Refereeing Standards

[Tony Le Mesmer]

Been quite a lot banded about recently with Scottish Refs set to go on strike.

I am actually completely sick to death of hearing TV Pundits, managers, fans & players bleeting on about how crap Refs are today. The incident in the Man U Spurs game was pretty much the icing on the cake. Completely 100% the fault of a player, game was more or less lost anyway, and yet you get days of bashing the Referee who was simply (and correctly) applying the laws of the game which, funnily enough, is what he is there to do. Total Joke.

How many ex players do we see Refereeing Professional games? Basically, none.

How many of YOU have taken a Referees course, or want to become one? Only slightly more than none.

How much do Premier League clubs put together into improving Officials? No Idea, but in comparison to £200k a week wages, its jack shit.

As for the current standards, I put it to you that it is a lot higher than it was 20 years, even maybe 10 years ago.

For the slightly older fan, who can forget the likes of Brian Coddington, Clive Wilkes et all Referring our games?. These guys didnt even have a basic concept of the laws. Thats what you call a shit Ref. Standards are now way higher overall.

Personally, I think the Scottish Strike is only the start and this will run an run.

[Row Z Royal]

I think refereeing standards are probably the same as they have been for as long as I can remember (which ain't that long, I'll grant you). However, the difference today is the impact of the instant, 6-angle replay.

Now everyone from the manager to the arm-chair fan can call the ref rubbish because of the sliver of toe that caught the ball, as viewed from the exact opposite direction from the referee's viewpoint.

[gazzer, loyal royal]

theres also no new decent young refs coming though, mainly because they are put off becuase of the way refs are treated

[AndyRFC]

I have written an article on the scottish refs situation and hopefully will get round to sending it in to The Whiff

[handbags_harris]

...as viewed from the exact opposite direction from the referee's viewpoint.

And this is the crux of any argument. I'm not a qualified referee but as you personally know RZR, I've officiated four or five games and whilst I feel I could have done better all I have done is made decisions based on what I see my own eyes and hear with my own ears. There have been contentious decisions, yes, but quite frankly I go by the mantra that if I can't see an infringement then I don't give it. Last game I did at short notice, handball shout after a shot was blocked in the area. I didn't see a handball from the angle I was at, so I didn't give it. Simple as really. But the amount of stick I got from both sides in almost every game was just pathetic. Talk about throwing toys out of the pram...

At the same time, having overseen a few games I look at referees and linesmen with different eyes now. Certainly, unless it is absolutely clear, I always give officials the benefit of the doubt. But even then you look at the decisions they make, can see why they have given a particular infringement, yet at the same time you know that they haven't taken into accountany of the dynamics of an incident. I think a relatively basic understanding of the dynamics of a natural and unnatural fall will tell you if an infringement is taking place for example, or indeed the thought process of different sets of players. Again, for example, the defender who goes "shoulder-to-shoulder" with an attacker who has no hope of playing the ball, has no intention of playing the ball, and instead runs into the man with the sole aim of throwing him to the floor, is committing an offence, yet it very rarely goes punished. Just a couple of examples that referees and linesmen don't understand what is actually going on.

But whilst I dismay at the number of officiating errors in the professional game the amount of talk about officials irritates highly because, despite that one incident that irks a manager, there are 90 minutes plus injury time to win a game. Bad decisions don't help teams, but a referee, sh*t or not, makes a decision on the spot. Even our very own McDermott is starting to annoy because of his recent penchant for stating "we don't talk about referees but this or that decision has cost us". Now until the FA as overseers, FL and PL clubs also club together and ensure referees and linesmen start to understand the mentality of players in attempting to gain an unfair advantage, unfortunately there are always going to be a high number of contentious and debated decisions.

[Skyline]

I am actually completely sick to death of hearing TV Pundits, managers, fans & players bleeting on about how crap Refs are today.

