the topic that we don't go completely overboard and turn it into an unrelated mess.
Click to expand...

No problem.

steevio_uk said:
For the record, whislt I disagreed (and still do) with your first 2 points and politely said why,- I completely agreed with you on the last point by saying the decision you speak of in the Everton v Liverpool game was a stupid one and that Poll is a complete prick anyway.
Click to expand...

That’s fine, no problem. There seemed to be a bit of a loaded statement in what you said about the third point, which made me think you were just signing Poll off as an idiot and with it the legitimacy of me raising the point; if you go back and read what you wrote I think you can see how I could have easily thought that. As has been said in the past it isn’t always easy to properly convey attitude via a flat forum, so I’ll take it that you didn’t mean that and that you in fact agreed with me, and in doing so you can accept my apology if you felt in any slighted for my remarks on that specific point.

steevio_uk said:
As I say, I don't want to go all over it, but you have been hypocritical by telling me I am wrong and telling me I am speaking crap and accusing me of antagonising you, when this is the 1 thing you hate other people doing to you.
Also with the last point you have obviously read it completely wrong and again got ultra defensive as a result.
Click to expand...

No Steevio this is what really does piss me off with your attitude. You are very bullish about your own opinions, very bullish and I have been accepting of them to avoid arguments or acted diplomatically in the past and at times have even allowed for this where the subject matter has been close to you. But I will not continue to accept that your opinion can be pushed to the hilt and that whenever I occasionally stick to my guns and opinions I am called a hypocrite or ultra defensive or x number of other insults.

In the Tevez thread despite having come around to much that you had said and partially agreeing with you, but not entirely agreeing with you….in a situation where you did not agree with me whatsoever…..you still at one point threw a lot of insults my way. You insult me again; this is not acceptable to me.

I said in making my last post that you might find the strength of my language offensive but that I was just being honest. But I did not resort to personal insults there, just as I have not in other threads with you and just as I did not in the Tevez thread. I would ask you if you could stop doing that.

Strong language of disagreement on the points and on what is being said is fine. If you want to say you thought a point of mine was invalid, incorrect or crap etc that is fine but please leave the personal insults out of it.

I have enjoyed discussing different topics with you and you do not need to be resorting to this kind of thing and I’m not putting up with it.

On the Everton point I have obviously misinterpreted what you were saying, you have an apology for that. I must say you are also misinterpreting me for being defensive in this post when I am not being. If you look at the last comments I made in the last post, I was merely saying;

We can disagree strongly and honestly, but it does not have to mean this escalates or makes a problem between us. That was all I meant, that we can agree to disagree.

But you have gone personal and escalated matters.

Can we not just disagree with one another and that be all it is, without us labeling the other for differing views?

I said I thought you were talking crap in this instance, strong but honest. Likewise I said I thought you were trying to antogonise me again I was being honest, I thought you were. But I never called you anything, I never threw shit at you and labeled you and I was not being defensive. Now like I have said I have apologized for misinterpreting your comments in one of the points, I am big enough to do that and I can see I have got something wrong.

Now can you in future keep personal comments out of it please….by all means say if you think I am talking crap on a given point etc, but just leave the personal stuff. I would like to get on with you as most of what you have to say is interesting and the conversation good.

Myabe there are lots of misinterpretations, I would like to think so in a way.

I don't always think my opinion are right, I question them like I question other peoples. I do that to try not to be dogmatic, to not beome polarised or entrenched in an opinion. Like everyone I would like to think my opinion is correct, we all do. But I would like to be able to be open minded enough to tak onboard what other people say to me and re-examin what I think and to alter my view if what I am being told seems to make logical sense. I do not think changin your mind on the basis of superior logic is a weakness, I see it as a stength. It doesn't matter if the opinion was originally yours mine or anyones etc This is especially improatnt I think given the fact that no matter how right we think we are or how logical we think we are, all of us are wrong at one time or another and all of us have imperfect reasoning and logic.

