BOF Posted December 11, 2013 Moderator Share Posted December 11, 2013 *shouldn't. But yeah, I agree with the fishy bloke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilchard Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 (edited) *shouldn't. But yeah, I agree with the fishy bloke. Woops God Bless the Edit button Edited December 11, 2013 by Pilchard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 Ponky, I agree. Mantis please re-read the 4th paragraph in my last message. It's where i addressed what you then said i had not addressed. Of course technology like headsets for communication and goal line technologies can and will reduce error, but error from the referee is still part of the game according to FIFA, and the FA in the laws of the game. Removing referee error is no more likely than removing all player or management, or villa talk error. I am adamantly opposed to anything that would stop the flow of play to try to make certain the unavoidable is avoided, BTW i understand your argument. But player errors are there because players are necessary, like it or not, an arbiter is mecessary as well. The idea of letting the 2 captains agree on all the decisions was abandoned long ago, for good reason. It didnt work. Referees are necessary participants. Anytime any human is involved errors occur and are unavoidable, hate to admit it, but my surgeon isn't perfect under ideal conditions. I am in favor of greater accountability as i suggested and/or as ponky suggested. No, you didn't address it and to be honest I don't think this really answers it either. Player error and refereeing error are two separate things, and this is shown in the reactions from fans. If a player makes a bad pass or misses an open goal fans of the team that players play for will be annoyed but there won't be a feeling of injustice because it's all part of the game. On the other hand, blatant refereeing errors are seen as just that - injustices. Even if more technology was brought in to reduce referee error (and I never actually said I was for this) there's no way it would move on to reducing errors from players. I never said referees weren't necessary. Of course they are We are clearly having a failure to communicate. I thought I explained my attempt to use the absurd idea of using technology to correct all player erross as an ilustration that it is equally absurd to use technology to correct all referee error. Human beings make errors. Period. In my opinion, supported by the Laws of the Game, that includes errors made by players, managers, referees, groundskeepers, etc. They are all a part of the game. You agree that the referees are a necessary part of the game. Once they are necessary, their errors are inherent and inescapable. Just like players. If you can't follow my attempt to illustrate abusurdity with the absurd, then I can't explain it any better than that. Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but are your seriously claiming that I'm wrong because fans react differently to referee errors, than they respond to player errors? I react differently to Fulham errors than I do to Villa errors, are only one a part of the game? Again, I think one of us is completely mis-understanding the other. I'm willing to operate on the assumption that I am the one misunderstanding you. But if we determine what's right and wrong based on fans reactions, we have made the discussion of human error explode to infinite proportions. I don't think we want to leave foul replay review to a vote of those in attendance, or a SKY selected mix of fans from one team or the other, or even fans at all! I certainly don't want commentators making those decisions. Simply becuase fans feel injustice doesn't mean the errror is inherently different. It's still error. I would rather not let the fans reactions be the arbiter of truth. There is already enough of a home field advantage (for everyone On related topics relative to referee error (which I and the laws of the game say are part of the game Sorry, couldn't resist.... ) Similarly to BOF, based on my experiences, I am able to see referee decisions with a bit more neutrality than most. BTW, did you know that research indicates that teams wearing red have more fouls called against them? Also, if neutrals are shown the same video in mirror image, they interpret a challenge as more physical and violent if the aggression comes from the left to the right than if it comes from the right to the left. (This research utilized subjects whose native language reads left to right, so that might have impacted those results.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted December 11, 2013 Share Posted December 11, 2013 We are clearly having a failure to communicate. I thought I explained my attempt to use the absurd idea of using technology to correct all player erross as an ilustration that it is equally absurd to use technology to correct all referee error. Human beings make errors. Period. In my opinion, supported by the Laws of the Game, that includes errors made by players, managers, referees, groundskeepers, etc. They are all a part of the game. You agree that the referees are a necessary part of the game. Once they are necessary, their errors are inherent and inescapable. Just like players. If you can't follow my attempt to illustrate abusurdity with the absurd, then I can't explain it any better than that. Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but are your seriously claiming that I'm wrong because fans react differently to referee errors, than they respond to player errors? I react differently to Fulham errors than I do to Villa errors, are only one a part of the game? Again, I think one of us is completely mis-understanding the other. I'm willing to operate on the assumption that I am the one misunderstanding you. But if we determine what's right and wrong based on fans reactions, we have made the discussion of human error explode to infinite proportions. I don't think we want to leave foul replay review to a vote of those in attendance, or a SKY selected mix of fans from one team or the other, or even fans at all! I certainly don't want commentators making those decisions. Simply becuase fans feel injustice doesn't mean the errror is inherently different. It's still error. I would rather not let the fans reactions be the arbiter of truth. There is already enough of a home field advantage (for everyone On related topics relative to referee error (which I and the laws of the game say are part of the game Sorry, couldn't