Referee & Linesmen watch

[AVTuco]

I've never heard of fans who think their team has benefitted from officiating.

[villa-revolution]

There's just something about Dean that I can't warm to, don't know what it is..

 

 

It's definitely not his Goldenballs is it?

[JoshVilla]

I know that poor refereeing isn't anything new, but this season in particular, the standard is shockingly bad. It's tough to call in terms of whether we should use technology to aid the decisions as it obviously affects the flow of the game, but surely when it comes to potentially game changing decisions such a penalties, there should be something more to make sure the correct decision is made. Obviously, it'd still be a bit of a kick in the teeth for everybody, since every team, including us, has benefited from a soft penalty being given against the opposition.

 

Or alternatively, the refs need to just pull their f'ing fingers out and sharpen up.

[heid3ster]

Poor Mike Riley, whoever he is.

[VillaChris]

The penalty was harsh but tbh I didn't think it was much different to the one we got v Everton when I think it was Benteke who ran across the Everton defender. That said if he gives that he should be given the Gabby one.

 

We were poor though so can't blame the ref really unlike Chelsea away which was a disgrace.

[Rovers13]

The penalty was harsh but tbh I didn't think it was much different to the one we got v Everton when I think it was Benteke who ran across the Everton defender. That said if he gives that he should be given the Gabby one.

We were poor though so can't blame the ref really unlike Chelsea away which was a disgrace.

The benteke one was kinda soft, but the Fulham one was horrible. The player jumped into bacuna, it really should've been a foul on Fulham, not a penalty

[Pilchard]

I must admit that this is a thread I've toyed with creating a couple of times, but not done so as I didn't want to do it after a particularly poor officiating display as it'd look like sour grapes, and similarly didn't want to do so after a game when we haven't had anything go wrong as it could easily be pushed aside as 'nothing to see here'. So I'm glad someone else has done it!

 

There are two things that are really turning me off football. The first is the money factor (well, more likely Villa's lack of it!) and the way that football is plastered everywhere you look - the second is the atrocious officiating standards in this country. When I look at the way it's run, the way the officials conduct themselves and the decisions made I find it very hard to come up with anything praiseworthy other than perhaps they manage to turn up each week.

 

I could rattle on about referees, standards and the media's reaction to these guys all day - I'll try an keep it short, so excuse the list...

 

1. Whenever a team from this country plays in Europe, or in fact the an international competition, we often get told we must keep an eye on the referee as these nasty continental chaps give a free kick for anything etc etc. We are also told the players often struggle to adapt to the Premier League as it's more physical, more things are let go than other leagues. If this is the case, and it isn't just a lazy stereotype given by the commentator or pundit then why is it always assumed that it is England/Premier League standards that are in the right? If the rest of the continent, possibly the world referee in a particular style - then why aren't our officials doing it in the same way as everyone else? Why are we arrogant enough to presume we are right and everyone else is wrong? Especially when you consider the regular mistakes that go on. It hurts our teams in continental and international competitions as whilst they are the same rules, we are sometimes playing a different game.

 

2. There seems to be some kind of bizarre iron curtain around the referees in this country. THE REFEREE IS ALWAYS RIGHT. But he's seen a player run in on goal, have have shorts pulled down, a clear goalscoring opportunity denied and not even given a foul. THE REFEREE IS ALWAYS RIGHT. The secrecy and silence around these chaps is ridiculous. They are the most important part of the game. People pay in some cases a lot of money to watch a game of football. You don't expect them to get every decision right. But there are four of them down there - and, using the same example, I cannot believe that all four of them can fail to see a player have his shorts pulled down. Did they think that the elastic had gone in his shorts? And yet there is no explanation from any of them as to the reasoning behind not giving a foul. Which leads to more frustration, anger and tension. Why can't the referee come out and explain the reasoning for a controversial decision at the end of a game? Because he may have to admit he was wrong - and this isn't what the authorities want.

 

A team works hard, toils and gets glory by getting to a cup final. Fans of said club are delighted after twenty years of nothing. Early on in the game, a player is clean through on goal, and then taken out by a defender. A penalty is given for denial of a goal scoring opportunity. And yet the player, the last man, is not sent off, not even booked. Do the fans, some who have spent a lot of money following the team in this competition, travelled miles to be at the final, and the players who have worked so hard and put so much effort to get into the final, not deserve at least an explanation to why the rules have been applied in this way, instead of the what would be assumed as being a red card? Even if it was a "I've looked at it and yes, it should have been a red card - sorry". You'd find that most would forgive - he's human, mistakes are made. Instead silence. Which, when the same referee is in charge of other games and makes other mistakes involving the same team - such as issuing red cards against players for standing around as he did with Chris Herd - a decision which cost Villa the three points as we were leading at the time and was later rescinded - mistakes fast become a conspiracy or a vendetta - something that even the players can buy into. If public explanations after the game isn't acceptable, then at the very least why aren't the referee reports made public? Why is everything hidden away, kept secret?

 

3. The referees may have gone professional years ago, but they don't act it. These people are supposed to be guardian of the rules - making sure that the play is fair and true. Yet too often you can see them being 'chummy' with players. When you have a referee talking to John Terry like his best mate on camera, calling him 'JT' laughing and joking along is it any surprise that he can put in a vicious challenge on a player, or elbow him in the face and not be given the appropriate action - yet if a player of another side catches 'JT' with an elbow - he is sent off? It's not done consciously - at least I hope not - but when you are being 'matey' with particular players it is going to effect decision making and fairness across the board.

 

Mark Halsey's autobiography this summer claimed that he had approached Alex Ferguson and asked him to do him a favour by mentioning a referee (it may have been himself, I'm not sure) in a press conference and giving him his backing. When a referee is supposed to be impartial, fair, how on earth can this kind of thing going on be acceptable? Not consciously, yes, but it will effect decision making and impartiality. Utd losing? Well, Fergie did help me out last week - I better make sure every stoppage is accounted for as I don't want to upset him after he did that.....Though what should we expect from Halsey, who least we forget actually once told Villa players to retreat ten yards and make a wall and then told Henry he was free to take a free kick into an empty net? Halsey was the very example of this kind of attitude, often looking like he was trying to be mates with the 'stars', rather than their actual job of insuring rules are kept to in a football match. It's no surprise that he's gone on to try and forge a media career. It's also no surprise that after only a couple of weeks he's been demoted into a lesser role as viewers find his interactions dull and not useful.

 

It's behaviour like this, that for me at least, helps explain why the 'bigger' clubs get a bigger share of decisions go in their favour. David Moyes made an interesting comment this week, saying that he feels Man Utd haven't had much luck this season, and you always need a slice of that to win a game. And he's right - if the referee is stopping play when the opposition win the ball, ruling out good goals, letting play go on when it shouldn't - as often happened at Old Trafford under Ferguson - then you are going to win more games. And perhaps tha'ts part of the reason Man Utd are where they are at the moment. Perhaps the officials simply aren't as afraid of Moyes, or as friendly?

 

I could go on and on about it. But will leave it there. We didn't lose at the Weekend because of the referee. We lost because we were crap. We couldn't defend, couldn't create and the striker we played up front can't hit a cows arse with a banjo at the moment. However, we won only a few days earlier in similar circumstances. But this time the rules of the game had been kept to. At the timing of the decision not to give Gabby that stonewall penalty, it should have been a chance to equalize as their penalty was not a foul and never has been a foul. And at 1-1 - the game would have been much different. 

 

Edit: Sorry - one more bit - the media have their own part to play in this too. Why is it that on a rare occasion a decision is made incorrectly against one of the top lot, like Man Utd, it gets discussed for weeks - the manager raving about it in the back pages. Yet something as obvious as a player, through on goal, having his shorts pulled down in the penalty area is degraded to "AHAHAHA LOOK - YOU CAN SEE THE DANISH BLOKE'S PANTS AHAHAHA". Where is a fairness, consistency and impartiality in that?

Edited December 10, 2013 by Pilchard

[Nigel]

I just wish Referees were made to explain their decisions.

 

Not a club driven inquisition, but run by an outside body, perhaps even the commentators/media.

 

At least if we were to hear their side of events, and why a course of action was taken, it would seem a bit less dubious.

 

We have to remember these are incredibly well paid individuals, that sometimes receive a bit too much protection!

Edited December 10, 2013 by Nigel

[Stevo985]

I just wish Referees were made to explain their decisions.

 

 

I don't know this,

 

but I bet refs would be happy to explain their decisions. But I reckon they're told not to.

 

I agree that would be good though. You'd at least get to hear his point of view.

I mean if a ref didn't give a penalty but then came out and said something like "i've seen it again and agree it was probably a penalty but from where I was standing at the time I didn't have a perfect view so couldn't give it as I wasn't 100% sure"

wouldn't we be a bit more sympathetic?

[Papillon]

I too think the referees should be given an opportunity to explain certain decisions right after the game. It is a game played by professionals, officiated by people basically who are not. In Norway (where I come from) the referees are often put on the spot after important decisions and you get to hear the reasoning behind it, and even though it can be completely wrong when you see it on TV, you sometimes get the respect for the referee because of his angle. If the referee is placed behind a few players and he cannot see anything, well then you understand why he cannot give a perfectly clear penalty. That happens every game, even though positioning is important for the really good refs, like it is for a good striker trying to score a goal.

 

When these guys make an awful decision and we never hear from them, well we kind of respect them even less and it seems arrogant (even though we know they aren't allowed to speak). Another thing is that if a ref sees a very bad mistake he can apologize on live TV and that will be that. Many teams are **** over each single week, but if the person in charge sees the mistake and says sorry I guess many people will feel better - even though the decision can never be taken back.

 

This campaign about respect and all that is utter bullshit in my eyes. The officials are not the professionals here, they can be subbed in two seconds and even I could take a few courses and become a referee over time. I could not become a professional footballer though, that ship has sailed a long time ago. They have chosen this profession and they are paid incredible sums to whistle and call a few offsides, that also mean they have to stand up when they have done wrong.

 

Refs are humans, they make mistakes, and in retrospect an explanation and an apology is all we need to think better of them. Now they are guarded and that's not right IMO.

[Kwan]

I think it's absolutely ridiculous how much protection the referees are given. There is nothing wrong with them being allowed to give one.

An ump blew a call to give a pitcher a perfect game and had to explain afterwards that he was wrong. Nothing happened to him. The players kept playing, he was still an umpire and the game went on but at least everyone knew that it was the wrong decision.

It's just baffling to me.

[SikhInTrinity]

Remember that Rodriguez pen, well Halsey who gave it said he made a mistake. About a year later.

[Whatsthismalarky]

Remember that Rodriguez pen, well Halsey who gave it said he made a mistake. About a year later.

 

Was that in his book that the FA and match officials group tried to stop getting published, and then started getting the media to attack his personal life when they couldn't? Having Mark Halsey on BT Sport explaining some of the decisions etc. is quite interesting actually.

 

One thing I'd like to know is when we're going to be given a penalty for a handball in the box. When was the last time we got given one? I can't remember one since O'neill left, even though there has been incidents like John Terry handballing on the line from Ireland's shot under Mcleish (Ireland then hit in the rebound but its still a red card offence, so why should he get away with it). Also John Terry handballing it with arms held above his head at the start of this season. A couple seasons back (either Houllier or Mcleish) I remember a cross going all the way from the right side, travelling all the way to the left side of the box and hitting a defenders outstreched arm - nothing given. Those are just the obvious stonewall ones I can remember, then there's all the ones from shots/crosses where it hit the arm from a very little distance/ball was travelling very fast which fall under various degrees of 'harsh but I've seen them given'.

 

On the the hand we have for example Man City game with Weimann literally not touching the ball and its given. Same game Bannan's handball was very harsh (didn't he slip and the ball hit his arm as he fell or something? I forget). Then Clark this season I can see why it was given but it was a harsh decision. There has been a few handballs from us where we got away without a penalty, but I just can't remember the last time we got a handball decision like that give us a penalty.

