As someone on here alluded to earlier, referees can be like teachers. Unfortunately I'm both, though fortunately being a PE teacher hopefully I'm seen in the 'cool' camp. Though I doubt it. There are similarities however. As a teacher I want nothing more than a good lesson, one that is enjoyable and everyone gets something from. To get this, I need the pupil to co-operate; to manage their behaviour and to play their part. If they don't then I have to repsond and react accordingly. I don't relish it, nor look for it. But I can't ignore it. Similarly I'm sure the vast majority of refs want a game with no incident, no big issues, no cards or sendings off. But, if the players cheat, dive, swear, feign injury etc etc then the ref has to act. A ref can only go unnoticed if the players and managers behave like adults and not kids.
When I was a Sunday league ref I used to have the lawbook in my sock like a shinpad, when the players wanted to tell me I was wrong I would get the rulebook out and invite them to tell me why, and where it said so! They always always shut up. The thing is the players (and I happened to ask a Kent league player today) don't know the laws of the game, and have certainly never read them. The pundits have not read them too, try ringing a football phone in and ask the panel to quote from the Laws of the Game book they have there in the studio! How many posters here have bothered to read them? Did you know for example that in Law 11 (offside) It does not say that the ball has to have been played FORWARD? (look it up). I used to enjoy being a ref, but eventually got fed up with abuse, especially from blokes who were much worse players than I was a ref, and even when desperate managers would phone me trying to get a ref for their weekend game, offering double the fee, I didn't bother. Treat the refs like the weather or pitch conditions, can be lousy, but unlikely to be biased.
As a former reasonable standard rugby player I can say in every ruck and maul someone is cheating or conning the ref.The difference is when we were caught we take it because as stated on here its 10 metres and any more chat can lead to a yellow or even red card.The best put down from a ref we got was in a second team bounce game where a few dodgy decisions were made and the players were getting at the ref.He blew the whistle called all 30 players over to him.He then acknowledged he was a shite ref and then pointed out if we were any good we would be playing at Murrayfield and not on this shitty park pitch! He had perfect control after that.
It was a pig awful decision. It was 2 yards in front of the assistant near the half way line and the Fulham player clearly punched the ball out of play yet they get the throw and that was in the PL. Most decisions I can defend but that one I can't. The assistant dropped a catastrophically huge b*ll*ck that day.
Didn't the linesman flag for a free kick for handball, rather than a throw in, against Traore when it was the Fulham player who clearly punched it? I'm sure the free kick then got launched into our penalty area & they scored.
It was a pig awful decision. It was 2 yards in front of the assistant near the half way line and the Fulham player clearly punched the ball out of play yet they get the throw and that was in the PL. Most decisions I can defend but that one I can't. The assistant dropped a catastrophically huge b*ll*ck that day.
Didn't the linesman flag for a free kick for handball, rather than a throw in, against Traore when it was the Fulham player who clearly punched it? I'm sure the free kick then got launched into our penalty area & they scored.
Indeed you're right. It was a Fulham player who handballed it (Radzinski I think) and they got a freekick and they scored from it. Never been so gutted at a football game. Never.
It was a quality tackle, unfortunately it broke the laws of the game.
That's the crux of it.
He didn't catch the man - did Nani pull out? Many of these studs-up tackles are also pulled up when the defender is sliding away from the defender, so I can't see why they are given as fouls?
It was a quality tackle, unfortunately it broke the laws of the game.
That's the crux of it.
He didn't catch the man - did Nani pull out? Many of these studs-up tackles are also pulled up when the defender is sliding away from the defender, so I can't see why they are given as fouls?
That's the thing - it's irrelevant how near he was to the guy. The rule is pretty clear - if both feet leave the ground, or if you go in studs up, it is a red card. Whether or not contact is made with an opponent doesn't come into it (correct me if I'm wrong Seth Plum!) It's a bit like saying all handballs should be a free kick I suppose, only handballs will rarely leave an opponent in hospital. As per the original post, I am frustrated that Mancini/ City do not take responsibility for that.
As for handballs, my feelings on the rules are that any intentional/ reckless handball should be given, as should any accidental handball that gave the player an advatange. For instance, if the player handballs while protecting his face, all he's done is stop it hitting another part of defensive anatomy. But accidentally handballing when the shot was on target (Kanchelskis in the League cup final 15 years ago), then it's gotta be given. not all accidental handballs should be forgiven!!
Well Jimmy 85 you make sense but won't this issue over defensive versus non defensive handballs just make the whole matter even more complicated? How is the ref in a split second going to decide if there was an advantage or not it's really subjective, in essence I do agree with you but how the hell you police that fairly and evenly is another matter.
Just making the point that before the Premier League, the foreign players and the money there wasn't even a quarter of the diving, cheating and unsporting behaviour that you see now. I think most would agree diving and simulation started in foreign football long before it did in England.
You never saw Frannie Lee then?
Players have always tried to get away with whatever they can since I've been watching football. The real problem, amongst others, is the ignorance of the game's rules from players, managers and fans. And the unwillingness to let refs make mistakes - which players and managers never do.
Great post, but equally agree with Clem. When I see the likes of Atwell, Clattenburg, Webb or Styles (usually on telly nowadays) - or Poll/Ellery/Rennie I know something daft is going to happen.
Well Jimmy 85 you make sense but won't this issue over defensive versus non defensive handballs just make the whole matter even more complicated? How is the ref in a split second going to decide if there was an advantage or not it's really subjective, in essence I do agree with you but how the hell you police that fairly and evenly is another matter.
Yeah it's tricky, but it'd be a lot easier if everyone tells the truth!! Honesty and video replays - the two ways football can be saved.
Another thing I've never understood is why the referee is named before the game, and reported in the program, etc. Surely who the referee is is irrelevant to the game. Plus knowing beforehand gives managers the chance to play mind games and everybody else to prejudge what is likely to happen. As far as I'm concerned nobody should know who the ref is up until a couple of hours before kick-off. There's no reason for the fans to know who the referee is at all.
But the opposite happens, especially for big games, the ref is announced way in advance, the mind games start, the manager will be telling his players the things that ref is typically hard on and the things they can get away with more, and the system is gamed once again.
The cheating is not just in football these days. Take cricket. Remember when a batsman used to walk when he knew he had faintly edged a ball to the keeper or when a fielder would signal a 4 to the umire if the ball had touched the rope etc. It just doesn't happen any more in top-level cricket.
However there is one big difference and that's the use of technology which cricket has embraced, and in a stop-start game like cricket, or even rugby, the wait for the decision adds to the tension and hence enjoyment for the spectators.
I don't want to see the flow of the game slowed by technology but for serious foul play judgements, along with goal-line decisions, what are FIFA waiting for?
I agree in a way, however anyone who has played the game knows that Kompany's tackle was a brilliant one and if that gets you sent off then there is no hope for the game. The other major problem isthe handball nonesense, a penalty gets given when it is so obvious the ball has hit the hand, it used to be ball to hand when it was played under proper rules. Problem is the Ref's are being directed by people who never played the game and that coupled with the fact they mostly are non players themselves creates the utter stupidity that reigns in the game at present. Do Ref's get a lot of stick...........yes but mostly deserved as it is they who give these crazy decisions week in wek out
I agree, I think it's a lot to do with how football referees are subject to direction and have had discretion beaten out of them. Rugby referees seem to have more freedom to apply their own interpretation of rules and it seems accepted some referees will be harsher or softer on some infringements.
Might be off beam here but Rugby may have retained a closer link to the traditional british culture of fair play and law and order where conduct is examined by an impartial judge , the referee, whose decison is final. World football is run by authorities more likely to embrace the Roman type approach to law and order of absolute authority of codified rules which lead to arguments about how to interpret the rules, rather than what's fair or right.
Players are wrong in how they behave but it is the system which has allowed this to develop where rules and inconsistent interpretation define correct behaviour rather than respected judgement on a player's conduct. We lost control of football a long time ago and don't see much chance of us getting back control of our referees to solve the underlying problems.
Yes, technology used only for situations leading to goals and unfair bookings and sending offs and challenges can no longer be made by a team in that game when a ref's decsision is upheld so they have to be 100%. You wouldn't see the game broken up and it will only add to the excitement I think.
Comments
How many posters here have bothered to read them?
Did you know for example that in Law 11 (offside) It does not say that the ball has to have been played FORWARD? (look it up).
I used to enjoy being a ref, but eventually got fed up with abuse, especially from blokes who were much worse players than I was a ref, and even when desperate managers would phone me trying to get a ref for their weekend game, offering double the fee, I didn't bother.
Treat the refs like the weather or pitch conditions, can be lousy, but unlikely to be biased.
That's the crux of it.
As for handballs, my feelings on the rules are that any intentional/ reckless handball should be given, as should any accidental handball that gave the player an advatange. For instance, if the player handballs while protecting his face, all he's done is stop it hitting another part of defensive anatomy. But accidentally handballing when the shot was on target (Kanchelskis in the League cup final 15 years ago), then it's gotta be given. not all accidental handballs should be forgiven!!
Players have always tried to get away with whatever they can since I've been watching football.
The real problem, amongst others, is the ignorance of the game's rules from players, managers and fans. And the unwillingness to let refs make mistakes - which players and managers never do.
But the opposite happens, especially for big games, the ref is announced way in advance, the mind games start, the manager will be telling his players the things that ref is typically hard on and the things they can get away with more, and the system is gamed once again.
However there is one big difference and that's the use of technology which cricket has embraced, and in a stop-start game like cricket, or even rugby, the wait for the decision adds to the tension and hence enjoyment for the spectators.
I don't want to see the flow of the game slowed by technology but for serious foul play judgements, along with goal-line decisions, what are FIFA waiting for?
Might be off beam here but Rugby may have retained a closer link to the traditional british culture of fair play and law and order where conduct is examined by an impartial judge , the referee, whose decison is final. World football is run by authorities more likely to embrace the Roman type approach to law and order of absolute authority of codified rules which lead to arguments about how to interpret the rules, rather than what's fair or right.
Players are wrong in how they behave but it is the system which has allowed this to develop where rules and inconsistent interpretation define correct behaviour rather than respected judgement on a player's conduct. We lost control of football a long time ago and don't see much chance of us getting back control of our referees to solve the underlying problems.