resist.... ) Similarly to BOF, based on my experiences, I am able to see referee decisions with a bit more neutrality than most. BTW, did you know that research indicates that teams wearing red have more fouls called against them? Also, if neutrals are shown the same video in mirror image, they interpret a challenge as more physical and violent if the aggression comes from the left to the right than if it comes from the right to the left. (This research utilized subjects whose native language reads left to right, so that might have impacted those results.) I just find it absurd that you can even make the connection. To put it simply, if referees were perfect and made no mistakes whatsoever then that wouldn't impact too much on the game as a competitive spectacle. If players on the other didn't make any mistakes then there'd be no point in even watching. I mentioned fan reactions to illustrate how bringing in technology to correct refereeing mistakes wouldn't lead to technology being introduced to correct player mistakes. Find me one person that wants the latter to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 Ok, for whatever reason, you make absolutely no sense to me. It truly feels like you are quarreling just to be quarrelsome. Not me, so, I'll go back to talking about Villa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 (edited) Ok, for whatever reason, you make absolutely no sense to me. It truly feels like you are quarreling just to be quarrelsome. Not me, so, I'll go back to talking about Villa I'm not even quarreling, I'm just responding to your posts. No need to be rude. Lots of people want more technology introduced to reduce errors from officials but no one wants that for players. I just can't understand how you even made that connection in the first place. Edited December 12, 2013 by Mantis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skruff Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 A referee is there to uphold(correct word?) the law. If technology helps doing that it's great. Guy dives, he should be caught. Someone throws in a dirty elbow should be caught. It's not something that should simply pass just because the referee had his back turned or view blocked by a player. Especially not when it's there for everyone to see. A simple replay, that's ready 2 seconds after the incident where you clearly see what happens in any given situation. Any referee would make their mind up even before the players were done pretending to be hurt or discussing/complaining to ref wether it was yellow card or not. Have the 4th official watch a screen and communicate with referee, just in the same way as the linesmen do. Or heck, give the referee a ipad attached to his belt. A referee making a mistake is a man who's there to upheld the law but fails too. A player making a mistake is an athlete testing his skills and being challenged by other athletes. It's in no way comparable in my opinion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted December 12, 2013 Share Posted December 12, 2013 A referee is there to uphold(correct word?) the law. If technology helps doing that it's great. Guy dives, he should be caught. Someone throws in a dirty elbow should be caught. It's not something that should simply pass just because the referee had his back turned or view blocked by a player. Especially not when it's there for everyone to see. A simple replay, that's ready 2 seconds after the incident where you clearly see what happens in any given situation. Any referee would make their mind up even before the players were done pretending to be hurt or discussing/complaining to ref wether it was yellow card or not. Have the 4th official watch a screen and communicate with referee, just in the same way as the linesmen do. Or heck, give the referee a ipad attached to his belt. A referee making a mistake is a man who's there to upheld the law but fails too. A player making a mistake is an athlete testing his skills and being challenged by other athletes. It's in no way comparable in my opinion. I was looking for a way to phrase this exact thought and couldn't come up with anything. Perfectly put. I'd add that yellow cards should be able to he appealed as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted December 13, 2013 Share Posted December 13, 2013 (edited) deleted post Edited December 13, 2013 by srsmithusa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danceoftheshamen Posted December 15, 2013 Author Share Posted December 15, 2013 A referee is there to uphold(correct word?) the law. If technology helps doing that it's great. Guy dives, he should be caught. Someone throws in a dirty elbow should be caught. It's not something that should simply pass just because the referee had his back turned or view blocked by a player. Especially not when it's there for everyone to see. A simple replay, that's ready 2 seconds after the incident where you clearly see what happens in any given situation. Any referee would make their mind up even before the players were done pretending to be hurt or discussing/complaining to ref wether it was yellow card or not. Have the 4th official watch a screen and communicate with referee, just in the same way as the linesmen do. Or heck, give the referee a ipad attached to his belt. A referee making a mistake is a man who's there to upheld the law but fails too. A player making a mistake is an athlete testing his skills and being challenged by other athletes. It's in no way comparable in my opinion. I was looking for a way to phrase this exact thought and couldn't come up with anything. Perfectly put. I'd add that yellow cards should be able to he appealed as well. I was too but i think Skruff has nailed it... The players are paid to play football and that will always involve mistakes as will any sport on the planet. Referees on the other hand are paid to make sure it is played fairly and ensure the correct decisions are enforced in the game... The players however know that he can only see in one direction at a time so have mastered the art of cheating over many years.. Well now the Referee has the option of using some new tools at his disposal to help prevent this cheating surely it is crazy to not use them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 (edited) Arsenal had two goals and a penalty chalked off today (edit: yesterday). Surprised Wenger did not make a big thing of it. Edited December 15, 2013 by Con Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ponky Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 I notice our old friend Kevin Shitforbrains was in the thick of it as Fourth Official at the brawl between Newcastle and Southampton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nigel Posted December 15, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted December 15, 2013 Well our ref was quite fair wasn't he! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Con Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 (edited) Well our ref was quite fair wasn't he! Yes. Lee Mason was it? Officials were noticeably fair, compared to the typical game at Stamford Bridge, Fergie Trafford and Man City. Man Utd had it easy though so you could argue the ref didn't need to get involved to help them win. Maybe that's me being cynical. I might have sent off Baker for his challenge on Welbeck. Edited December 15, 2013 by Con Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaChris Posted December 15, 2013 Share Posted December 15, 2013 Baker was very lucky not to get a red card in the last 15 minutes I thought for various incidents. Lowton also lunged in, we really lost our discipline towards the end of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted December 20, 2013 Share Posted December 20, 2013 The most interesting referee related event in the MU match was how easily their players manipulated the referee. We had three players cautioned (Lowton, Gabby, Baker) because after a tackle that the referee had not called (Baker should have been, and maybe Lowton) the aggrieved manUre player got up pushing, angry, "squaring up." Our players instinctively, but naively responded in kind... (in the case of Gabby it was delayed and he should have known better). When you square up after a foul, even if you got shoved in the back (like Lowton and Baker) the easy way out for the referee is to book them both. It's exactly what he did. But teams that have been coached and made strategy based on the referee, know this. Coaching tip for you youngsters out there. If you want to slow the match down... of if you want the referee to call more fouls in general (let less contact go as acceptable) it's easy. Over-react with aggression and hostility to the contact made. Overreacting with aggression aimed at the referee is wasted. He will ignore your appeal and/or book you. Overreact with aggression aimed at the opponent(s) and the opposing team players that defend thier teammate. (Don't aim at the head or neck or groin, don't commit striking or spitting, in which case, it's just easy to send you off.) Again, this aggression is after the play, behind the play, not just playing more physically. The modern referee assessor may (but likely not) question a referee if he ignores appeals for more calls. He will not ignore, if it appears the referee is losing control of the match. Non- play aggression between the teams will force the referee to start calling the game more tightly and decrease the flow of the match, helping you kill off the clock and any flow or rhythm the opponent may wish to develop. If you watch the game again on tape (painful though it will be) you will notice that after each of these incidents there are several minutes in which the referee restablishes a tone of tighter control on the contact. BTW, from Villa's standpoint. Ignore the shove in the back, walk away. Laugh off contact, jump up ready to play. Help any opponent up with a big friendly smile and a laugh. Even if the referee warns you or books you, take it all with a good natured, smiling, "we're all just having fun out here" kind of attitude. And if the referee does respond to an incident with a double booking (safe way to control a dangerous situation without causing too much ill will) play squeeky clean for the next few minutes. The referee will be looking for a chance to call some little things to set the tone of match control higher. One last thought, if you don't think that lots of clubs are coaching their players to manage referees like this, you're sadly mistaken. It's almost as prevalent as diving. Just less obvious. The surprising thing was that an experienced refereee was so clearly and easily influenced in this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Following up on my last post... Albrighton gave a great example against Stoke. He was pushed off the field of play. Since the ball and the push were both out of play, the referee had three options. Caution Stoke, restart with a throw-in to Stoke. Verbally admonish Stoke, throw-in to Stoke. Ignore the contact, throw-in to Stoke. He chose the third. (I thought he should have done, at least, the second. Not just becuase I'm Villa biased, but also think he would have instilled more confidence in the players.) If Weimann had been joined by some others and they had done more pushing and hostility toward the culprit, more action would have been much more likely. In any case, after the minor handbags that ensued, you can predict the referee will be looking for something small he can call to re-assert control. So, within 10 seconds, Albrighton goes in, knee high, studs showing. A caution for Albrighton was inevitable. Foolish timing for a high risk tackle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 i haven't the tackle on the edge of the box when he was last man back discussed anywhere, the commentator on MOTD said someone was covering, was there ****, the only reason for it only being a yellow i could see was the touch was a little heavy and it might have run through to the keeper anyway but i think it was a poor decision, he should have sent him off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srsmithusa Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Don't buy the covering defender idea. The "touch was too strong and Andi had no real chance to reach it before the keeper" is impossible to measure. Did the contact or eminent contact, impact Andi's last touch? As a villa fan, i'm with you, but the refs decision on this one was reasonably defensible, at least. (Damn it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted December 24, 2013 Share Posted December 24, 2013 Don't buy the covering defender idea. The "touch was too strong and Andi had no real chance to reach it before the keeper" is impossible to measure. Did the contact or eminent contact, impact Andi's last touch? As a villa fan, i'm with you, but the refs decision on this one was reasonably defensible, at least. (Damn it) I think the touch was bad enough that it was no longer a clear goal scoring opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts