Mark Halsey's Thoughts on Hooperman

[Yellow Through and Through 0]

This is a direct, unedited quote from Mark Halsey on his blog today. Interesting as retired referees are usually rather reluctant to critisise their brethren.

''Looking back at Simon Hooper’s decisions yesterday, Norwich City fans can feel very disappointed and upset. I don’t blame him because if he’s given the game he’s going to do the game, I blame the PGMOL management that appointed him to it.

His first decision – the challenge by Glenn Murray on Graham Dorrans – he lost his chance to stamp his authority on the game early on. You look at the challenge – if it’s careless then it’s a free-kick, nothing else. If it’s reckless, it’s a free-kick and a yellow card. If it’s a reckless challenge that endangers the player’s safety with excessive force, it’s a red card for serious foul play.

I know it was early in the game, a lot of experienced referees would’ve red carded that, but for me, you could accept it if a yellow card had come out. But he lost his chance to stamp his authority and the players knew that– they knew what they could get away with. From that moment he didn’t have the respect of the players.

The second big decision was the overhead kick from Cameron Jerome – for me that was a fantastic goal, that’s what fans pay a lot of money to see, it was similar to Graziano Pelle’s against QPR last season.

It should have been awarded, it wasn’t dangerous play, he was in front of the defender, the defender’s gone to try and head the ball away, the goal should have been given – that was the wrong decision. If you go looking for trouble, trouble will find you. Simon Hooper went looking for trouble when he should have just given the goal and got the hell out of it.

And then the third major decision which he’s got wrong was a push by Connor Wickham on Sebastien Bassong, it’s an absolutely blatant penalty. He’s in a great position, he’s looking straight at it – how’s he not seen that as a penalty?''

A slightly more diplomatic version of my thoughts however. Still mad as hell at one of the worst displays of officiating I''ve seen in over 40 years.

[FCC 76]

Agree with all this - especially "Why was he given the game?"

No way would he have got Utd v Spurs to gain experience. Less fashionable teams are testing grounds for refs - hence bigger clubs get better refs. Whenever it happened (first or last game of the season) that was a massive decision for us. A point could be the difference at the end of the season.

The Premier League should be a level playing field - but the referee allocation isn''t. Big clubs - better officials.

Personally, I think it was his big chance and he was determined to get noticed. Should never get another Norwich game all season, but the other 18 Premier clubs should have to have him once.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

We said the same straight after the game. An experienced Ref would have , at least, carded Murray. Because it was his first game, Hooper wasn''t ever going to give him a red. He didn''t want controversy, but by goodness didn''t he bring it upon himself.

Too hindered by the powers that be, like Refs are at the top levels. they are hindered by the rules that the top brass have brought in. There needs to be a big sea change, to make things better

[chicken 0]

I''m surprised they gave it to him on the back of the opening fixture of last season too.

I don''t envy the refs job, but like a lot or roles like that in life some people approach it as a position of power and others approach it as a position of responsibility.

I have reffed before and I try to do nothing more than ensure the game is played safely and with the right attitude and behaviour. I don''t see it as a position where you should pull up every infringement - in fact I don''t believe the rules are written in that way either.

The problem with some refs is this "battle for control". It''s very simple. You tell the captains where your line in the sand is before the game. The first infringement from either side should result in a word with them again. Unless the incident is serious. After that you bring out the cards. Again, unless anything is exceptionally out of order.

I have found the less obstructive and pernickity you are as a ref the more players tend to get on with it and focus on the game.

Murray''s foul yesterday was, by the letter of the law, dangerous foul play. Rather than attempting to win the ball he was actually trying to prevent a player from playing the ball - two footed and studs first. Again Halsey has it right. One would reluctantly accept a yellow.

What he doesn''t point out is that Hooper appears to have realised this missed oppertunity and booked Tettey for a far less dangerous foul as an attempt to reassert himself.

There were examples of this all day. I spoke to some of my own players today - defenders and attackers alike felt that because the defender was going across from the wrong side of Jerome it should have stood. It would be dangerous if Jerome was challenging for that ball and the defender had been the other side of him.

I disagree with the suggestion it would be a foul anywhere else on the pitch.