State of the refs in this country

[Adisa]

Refs are becoming more and more the center of attention in this country.
I'm sick of it. Refs making bad calls, refs bottling calls, inconsistencies etc.
Some say video technology will disrupt the game. Feck that.
Video technology can't do as much damage as these guys are doing now.
With everything improving in the premier league, these guys are just getting worse and worse.

 

[top1whoisman]

I agree, don’t know how they compare to refs abroad, but at least half of PL refs are simply not good enough, one way or the other.

 

[77]

Pink shirts

 

[Raw]

Yeah but apparently video replays will damage the flow of the game or something.

 

[Sylar]

Refs needs more agents, tattoos and time on camera.
Its a shame as the Euros were perfectly reffed imo (bar one or two mistakes obviously).

Clattenburg is really good at times but lets himself down by trying to be a celeb. Mike Dean is one of the worst in trying to get attention. Martin Atkinson is just terrible.

But its funny cos it also seems like England have some of the best refs in Europe.

 

[klayton88]

Resident Referee Howard Webb

 

[Sigma]

I think people are underestimating the job. They are humans, they are going to make mistakes.

The real issue is that a Hawk-Eye system with the 3 challenges thing which is used in Tennis really needs to be adopted

 

[kidbob]

I think people are underestimating the job. They are humans, they are going to make mistakes.

The real issue is that a Hawk-Eye system with the 3 challenges thing which is used in Tennis really needs to be adopted

Don't be crazy can't be slowing down our games by a tiny amount so fairness can prevail.

 

[Nighteyes]

Problem with video refs is not the time but the nature of the decisions themselves. So many decisions are subjective and divide opinion even after 100's of replays.

That's not to say they should not be implemented but only in certain cases. You can apply it for offside calls for instance when a goal is scored which is quite objective. But for pens? I'm not too sure.

 

[montpelier]

No, I'm not either. A half with 6 reviews in it & 4 subs is gonna be an absolute joy (NOT). And that's even before the gamesmanship on using them & rows on the touchline & any load of other nonsense it would lead to.

 

[Snow]

Problem with video refs is not the time but the nature of the decisions themselves. So many decisions are subjective and divide opinion even after 100's of replays.

That's not to say they should not be implemented but only in certain cases. You can apply it for offside calls for instance when a goal is scored which is quite objective. But for pens? I'm not too sure.

Doesn't matter. The video decision should only overturn the verdict on the pitch if it's clear. Subjectiveness shouldn't interfere.

 

[HumblePieEyed]

Middle aged men required to run the length of the pitch, for 90 minutes, chasing top athletes in the prime of their lives, while retaining ultra acute powers of observation and judgement. Kind of ridiculous isn't it?

My proposal, TWO REFS, neither of which runs past the centerline. If a player is going end to end, the second ref simply picks up his run and follows him down the field til the play turns around, and the other ref again takes charge when the ball comes into his half.

There won't be any more crowding on the field than if there was only one referee, and both men will still be relatively fresh and sharp even after 90 minutes.
Go ahead, scoff, I'm ready ;-)

 

[Theonas]

I think it was last year when the rate of correct decisions was supposed to be something like 95%. This is far from the doom and gloom some people like to portray it to be. Refs always did make mistakes and unless technology is introduced, will continue to make mistakes. But I do think that relatively speaking, they are doing a good job. I think it is people who are increasingly intolerant of any kind of injustice. There is a refusal to accept that it is not perfect.

 

[Nighteyes]

Doesn't matter. The video decision should only overturn the verdict on the pitch if it's clear. Subjectiveness shouldn't interfere.

The world "clear" is subjective in itself.

 

[skidmark]

Doesn't matter. The video decision should only overturn the verdict on the pitch if it's clear. Subjectiveness shouldn't interfere.

Define "clear"....

 

[Sigma]

Problem with video refs is not the time but the nature of the decisions themselves. So many decisions are subjective and divide opinion even after 100's of replays.

That's not to say they should not be implemented but only in certain cases. You can apply it for offside calls for instance when a goal is scored which is quite objective. But for pens? I'm not too sure.

Have a panel, 4-1 decision overturns the initial call

 

[BigDub]

"Disgraceful" comes to mind. Just when you think one is the worst in the league, another comes a long and does an even more terrible job. Shocking really. Moss is the worst for me, but there are plenty of good choices for that title.

 

[Snow]

Define "clear"....

The world "clear" is subjective in itself.

When you are sure. It's very easy for a ref to assess a situation if he gets time and replays. If he watches a couple of replays and isn't immediately sure then the situation isn't clear.

 

[SteveJ]

I think people are underestimating the job. They are humans, they are going to make mistakes.

It's a very difficult job. But their public image isn't helped by certain refs presenting decisions as if they were in a Queen video.

 

[stevoc]

Middle aged men required to run the length of the pitch, for 90 minutes, chasing top athletes in the prime of their lives, while retaining ultra acute powers of observation and judgement. Kind of ridiculous isn't it?

My proposal, TWO REFS, neither of which runs past the centerline. If a player is going end to end, the second ref simply picks up his run and follows him down the field til the play turns around, and the other ref again takes charge when the ball comes into his half.

There won't be any more crowding on the field than if there was only one referee, and both men will still be relatively fresh and sharp even after 90 minutes.
Go ahead, scoff, I'm ready ;-)

Thats actually not a bad idea, two refs and 4 linesmen the more eyes on the game the better i say.

The only problem i see is when you have two plonkers like Clattenberg and Dean on the same pitch both making crazy decisions trying to out do each other and make themselves the centre of attention.

 

[AN17]

Middle aged men required to run the length of the pitch, for 90 minutes, chasing top athletes in the prime of their lives, while retaining ultra acute powers of observation and judgement. Kind of ridiculous isn't it?

My proposal, TWO REFS, neither of which runs past the centerline. If a player is going end to end, the second ref simply picks up his run and follows him down the field til the play turns around, and the other ref again takes charge when the ball comes into his half.

There won't be any more crowding on the field than if there was only one referee, and both men will still be relatively fresh and sharp even after 90 minutes.
Go ahead, scoff, I'm ready ;-)

Had the same thought myself.But then biggest problem would be fouls on the half way line. Imagine Mike Dean and Clattenburg on opposite halfs trying to make it all about them.What could go wrong ?

 

[Adisa]

Another week and they show up again. It's a fecking disgrace.

 

[SwansonsTache]

It has now become so bad that they decide matches on a weekly basis. I watch far too little of other leagues to comment, but I refuse to believe that the state of the refs is as bad in BL and Spain.

They should start calling refs out on it. You want "respect" as the campaign says? Then fecking earn it.

 

[Enigma_87]

The only way I see it is video replays. I get all the negatives, but it has worked well for tennis and there were similar objections. There's one in volleyball etc.

Generally I don't like the idea but it's becoming more and more appealing.

 

[Akshay]

Middle aged men required to run the length of the pitch, for 90 minutes, chasing top athletes in the prime of their lives, while retaining ultra acute powers of observation and judgement. Kind of ridiculous isn't it?

My proposal, TWO REFS, neither of which runs past the centerline. If a player is going end to end, the second ref simply picks up his run and follows him down the field til the play turns around, and the other ref again takes charge when the ball comes into his half.

There won't be any more crowding on the field than if there was only one referee, and both men will still be relatively fresh and sharp even after 90 minutes.
Go ahead, scoff, I'm ready ;-)

At the moment we can't get consistent calls from different referees game to game. Just imagine in a two ref game one deciding all shirt pulling will be a penalty and the other deciding to let it go. There can't be two different laws in different areas of the pitch. That's why there has to be one person making the final calls.

 

[Enigma_87]

At the moment we can't get consistent calls from different referees game to game. Just imagine in a two ref game one deciding all shirt pulling will be a penalty and the other deciding to let it go. There can't be two different laws in different areas of the pitch. That's why there has to be one person making the final calls.

There are couple of dubious decisions during a game that can sway it in one way or another. Video challenge would solve this IMO. No need of 2-3-4 referees on the pitch.

Just like tennis - each team gets 2 video challenges and if they squander it they will have none. Won't be worse in terms of intercepting the flow as say substitution or pushing and shoveling after the decision is made.

 

[the hea]

The Arsenal penalty and the Bravo tackle makes me feel sick. How Arsenal can get that penalty while Bravo is allowed to walk away from a reckless challenge like that is just ridiculous. Something has to be done about this, it's really starting to ruin the joy of watching football.

 

[kps88]

Video appeals the only option. Each team should get a limited number of challenges. They can only challenge during a break in play. If a decision still can't be made after a replay, the ref's original call should stand. Similar to cricket where the on field umpire's call is given priority.

Also worth investigating whether we should let refs get continuous assistance in their ear from another ref sat next to a monitor. They need all the help they can get.

 

[Catt]

It's controversy surrounding the refs almost every weekend.

 

[Enigma_87]

Video appeals the only option. Each team should get a limited number of challenges. They can only challenge during a break in play. If a decision still can't be made after a replay, the ref's original call should stand. Similar to cricket where the on field umpire's call is given priority.

Also worth investigating whether we should let refs get continuous assistance in their ear from another ref sat next to a monitor. They need all the help they can get.

Spot on - that's the other option.

 

[Wumminator]

Think they're mostly very good to be fair.

 

[Akshay]

There are couple of dubious decisions during a game that can sway it in one way or another. Video challenge would solve this IMO. No need of 2-3-4 referees on the pitch.

Just like tennis - each team gets 2 video challenges and if they squander it they will have none. Won't be worse in terms of intercepting the flow as say substitution or pushing and shoveling after the decision is made.

I'd be all in favor of video challenges but given how long a clear-cut technology like goal-line took to adopt, I can't see it happening anytime soon unfortunately.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

Arsenal have already gained 3 points from very very poor injury time penalty decisions.

 

[bleedred]

There used to be a website something like rightleague, I dont remember exactly.

They used to discuss every contentious decision and alter the table accordingly. And it didnt change much at all. As they say, it evens out throughot the season,It just sucks when you are in the receiving end.

As for people calling for video refs based on other sports, even in them after various long term studies it has been found that the ref gets it right in first place, with accuracy ranging from 70-80%

 

[Adisa]

Clattenburg thinks he's a celebrity.
He hired a management company ffs. Referees have to be made accountable.

 

[Red_toad]

I'd be all in favor of video challenges but given how long a clear-cut technology like goal-line took to adopt, I can't see it happening anytime soon unfortunately.

I'd be against video replays, would break up the game & ruin talking points after the game. We love the game for the way it is, too many changes & we'll end up with gridiron, which I find tediously boring as there's no flow.

Back on subject, United rarely get anything from Clattenberg & gives bizarre wrong decisions to who we face.

 

[3KDré]

I would be in favour of a system similar to how they do it in rugby, but if not then fair enough. At the very least the FA should hold the idiotic referees accountable.

 

[Akshay]

I'd be against video replays, would break up the game & ruin talking points after the game. We love the game for the way it is, too many changes & we'll end up with gridiron, which I find tediously boring as there's no flow.

There's plenty of talking points after every game even if the referee does a splendid job. Does a ref making no controversial wrong decisions also ruin the game then? Gridiron has flow issues due to the very fundamental rules of the game which is nothing like football at all. Considering how much time is wasted by players coming up to referees and arguing their case, I'm sure a video replay would not cause much more delay.

 

[justboy68]

The Premier league should employ Deepmind to make an Alpha Ref. It will render shite human refs redundant in a few short years and far surpass them, while also acting just as fast. Also you could mount a taser gun on it and players would soon stop misbehaving.

 

[Red_toad]

There's plenty of talking points after every game even if the referee does a splendid job. Does a ref making no controversial wrong decisions also ruin the game then? Gridiron has flow issues due to the very fundamental rules of the game which is nothing like football at all. Considering how much time is wasted by players coming up to referees and arguing their case, I'm sure a video replay would not cause much more delay.

We already have too much time wasting in the game, adding more opportunity would be detrimental to the game in my opinion.