That is why when discussing the best free kick takers and a reference I made to weaker leagues I took on board what you said Steevio about van hooijdonk. I changed my view on him because you corretcly poited out the lack of logic in my position/point. If I was dogmatic I would not have been able to change my view, see the sense you provided as I would have had ownership of a certain view and have an entrenched opinion. We see people all the time that can only disagree with one another and never see another side to issues. Steevio when we discussed Tevez, again I was open minded and because of that I was swayed by information you provided and given much of the logic I considerably if not whole changed my viewpoint and I did so without pride preventing me.

Given all I am saying...

So far what I am seeing is a picture where we agree on much about football, but where we do not I think you push you opinion to the hilt and strongly disagree even where somebody half agrees with you and moves closer to your view. But you do not seem to make much in the way of allowance for any divergence of opinion form your own view. Surley you cannot always be right? Can you not allow for other peoples opinions a little bit more and not go to the personal remarks? Also maybe consider why people have a difference of opinion and not bullishly always push so hard you own view?

I am tring to say honest things...maybe you wil say this is all shit and take a negative look at my comments or say it is not a psychology class or that I am patronising I don't know. All I know is I agree much with you but when the opinion is different I don't see much int he allowance for that I have yet to see you change your view on anything on the basis of anything said to you..


P.S

To Gerd

Battiston, clattered, fell to the ground unconscious, with damaged vertebrae and teeth knocked out and a broken jaw, later slipping into a coma.

Schumaker after winning the game caused more controversy when he was told that Battiston had lost several teeth, by replying;

"If that's all that's wrong with him, I'm prepared to pay for him to have them fixed!"

His lack of remorse coupled by his lack of intention to win the ball and go for the player should have resulted in a international ban.

At the time of the incident it should have at least resulted in a red card.

Even the BBC have Schumakers challenge listed as one of the worst ref decisions ever

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/4148525.stm

I think earlier in Battison’s career he was a more attacking player, and played in a more attacking position. I am certain I have read this somewhere. If it is not true fair enough, but I think if you search you might be able to find information on this.

One of the other refereeing decisions that is terrible and up there with the worst for me is the Maradona hand of god incident. I think there is a cultural difference in attitude in Argentina and some other places that likes to think that Maradona was clever or crafty and that this craftiness is a great skill to be applauded. I have to say I see it as terrible and blatant cheating that ruins the game and I think the referee and his officials must have been the only people in the stadium who did not see Maradona handball the ball. Terrible decision.
 
Last edited:
Fella, I'm not ignorant or in denial, but you have me so wrong it is untrue.

I have been on the piss today and soaked up a cracking win by our boys.
I won't get into it now as we can do without it, but I think you have me wrong and have done me much of an injustice.
As I say that's that and we'll move on and I won't post my original post as it will be nothing but escalating things for no reason.
Let's just leave it at that and enjoy debates in future, which we both enjoy doing with each other despite our obvious personality conflicts.

Now, I'm off to Reflex to dance to cheesy 80's music and pull a fatty :D
 
steevio_uk said:
Fella, I'm not ignorant or in denial, but you have me so wrong it is untrue.
Click to expand...

I have not put those labels on you, neither have I said or implied such. I have tried to explain something that is quite complex and difficult to explian. A sort of pervading attitude or position that I feel is coming from you, which whilst small, almost in the ether is still perceivably there and vexing. I have been trying to tell you why I feel there is a problem in our communication with one another and I have been honestly telling you my feeling, not trying to get one over on you.

steevio_uk said:
I have been on the piss today and soaked up a cracking win by our boys.
Click to expand...

Great win mate, well done on today’s result..

steevio_uk said:
I won't get into it now as we can do without it, but I think you have me wrong and have done me much of an injustice.
Click to expand...

That doesn’t surprise me at all, you see, you always see injustices done to you, but you never perceive the injustices you do to me, because you do not examine and consider me as much as your own feelings. Something demostrated by the fact that you have made a lot of personal insults, I have made none, but I have apologised to you and you have never apologised to me....very one sided.

You see your own opinions and reasoning with a clarity and detail that you do not afford what I have to say. I on the other had try to view your thoughts, ideas and position with as much reason and consideration as my own thoughts and opinions etc. That is why I have been able on various occasions to be able to reject my own opinions and concur in favour with yours. The fact that this has very happened in the reverse polarity to me suggest that it is because you think you are right very often and do not place as much consideration in what is said to you. I do not think that is ignorant or that you are in denial. I just think like a lot of people you push your own views a little too much without full consideration of those being put to you. A lot of what you say and a lot of your opinions are very good to my mind or at least I see what you are saying much of the time as being very good because perhaps it concurs with my own views….perhaps that is my bias that kicks, I don’t know. All I know is you have very intelligent comments and views much of the time and I enjoy a lot of what you have to say. But where we ever differ, unless I was to back down there would probably be an argument and you would probably insult me….this I see as wrong, that is the conflict. But I like your posts and thoughts much of the time.

steevio_uk said:
Let's just leave it at that and enjoy debates in future, which we both enjoy doing with each other despite our obvious personality conflicts.
Click to expand...

I hope we can in future always agree to disagree without personal remarks, it would be a shame to not have the banter and conversation which excluding these one-offs is very good.

As you can see I have apologized for the misunderstanding that was due to my mistake.

steevio_uk said:
Now, I'm off to Reflex to dance to cheesy 80's music and pull a fatty :D
Click to expand...

:)

Good for you, I hope you are very drunk and you mistakenly pull something thinner than you think though Haha.
 
Last edited:
steevio_uk said:
I really do not know what to say.... honestly.

Fuck me, dude you are unreal.:shock:
Click to expand...

Well I would imagine that you would only see where we disagree and comments you do not like, only concentrate on what divides as opposed to seeing where we agree, comments that are good and what is in common.

That is surmising that your post was a negative take on what I said. It must be very easy for you if you are always right.

I mean if other people seem insulting to you despite having never insulted you. Even when they have apologised to you, but never said anything personal. Yet you have insulted me countless times with labels and obviously you have never felt the need to apologise for anything you have said (not once) and in fact have defended such things with elastic reasoning.

You very much rate your own views and think're right all the time.

I wish I was so cocksure of always being correct, but I am not.
 
Last edited:
Vanzandt, you could be right about the Battiston-Schumacher incident...my problem is that i have a fantastic memory and never go searching because i think i can remember well...

Don't want to interfere in your argument but apologizing like you did is class...it does not happen enough...
 
How about the usually impressive Roger Milford failing to send off Paul Gascoigne in the 1991 FA Cup final after he kung-fu kicked Garry Parker in the chest then went on to assault Gary Charles?
2 bookings if ever I saw them!!

(vanzandt, you love me really, don't you?:lol:;))
 
steevio_uk said:
How about the usually impressive Roger Milford failing to send off Paul Gascoigne in the 1991 FA Cup final after he kung-fu kicked Garry Parker in the chest then went on to assault Gary Charles?
2 bookings if ever I saw them!!
Click to expand...

I can only recall the second challenge where Gazza hospitalised himself and turned himself from a world class player into just a very good player (never the same after the ligament damage for me).

steevio_uk said:
(vanzandt, you love me really, don't you?:lol:;))
Click to expand...

I don't dislike you as it happens, if I did I wouldn't waste so many words; rightly or wrongly. I was trying to get through to you for what it is worth.

Let's move on, maybe bare in mind a hint of what I said though even if you do not agree.

Refs!!!

What about Collina's decision to disallow Duncan Ferguson's perfectly legitimate header against Villareal and in doing so knock Everton out of the champions league?