[briny_ear]

I've never heard of fans who think their team has benefitted from officiating.

True. In fact, I was sitting amongst the Fulham fans on Sunday and I can assure you that they thought Dean was giving every decision Villa's way.

[BOF]

I've seen us benefit from officiating. It's why I like Michael Oliver when he refs us. The amount of times I've commented that "oops, we got away with that one" when he's officiating us has been plenty. On the whole I'd agree, very few fans can be unbiased watching a game; or more often watching a ref. But some of us can

[SikhInTrinity]

 

Remember that Rodriguez pen, well Halsey who gave it said he made a mistake. About a year later.

 

Was that in his book that the FA and match officials group tried to stop getting published, and then started getting the media to attack his personal life when they couldn't? Having Mark Halsey on BT Sport explaining some of the decisions etc. is quite interesting actually.

 

One thing I'd like to know is when we're going to be given a penalty for a handball in the box. When was the last time we got given one? I can't remember one since O'neill left, even though there has been incidents like John Terry handballing on the line from Ireland's shot under Mcleish (Ireland then hit in the rebound but its still a red card offence, so why should he get away with it). Also John Terry handballing it with arms held above his head at the start of this season. A couple seasons back (either Houllier or Mcleish) I remember a cross going all the way from the right side, travelling all the way to the left side of the box and hitting a defenders outstreched arm - nothing given. Those are just the obvious stonewall ones I can remember, then there's all the ones from shots/crosses where it hit the arm from a very little distance/ball was travelling very fast which fall under various degrees of 'harsh but I've seen them given'.

 

On the the hand we have for example Man City game with Weimann literally not touching the ball and its given. Same game Bannan's handball was very harsh (didn't he slip and the ball hit his arm as he fell or something? I forget). Then Clark this season I can see why it was given but it was a harsh decision. There has been a few handballs from us where we got away without a penalty, but I just can't remember the last time we got a handball decision like that give us a penalty.

 

 

No he mentioned it on the BT Sports panel yesterday with the two Villa fans on there. Saying he made a mistake thinking Rodriguez had been fouled, my anger wasn't with Halsey at the time it was the fact that Rodriguez cheated to get a pen, because he is English he got away with it, even had his mate Lambert saying it was a stonewall penalty afterwards.

[Zatman]

Even Meulensteen said the penalty was lucky, and that he would have been disapointed had they not been awarded that in the same situation. Mike Dean was atrocious today, not only the big calls, but all the little calls affecting the overall run of play were continually in Fulham's favour. 

 

the part in 2nd half when Gabby was fouled and then stayed down injured in the centre circle was pretty poor refereeing when he never stopped game. 

 

 

though as bad as Dean was their can be no excuses to losing vs a poor team

[Stevo985]

 

 

Remember that Rodriguez pen, well Halsey who gave it said he made a mistake. About a year later.

 

Was that in his book that the FA and match officials group tried to stop getting published, and then started getting the media to attack his personal life when they couldn't? Having Mark Halsey on BT Sport explaining some of the decisions etc. is quite interesting actually.

 

One thing I'd like to know is when we're going to be given a penalty for a handball in the box. When was the last time we got given one? I can't remember one since O'neill left, even though there has been incidents like John Terry handballing on the line from Ireland's shot under Mcleish (Ireland then hit in the rebound but its still a red card offence, so why should he get away with it). Also John Terry handballing it with arms held above his head at the start of this season. A couple seasons back (either Houllier or Mcleish) I remember a cross going all the way from the right side, travelling all the way to the left side of the box and hitting a defenders outstreched arm - nothing given. Those are just the obvious stonewall ones I can remember, then there's all the ones from shots/crosses where it hit the arm from a very little distance/ball was travelling very fast which fall under various degrees of 'harsh but I've seen them given'.

