Quality of refereeing

[maltaseagull]

Is the correct answer, its now almost an impossible job the higher up the pyramid you go. Mistakes will be made, as everyone makes them but due to the constant bashing of officials by managers this season, referees are now CONSTANTLY under scrutiny, more so than ever before. The treatment and abuse is becoming worse and worse too and it starts at the top. I referee both senior and kids football, and both are now as bad as each other for the abuse/language used against me - most of the cautions this season I have given have been for dissent. Its no wonder we are beginning to have a shortage of referees at grassroots in this country, people see the level of stick we get and think "I dont want that", so they dont.

We referee because we enjoy football, we arent there to ruin a game or anything and without referees, you wont have competitive football. Something will have to give soon, as it simply getting worse and worse.

Back on topic, I wouldnt say the quality is getting worse, its just that its being more and more scrutinised, so you will always find more talking points.

If you want to constantly slate referees, I offer you something - visit the Sussex FA website, pay the money to do the cause and referee kids game to help at grassroots level - if you think you can do better that is as well.

Referees making mistakes is a fact of life and as long as they balance out over a season it's part of the game.

What is unacceptable is the pressure they are put under by players, managers and pundits. Ex players would make great refs but why on earth would they want to get the constant questioning of every decision and the abuse?

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Without the amount of dodgy decisions in their favour, I doubt Bournemouth would be anywhere near the top. Eddie Howe certainly likes to train his teams to cheat.

All teams cheat but some get away with it more than others.

 

[Acker79]

Ex players would make great refs but why on earth would they want to get the constant questioning of every decision and the abuse?

Having often watched Gilette Soccer Saturday, and read about Martin Keown's experience refereeing, I'm not convinced they would be any better.

Firstly, on GSS there are four ex-players/managers who often disagree with each other showing a) there won't be any more consistency than there currently is, b) the decisions they make will still be contested by others (players, pundits, fans, etc).

Secondly, they will still have to apply the current laws of the games, not what they think the laws should be or what they used to be in the good ol' days, they will not have any more freedom to interpret the laws than currently given, they will still face the same pressures of getting every single decision right while playing in front of a divided, blinkered fan base, and occasionally in front of an assessor who will be second guessing every decision based on how FIFA say the laws should be applied, refereeing players who will question every decision no matter how obvious, with so many of them trying to con the ref.

 

[maltaseagull]

Having often watched Gilette Soccer Saturday, and read about Martin Keown's experience refereeing, I'm not convinced they would be any better.

Firstly, on GSS there are four ex-players/managers who often disagree with each other showing a) there won't be any more consistency than there currently is, b) the decisions they make will still be contested by others (players, pundits, fans, etc).



Secondly, they will still have to apply the current laws of the games, not what they think the laws should be or what they used to be in the good ol' days, they will not have any more freedom to interpret the laws than currently given, they will still face the same pressures of getting every single decision right while playing in front of a divided, blinkered fan base, and occasionally in front of an assessor who will be second guessing every decision based on how FIFA say the laws should be applied, refereeing players who will question every decision no matter how obvious, with so many of them trying to con the ref.

Fair point.So what is the answer?
I suppose put up and shut up really

 

[Acker79]

Fair point.So what is the answer?
I suppose put up and shut up really

I don't know that there is an answer. I think there are too many problems;
dishonest players,
unfair criticism of referees, a
society wide anti-authority attitude (as mentioned earlier in this thread we live in a world that would rather criticise speed cameras than the people who speed, ticket wardens than the people who park illegally, referees rather than the players who cheat, and the current trend for bemoaning the "triple punishment" of penalty/sending off (don't get me started on that nonsense)),
the tribal nature of football wherein every decision against you is wrong,
the out of touch governing bodies,
the lack of freedom given to refs to run games in the spirit of the law rather than to the letter (in part because the lack of consistency this would create - even moreso than currently),
the way fans look for excuses or things other than players to blame because criticising your own team makes you a bad fan,
the way nothing the referee does is right - give a decision right away, why not play the advantage; wait to see if there's an advantage, get criticised for taking too long; play the advantage and nothing comes of it, criticised for not giving the free kick,
the referees being human and both making odd mistakes, and having a bad day now and again,
the actually incredibly few referees who are truly bad at it (for a few possible reasons including arrogance, and ineptness),
the resistance from the powers that be to technology or change,
the need to avoid some changes,
the fact results of games are determined by thousands of decisions over the course of 90+ minutes of the game (plus decisions made by the manager before the game and at half time regarding team selection, tactics, instructions, motivational talks etc) yet it's only ever a single decision by a ref that is blamed
the culture of winning at all costs over fair play.


I'm not opposed to video replay technology, but for me it has to be the referee who looks at the video. The laws of the game are mostly written "in the opinion of the referee", it would undermine his authority to have anyone else make a decision that overrules him. The one rule that isn't empirical that doesn't rely solely on the referee's interpretation/opinion is the offside law, and that is famous for being so complicated no one can understand it. If the rules are re-written so they all remove as much interpretation, the game is going to be way too complicated.

The system would also have to be designed with the idea of causing as little disruption to the game as possible, and not something that is too easy for managers to abuse i.e. it can't be another thing they use to "manage the game", like substituting the player who is furthest from the dug out so as to run down the clock, or frivolous substitutions to interrupt the losing teams momentum as they are searching that late equaliser/winner.


But a simple change I would make would be to make referees and their assistants watch the game back as they write their reports and give them the authority to remove or add card punishments. If they gave a red or yellow during the game and on reflection they either think it was too harsh or simply wrong, they can remove it. If they see something they missed, they can give a red. I'd allow them to refer any offence they feel is severe enough to merit extra punishment, or consideration for extra punishment.

By having the ref look at it again, the FA aren't re-reffing the game, they aren't overruling the ref, he's doing it himself. It would reduce appeals (not just those that are overturned, but also those that are iffy, knowing the ref has had another look may put off some appeals. I also think refs would see where their own blind spots are and naturally improve.


Failing that, ban all players, managers, pundits, commentators and journalists from talking about the referee. A lot of the conversation in football is driven by these peoples comments on the main games, and fans take their cue on what to look for from a game. Over time fans will also stop talking about referees and if we're not looking to them for our talking points, we will eventually grow to accept their decisions as part of the game rather than a blight.

 

[Machiavelli]

I don't know that there is an answer. I think there are too many problems;
dishonest players,
unfair criticism of referees, a
society wide anti-authority attitude (as mentioned earlier in this thread we live in a world that would rather criticise speed cameras than the people who speed, ticket wardens than the people who park illegally, referees rather than the players who cheat, and the current trend for bemoaning the "triple punishment" of penalty/sending off (don't get me started on that nonsense)),
the tribal nature of football wherein every decision against you is wrong,
the out of touch governing bodies,
the lack of freedom given to refs to run games in the spirit of the law rather than to the letter (in part because the lack of consistency this would create - even moreso than currently),
the way fans look for excuses or things other than players to blame because criticising your own team makes you a bad fan,
the way nothing the referee does is right - give a decision right away, why not play the advantage; wait to see if there's an advantage, get criticised for taking too long; play the advantage and nothing comes of it, criticised for not giving the free kick,
the referees being human and both making odd mistakes, and having a bad day now and again,
the actually incredibly few referees who are truly bad at it (for a few possible reasons including arrogance, and ineptness),
the resistance from the powers that be to technology or change,
the need to avoid some changes,
the fact results of games are determined by thousands of decisions over the course of 90+ minutes of the game (plus decisions made by the manager before the game and at half time regarding team selection, tactics, instructions, motivational talks etc) yet it's only ever a single decision by a ref that is blamed
the culture of winning at all costs over fair play.


I'm not opposed to video replay technology, but for me it has to be the referee who looks at the video. The laws of the game are mostly written "in the opinion of the referee", it would undermine his authority to have anyone else make a decision that overrules him. The one rule that isn't empirical that doesn't rely solely on the referee's interpretation/opinion is the offside law, and that is famous for being so complicated no one can understand it. If the rules are re-written so they all remove as much interpretation, the game is going to be way too complicated.

The system would also have to be designed with the idea of causing as little disruption to the game as possible, and not something that is too easy for managers to abuse i.e. it can't be another thing they use to "manage the game", like substituting the player who is furthest from the dug out so as to run down the clock, or frivolous substitutions to interrupt the losing teams momentum as they are searching that late equaliser/winner.


But a simple change I would make would be to make referees and their assistants watch the game back as they write their reports and give them the authority to remove or add card punishments. If they gave a red or yellow during the game and on reflection they either think it was too harsh or simply wrong, they can remove it. If they see something they missed, they can give a red. I'd allow them to refer any offence they feel is severe enough to merit extra punishment, or consideration for extra punishment.

By having the ref look at it again, the FA aren't re-reffing the game, they aren't overruling the ref, he's doing it himself. It would reduce appeals (not just those that are overturned, but also those that are iffy, knowing the ref has had another look may put off some appeals. I also think refs would see where their own blind spots are and naturally improve.


Failing that, ban all players, managers, pundits, commentators and journalists from talking about the referee. A lot of the conversation in football is driven by these peoples comments on the main games, and fans take their cue on what to look for from a game. Over time fans will also stop talking about referees and if we're not looking to them for our talking points, we will eventually grow to accept their decisions as part of the game rather than a blight.

Hard to disagree with any of this.

 

[The Camel]

Refereeing in general is massively better than when I was a kid 30+ years ago.

Obviously refs make mistakes, but they always will won't they?

Footballers make mistakes too. Derby fans seemed to want to criticise the ref for not sending off the Wolves defender more than their own goalkeeper for his horrendous own goal.

The difference between now and when I was a kid is the ridicous over analysis of every decsion.

I hate rugby with a passion, but the player/management are far more mature about accepting incorrect decisions.

 

[wakeytom]

One against my team today, how that was not a foul in the build up to the goal I will never know, hate losing to Westham as well

 

[maltaseagull]

I don't know that there is an answer. I think there are too many problems;
dishonest players,
unfair criticism of referees, a
society wide anti-authority attitude (as mentioned earlier in this thread we live in a world that would rather criticise speed cameras than the people who speed, ticket wardens than the people who park illegally, referees rather than the players who cheat, and the current trend for bemoaning the "triple punishment" of penalty/sending off (don't get me started on that nonsense)),
the tribal nature of football wherein every decision against you is wrong,
the out of touch governing bodies,
the lack of freedom given to refs to run games in the spirit of the law rather than to the letter (in part because the lack of consistency this would create - even moreso than currently),
the way fans look for excuses or things other than players to blame because criticising your own team makes you a bad fan,
the way nothing the referee does is right - give a decision right away, why not play the advantage; wait to see if there's an advantage, get criticised for taking too long; play the advantage and nothing comes of it, criticised for not giving the free kick,
the referees being human and both making odd mistakes, and having a bad day now and again,
the actually incredibly few referees who are truly bad at it (for a few possible reasons including arrogance, and ineptness),
the resistance from the powers that be to technology or change,
the need to avoid some changes,
the fact results of games are determined by thousands of decisions over the course of 90+ minutes of the game (plus decisions made by the manager before the game and at half time regarding team selection, tactics, instructions, motivational talks etc) yet it's only ever a single decision by a ref that is blamed
the culture of winning at all costs over fair play.


I'm not opposed to video replay technology, but for me it has to be the referee who looks at the video. The laws of the game are mostly written "in the opinion of the referee", it would undermine his authority to have anyone else make a decision that overrules him. The one rule that isn't empirical that doesn't rely solely on the referee's interpretation/opinion is the offside law, and that is famous for being so complicated no one can understand it. If the rules are re-written so they all remove as much interpretation, the game is going to be way too complicated.

The system would also have to be designed with the idea of causing as little disruption to the game as possible, and not something that is too easy for managers to abuse i.e. it can't be another thing they use to "manage the game", like substituting the player who is furthest from the dug out so as to run down the clock, or frivolous substitutions to interrupt the losing teams momentum as they are searching that late equaliser/winner.


But a simple change I would make would be to make referees and their assistants watch the game back as they write their reports and give them the authority to remove or add card punishments. If they gave a red or yellow during the game and on reflection they either think it was too harsh or simply wrong, they can remove it. If they see something they missed, they can give a red. I'd allow them to refer any offence they feel is severe enough to merit extra punishment, or consideration for extra punishment.

By having the ref look at it again, the FA aren't re-reffing the game, they aren't overruling the ref, he's doing it himself. It would reduce appeals (not just those that are overturned, but also those that are iffy, knowing the ref has had another look may put off some appeals. I also think refs would see where their own blind spots are and naturally improve.


Failing that, ban all players, managers, pundits, commentators and journalists from talking about the referee. A lot of the conversation in football is driven by these peoples comments on the main games, and fans take their cue on what to look for from a game. Over time fans will also stop talking about referees and if we're not looking to them for our talking points, we will eventually grow to accept their decisions as part of the game rather than a blight.

Would love to see this happen but it never will.

You are so right though.

Watching the rugby today there were several times when a ref went to the TMO where in a lower league game he would make a decision. So if we are going down this route, We will eventually have a game refereed by remote officials who hold up play while they review replays and then make a decision. Matches will last 3 hrs at least. I will be long gone by then

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Here we go again, wrong man sent off in the City game after 90 seconds, what a joke, how in this day and age do we not use video etc to ensure the correct player goes. I do agree a player should go there as last man but not that one

The ref in the Huddersfield v Fulham game nearly did the same thing, but changed his mind before the player left the pitch.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31882508

 

[drew]

Most of the solutions rest with the refs themselves. Take a firmer stand (which needs to be with the support of the FA) against players haranguing the ref. I'm not bothered that refs make mistakes, it's that they never (or almost virtually never) hold their hand up and admit they got it wrong.