Poor Refs

[Yellowbeagle 0]

Now this is a good way to deal with a ref who has had a shocker. Lock them in the dressing room overnight to contemplate their cr*pness.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/nov/04/trabzonspor-president-suspended-locking-referee-stadium

[0ridgemanddMMyyyy0Falseen-USTrue 0]

In the view of Mike Riley (head of referees) referees don''t have shockers. He recently reported that they are getting more decisions right. Would be much better if he didn''t have such a secret squirrel approach to the standard of refereeing. Managers have to give an interview shortly after a game and must not question referees whilst referees never state why they give decisions.

[SwindonCanary 455]

They are not poor, they get paid very well for the job !

[E.L.F. 0]

Officials in most professional sporting leagues have become incompetent, not just footy. Was watching the Toronto Blue Jays in the MLB playoffs last month and while they lost to the better team, they got shafted by the on field officials every match. That''s 6 on field and a video review centre. It was pathetic.

I believe that they just can''t keep up with the pace of the players anymore along with some who are on the take.

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

[quote user="E.L.F."]Officials in most professional sporting leagues have become incompetent, not just footy. Was watching the Toronto Blue Jays in the MLB playoffs last month and while they lost to the better team, they got shafted by the on field officials every match. That''s 6 on field and a video review centre. It was pathetic.

I believe that they just can''t keep up with the pace of the players anymore along with some who are on the take.[/quote]I believe that there are only really two options when it comes to poor officials. The 1st is that they''re incompetent and not up to the task at hand, which would lead to the question of why do they keep getting work as professional sports referees? The 2nd option is that they are corrupt, and are intentionally shafting certain teams because they have been instructed to do so and want to keep their jobs.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

If refs could discuss their decisions, that would inevitably force them to accept they were wrong in some cases, otherwise it would be as pathetic/pointless as politicians refusing to accept they''ve ever made a change in policy.  And if a ref admitted he was wrong in a key game, clubs would be suing at the drop of a hat.

 

Personally I think in the Prem refs are not bad overall, allowing for the fact that they have to make the decision in a split second with no replay.  I have two main problems with them - there is a general bias in favour of the bigger teams which I think comes from the fact that they ref for them more regularly and get to know who the players are so tend to favour them, etc; second, there are some Prem refs who enjoy being in the limelight and enjoy making the big decisions.  Clattenburg is the obvious example.

Lower league refs are simply not as good, and they tend to duck making big decisions which I think is partly down to lack of confidence but also because they know that if they give a penalty or disallow a goal etc, it will get looked at in detail, whereas if the don''t give anything, the chances are it won''t get nearly as much attention.

 

I think there should be scope for a ref to call for a video review when a game has stopped eg over whether to allow a goal or give a penalty etc.  The game has enough stoppages that it wouldn''t do any harm.

[Woodman 92]

''Clattenburg is the obvious example.''

Celebrity ref Mark Clattenburg is our ref this Saturday.

[It's Character Forming 1,160]

[quote user="Woodman"]''Clattenburg is the obvious example.'' Celebrity ref Mark Clattenburg is our ref this Saturday.[/quote]

 

You got it !  I just hope that for once he gives a controversial decision that decides the game in our favour.  Not holding my breath though...

[Trevor Hockey's Beard 526]

If my memory serves me well, Mike Riley was one of the worst refs of his generation - weak and cowardly.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

[quote user="ridgeman"]In the view of Mike Riley (head of referees) referees don''t have shockers. He recently reported that they are getting more decisions right. Would be much better if he didn''t have such a secret squirrel approach to the standard of refereeing. Managers have to give an interview shortly after a game and must not question referees whilst referees never state why they give decisions.[/quote]Nor do we have any information as to how they come up with this ''getting more decisions right'' metric. How is that being measured? How was the data collected? Where is the data?It reminds me of the FIFA and the Garcia Report. ''We can''t show you the report, but take our word for it, we''re not corrupt."