 

On the the hand we have for example Man City game with Weimann literally not touching the ball and its given. Same game Bannan's handball was very harsh (didn't he slip and the ball hit his arm as he fell or something? I forget). Then Clark this season I can see why it was given but it was a harsh decision. There has been a few handballs from us where we got away without a penalty, but I just can't remember the last time we got a handball decision like that give us a penalty.

 

 

No he mentioned it on the BT Sports panel yesterday with the two Villa fans on there. Saying he made a mistake thinking Rodriguez had been fouled, my anger wasn't with Halsey at the time it was the fact that Rodriguez cheated to get a pen, because he is English he got away with it, even had his mate Lambert saying it was a stonewall penalty afterwards.

 

That was when Nigel Adkins gave the incredible excuse of something like

 

"yes there's no contact. but if he hadn't have moved his foot out of the way there would have been"

[AVTuco]

I've seen us benefit from officiating. It's why I like Michael Oliver when he refs us. The amount of times I've commented that "oops, we got away with that one" when he's officiating us has been plenty. On the whole I'd agree, very few fans can be unbiased watching a game; or more often watching a ref. But some of us can

Even if you can BOF , fans of this (or any other) team as a whole probably can't. I think it's a waste of energy to dwell in their poor decisions. Yell it out of your system and forget. An explanation or apology won't get us more points.

[danceoftheshamen]

The thing is we can sit and discuss the merits of whether the ref was right or wrong in a certain game all day long but for me the answer is simple...

 

Bring in the flag system used in American football!!

 

This would solve the problem pretty much, never entirely but at least it would mean 99% of the big decisions got given correctly. This would also surely reduce the pressure on the referees and also help reduce the amount of cheating/diving and the like in the game in general whilst also removing one of the main stigmas from the sport..Diving and play acting!..

 

At the end of the day what would be the point in diving for a penalty if 9 times out of 10 it was going to be spotted on the review of the incident? This would also mean those cheating players would be brought to book much more too.

 

This would barely disrupt the game either as when a penalty is awarded there is always a long delay as one team surrounds the Ref and complains (Another thing which would be pointless with the flag system in place) and then eventually the kick is taken... Ditto with a key sending off!.. so the delay is already present but we largely get the incorrect decision and send tens of thousands of paying supporters home with a bitter taste from the day.... 

 

The alternative is we use the flag system!

 

A player dives... lets say the Fulham players dives 

 

Paul Lambert throws his hand held flag onto the pitch indicating he wants the decision reviewed.

 

There is no point in the players rushing to surround the officials as they know it will be reviewed now anyway.

 

Very quickly the Ref liases via his headset with the 4th official in the video room who then analyses the incident from different angles... then the Referee goes to the pitchside video monitor to see for himself the verdict and then either stands by his original verdict or reverses it.... This last part is key because it gives the referee the opportunity to visually correct his own error thus appeasing the crowd and not affecting his standing as an official... this is the bit which Pilchard was referring to in his post where there is currently a blanket of silence and no accountability for referees... This would mean the error has been corrected so no need to then berate the official who made the incorrect call in the first place.

 

So correct decision is given... Fulham don't get the Penalty and Villa are right in the game... They may still play poorly and lose but at least the fans can go home in the knowledge that we lost fair and square... It also means the manager would have to face the real reason for the defeat not sidestep it by having the option, correctly so it has to be said, of blaming the officials!

 

Edited to add a couple more relevant points....

 

The Fulham player would also get booked, thus reducing the chance he'll do it again. 

 

I actually think this would replace mass frustration and anger in the fans with a new and quite exciting angle on things... the anticipation of whether the decision would be turned over or not for example!

 

I know Fifa and Mr Blatter in particular have issues with this as they think this would remove the talking points after the games but i just don't see that... If anything it would move the talking points onto the bits about the actual game itself like how well a player played or didn't play or how good a goal that was etc... in effect replacing negative chatter about a bunch of officials, which surrounds the game currently, with chat about the actual football, players, managers and day the day out in general.

 

Surely but surely this has to be the way forward? ......Would be interested in all your thoughts?

Edited December 10, 2013 by danceoftheshamen