It constantly surprises me how many basic mistakes in interpreting the rules made by managers, players, and pundits I pick up on, even with my own meagre understanding of the rules. It is amazing that managers and players show such little understanding of the Laws that govern the game that they play. And given that most pundits (although not commentators) are ex-players you'd also hope they would have an understanding of them as well.

One that sticks in my mind for some reason was on an edition of Goals on Sunday. Kamara was discussing a twice-taken penalty. For the first attempt the goalkeeper had moved off his line and the shot had either been saved or had gone wide - I forget which. Correctly the ref ordered the penalty to be retaken. On the second time the keeper moved again, but this time the penalty was scored, and the goal was awarded. Kamara's comment was along the lines of "Well if it had to be retaken because the keeper moved the first time, why wasn't it retaken the second time, as he moved again." Yet even the most cursory glance at the Law governing a penalty shows quite clearly why it is retaken the first time but not the second. Quite simply, if a penalty is missed but the defending team infringes, retake it, but if it is scored it is only retaken if the attacking team infringes.

I know we've had this discussion before, but the comparison between the knowledge of the Laws of the game displayed by football pundits is appalling when compared to the knowledge of the laws of cricket displayed by those who commentate on that game.

[Terminal Boardom]

It is way to easy for the spectator, pundit or viewer to pick holes in the decisons made by the men in black. Consider the view the referee has. At best, his eyes will be 5'8" above pitch level. Hardly the best view of proceedings. The same applies to the linesmen and 4th official. What does the punter have? Either sat quite a few feet above pitch level or using the benefit of the higher tv camera positions throughout the stadium.

I passed my Class 3 refereeing exam a long while back. I quickly realised as a 17 year old that I needed to play the game before officiating. I needed a better perspective and understanding of what went on from a players perspective. What gave me the final incentive to give up refereeing was the level of abuse I received during a youth match in Woodley. Who remembers the hounding Andy D'Urso got from Roy Keane etc? The youngsters see this on tv and they just expect to be able to do the same AND GET AWAY WITH IT.

Of course I made mistakes when refereeing. But they were honest, genuine mistakes because I could only give what I had seen. Where the officials can do better is in the way they interact with players on the pitch. A quiet word in passing goes a really long way. How many times have we seen a player fouled, referee plays on, then when the ball goes out of play cautions the offender. Great refereeing in my opinion. Or if not a caution then a word. Keeping the game flowing is the first priority for any official.

What can be done to help? Certainly, managers and players must be given a cooling off period after a game before speaking to the media. The match officials must also be given the opprtunity to communicate with the media afterwards. Sadly, I can not see this happening as the media, AND THE MAJORITY OF SPECTATORS, take great delight in undermining the authority and questioning the integrity of the match officials. I would love to see the so-called experts be called upon to officiate in games to appreciate how hard a task it is.

[TBM]

To be honest if you're going to be a ref then you must realise what comes with it.

Players and managers are constantly being slated by the media/fans so why should refs not be slated by managers/clubs? - a ref is always going to be 50% wrong even if the decision was correct, thats football. I personally think if a manager criticises a ref and it turns out the decision was in fact right, the manager/club should receive a fine (this may happen anyway)

Take that Arsenal game last night, Vella is totally cleaned out in the box and he gets booked for diving - why should that ref not receive criticism for it

[handbags_harris]

To a certain degree you're right TBMers, but the question remains - why should it be like that? Officials have dug themselves a hole by allowing players to get away with what they do, but the players also have a responsibility to their club and the game as a whole.

Massively hypocritical of me to say that mind

[soggy biscuit]

'no one understands the new offside rule, not even the refs understand it'
numerous pundits

yes they do, it's fairly straightforward.

[Y21_Royal]

It'll never happen because the authorities will, wrongly, see it as undermining officials, but I really do think referees should be miked up when they officiate. Under pressure from Sky, players would be forced to cut back their swearing and abuse of officials.

The second thing is that refs should be allowed to talk to the media after games and explain decisions. The Nani goal against Spurs is a case in point. If Clattenburg was encouraged to come out afterwards and talk us through his thought process and explain why he allowed the goal to stand, I honestly think he'd have got a lot less flak.

Both these ideas could go some way to humanise officials as well which could go a long way to cutting down the criticism.

I read an interview with Howard Webb a few months back about the WC final. In it he expressed his pride at being there and the fact that his father was there. He also talked through some of his decisions and admitted making errors, such as not sending de Jong off. Now you may not agree with his actions, but the insight meant that I had a degree of empathy for his position and that's one of the things thats really lacking.

On a slight tangent. I also don't think the FA are doing themselves any favours by fast tracking referees like Michael Oliver and Stuart Attwell. These two refs have been responsible for two of the worst decisions I've seen in recent years (Grant Holt's red card and the Watford 'goal') yet they're both rewarded with Premiership games and guess what, they make a mess in those as well

[6ft Kerplunk]

I've said it before but I'll say it again. All players, managers, pundits, commentators etc should have to learn the rules of football rather than having some kind of guess at what they think they are. As noted the offside rule is a prime example, all the pundits bleat on about how difficult it is, no-one else has that difficulty in understanding it. At the beginning of every season any changes to the rules and how they will be applied should be explained to managers (and their coaching staff) by the FA. Even extend that to BBC, ITV and Sky so they've got no excuses. Refs/refs assts don't have it easy, every mistake they make is highlighted by the media. Its not often that you actually hear a commentator saying "well I've just given the ref a load of stick for that decision but having looked at the reply he's spot on and I'm wrong."

[Y21_Royal]

I've said it before but I'll say it again. All players, managers, pundits, commentators etc should have to learn the rules of football rather than having some kind of guess at what they think they are. As noted the offside rule is a prime example, all the pundits bleat on about how difficult it is, no-one else has that difficulty in understanding it. At the beginning of every season any changes to the rules and how they will be applied should be explained to managers (and their coaching staff) by the FA. Even extend that to BBC, ITV and Sky so they've got no excuses. Refs/refs assts don't have it easy, every mistake they make is highlighted by the media. Its not often that you actually hear a commentator saying "well I've just given the ref a load of stick for that decision but having looked at the reply he's spot on and I'm wrong."

Exactly why a ref should be able to come out after a game and when challenged on an issue, such as an offisde, he can say "actually, if you check, that's in the rules"

[Elmer Park]

On a slight tangent. I also don't think the FA are doing themselves any favours by fast tracking referees like Michael Oliver and Stuart Attwell. These two refs have been responsible for two of the worst decisions I've seen in recent years (Grant Holt's red card and the Watford 'goal') yet they're both rewarded with Premiership games and guess what, they make a mess in those as well

You can add Anthony Taylor to that list. He is another 'young' referee who has been fast tracked onto the Select Group of referees allowed to referee Premiership matches yet look at the mess he made of the Sheffield United - Crystal Palace game last weekend.

There are a number of poor referees around but I don't subscribe to the theory that referees are any worse now than years ago. It's just that television coverage means we see all their mistakes and not just those at the matches we attend as was the case years ago. Also Internet discussions and radio phone ins mean incidents are more widely discussed and for much longer.

Overall though in games where our own teams are playing none of us can help seeing what we want to see and moaning about the referee is part of being a football supporter. It also appears to be part of being a football Manager and I have been disappointed to see McDermott has recently joined in the practice after initially rising above such things.

[handbags_harris]

I have said before within the realms of HNA that there should be a rule that an academy scholar who has been offered their first professional contract should be made to attend a referee's course and actually officiate 10 or so other league's academy games at something like U16 level. Maybe we could extend this to a part of the top level UEFA coaching badge so that those who want to coach to a good standard actually understand the rules and therefore minimise the impact of a "Chinese whispers" effect whereby an incorrect interpretation is coached into the game. Not only will this improve the knowledge of the laws of the game from the off, but I believe that it will also improve respect for officials.

[Y21_Royal]

I have said before within the realms of HNA that there should be a rule that an academy scholar who has been offered their first professional contract should be made to attend a referee's course and actually officiate 10 or so other league's academy games at something like U16 level. Maybe we could extend this to a part of the top level UEFA coaching badge so that those who want to coach to a good standard actually understand the rules and therefore minimise the impact of a "Chinese whispers" effect whereby an incorrect interpretation is coached into the game. Not only will this improve the knowledge of the laws of the game from the off, but I believe that it will also improve respect for officials.

^^^^ This

[Stranded]

I have said before within the realms of HNA that there should be a rule that an academy scholar who has been offered their first professional contract should be made to attend a referee's course and actually officiate 10 or so other league's academy games at something like U16 level. Maybe we could extend this to a part of the top level UEFA coaching badge so that those who want to coach to a good standard actually understand the rules and therefore minimise the impact of a "Chinese whispers" effect whereby an incorrect interpretation is coached into the game. Not only will this improve the knowledge of the laws of the game from the off, but I believe that it will also improve respect for officials.

I'd take that further and make it a rule that any coach/manager must pass a test on the rules of the game to be allowed to work in the game - they are retested every 2 or 3 years or when they change role.

[PEARCEY]

Been quite a lot banded about recently with Scottish Refs set to go on strike.

I am actually completely sick to death of hearing TV Pundits, managers, fans & players bleeting on about how crap Refs are today. The incident in the Man U Spurs game was pretty much the icing on the cake. Completely 100% the fault of a player, game was more or less lost anyway, and yet you get days of bashing the Referee who was simply (and correctly) applying the laws of the game which, funnily enough, is what he is there to do. Total Joke.

How many ex players do we see Refereeing Professional games? Basically, none.

How many of YOU have taken a Referees course, or want to become one? Only slightly more than none.

How much do Premier League clubs put together into improving Officials? No Idea, but in comparison to £200k a week wages, its jack shit.

As for the current standards, I put it to you that it is a lot higher than it was 20 years, even maybe 10 years ago.

For the slightly older fan, who can forget the likes of Brian Coddington, Clive Wilkes et all Referring our games?. These guys didnt even have a basic concept of the laws. Thats what you call a shit Ref. Standards are now way higher overall.

Personally, I think the Scottish Strike is only the start and this will run an run.

Fwiw Clive Wilkes is now working as a Police Officer in Gloucestershire.
As for referees I think they get a ridiculous amount of grief. Every mistake they make is scrutinised to the nth degree and they are mocked for making split second decisions by highly paid pundits who have the benefit of slow motion replays and all sorts of camera angles to look at before they need to cast judgement. I did some reffing of our under 8's last Saturday and even at that level one or two decisions were close calls. I certainly wouldn't want all the crap that goes with being a referee. The abuse they get is disgraceful.

[T.R.O.L.I.]

The second thing is that refs should be allowed to talk to the media after games and explain decisions. The Nani goal against Spurs is a case in point. If Clattenburg was encouraged to come out afterwards and talk us through his thought process and explain why he allowed the goal to stand, I honestly think he'd have got a lot less flak.

Totally agree with this and have done for a while. I think in all the televised games I've seen down the years, I've only ever see the ref being interviewed 2 or 3 times before - and ISTR these were referees towards the end of their career so they didn't have the wrath of the FA to worry about.

[royal tee]

I have said before within the realms of HNA that there should be a rule that an academy scholar who has been offered their first professional contract should be made to attend a referee's course and actually officiate 10 or so other league's academy games at something like U16 level. Maybe we could extend this to a part of the top level UEFA coaching badge so that those who want to coach to a good standard actually understand the rules and therefore minimise the impact of a "Chinese whispers" effect whereby an incorrect interpretation is coached into the game. Not only will this improve the knowledge of the laws of the game from the off, but I believe that it will also improve respect for officials.

Suonds like a great idea but is Colin not a qualified referee who has handled games - doesn't seem to make any difference to his outbursts