One of the best refs ever and he saves one of the worst decisions of his career for us...killer:cry:

The last time I felt so fooked up was when England went out of the semi final of the world cup in 1990on pens.

Two crushing moments in my life that rank up there with anything truly shite I can think of.
 
Bribed? :lol: Who uploaded this video, a Norvegian or Greek users?

Everybody knows about UEFA and TFF (Turkish Football Federation) relationship after Switzerland match. And, I dont think that they want to see us in Euro Cup at Switzerland. So, I call it as a simple mistake.
 
Ernestito said:
you wanna see an even worse decision?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k4UKqb6u0Y

ref said it was a foul or hand.
Click to expand...

See, this is the sort of decision where it is easy to make a mistake, so I don't think it really can be considered as a terrible decision.
I mean are you saying it should have or shouldn't have been a goal, it's so scrappy that it's hard to tell either way, let alone from where the ref may have been.
Especially given that the striker has gone in with his hand and into the keep which would have looked very suspicious to the referee I imagine.

robin_007 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCH33HRtryU

The same ref got an award for best Dutch ref a couple of weeks ago.
Click to expand...

That was one of the most blatant penalties I have ever seen :lol:





vanzandt, that Gary Parker incident, the ball bounced towards Parker with Gazza following the ball, Parker knocks it away and Gazza then proceeds to stud Garry Parker in the chest full blown... no word of a lie!
Common assault if ever I have seen it :lol:
 
Last edited:
Dennis Irwin getting a yellow for tapping the ball a few feet away when it was a free kick and then missing the cup final through suspension. Anyone that gets a yellow for something so petty is hard done by. Originally, the rule was brought in after players were hoofing the ball the length of the pitch to waste time, but now it's just got stupid.
 
steevio_uk said:
vanzandt, that Gary Parker incident, the ball bounced towards Parker with Gazza following the ball, Parker knocks it away and Gazza then proceeds to stud Garry Parker in the chest full blown... no word of a lie!
Common assault if ever I have seen it :lol:
Click to expand...

I remember hearing it was bad, but never saw it. If anyone has a youtube link I wouldn't mind having a look.

marukomu said:
Dennis Irwin getting a yellow for tapping the ball a few feet away when it was a free kick and then missing the cup final through suspension. Anyone that gets a yellow for something so petty is hard done by. Originally, the rule was brought in after players were hoofing the ball the length of the pitch to waste time, but now it's just got stupid.
Click to expand...

I remember seeing that one I think, wasn’t it where he couldn’t hear a whilstle cause he was on the sideline….if that is the one it was an awful decision…
 
Last edited:
i remeber now whic must have been one of the worst ever, incidently also by a Dutch ref...
This was the last match of Simon Tahamata, a Dutch winger who played for Ajax, Standard de Liège and a couple of other Dutch and Belgian teams.
Tahamata not only was a superb, technically gifted player, he was also one of the most fair players ever on a pitch (think Lineker).
Now this is his last match, the last match in the Dutch competition (don't even remember between which teams). The ref has given a free kick against Tahamata's team right outside the box...the wall will not move despite the refs insisting and he gives a yellow card to the player nearest to him: Tahamata.
Later in the match Tahamata scores a goal, is over the moon with joy and he leaves the pitch to salute the fans...the ref gives him a second yellow and that is the end of Tahamata's carreer...
The Dutch FA recognized what a stupid error of judgement this second yellow was and that referee never again led a top division match...

Some Dutch people cangive more details, but that's how i remember it...
 
I lived this one. The ref decided penalty when the tackle had been 1 meter outside the area. It was a very silly decision as you will see.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oNlKmLkWPU

It is ridiculous mainly because the defender who does the tackle never goes into the area, clearly. Even when the ref whistles and says it's penalty, the defender is still outside, so... how could he tackle the attacker inside the area? I was at the stadium and people got really mad with the ref, that afterwards sent off 2 barcelona players. Barcelona ended off loosing the match 2-4. Pathetic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom