Bamford - referees don't like our captains

[Davalon]

We all get frustrated with refereeing decisions and particularly the inconsistencies, but I often think it's the actual laws that don't help.

I also don't understand how certain incidents that were always a foul and an indirect free kick, have been routinely ignored and allowed for years.

Obstruction and blatant blocking just gets ignored now. Even our centre halves thought they were linebackers at times yesterday.

As for being in playing distance of the ball, that's gone out the window now yet the law doesn't appear to have changed.

I have to say though, many of our fans, just like any others I guess, have a huge chip on their shoulder about officials.

Even when replays make it clear, they won't change their view.

The ref yesterday wasn't that bad at all compared to some at this level. Instead of expecting officials to be perfect, maybe look at players who look to con them at every opportunity.

With player welfare more in focus, they can't win sometimes. Fair play to the ref making Furlong go off yesterday.

 

[Bladesman]

The common sense bit would be to leave his card in his pocket for the first. It was pretty minor stuff. But I want to see every player booked who dives for a penalty like that. Zero tolerance.

There’s not staying on your feet when genuinely caught (the Soton lad on Wednesday has learned that), and then there’s pure scuba. And Bamford was the latter.

I agree with you BUT I only ever see that yellow being thrown about when we dive for a penalty usually. The amount of players that come to the lane that chuck themselves about and rarely get punished for it. Fair enough some don't get the penalty they are seeking but most of the time the ref just plays on.

After last season I think our card is marked with most refs much like it seemed in the Warnock years. Also, Wilder had a few comments yesterday regarding the officials, so that will go down like a lead balloon.

 

[wadblade]

He was stupid especially when on a yellow
But still having watched it again on Tv I still dont think the first Yellow was warrented

 

[Grey Blade]

We all get frustrated with refereeing decisions and particularly the inconsistencies, but I often think it's the actual laws that don't help.

I also don't understand how certain incidents that were always a foul and an indirect free kick, have been routinely ignored and allowed for years.

Obstruction and blatant blocking just gets ignored now. Even our centre halves thought they were linebackers at times yesterday.

As for being in playing distance of the ball, that's gone out the window now yet the law doesn't appear to have changed.

I have to say though, many of our fans, just like any others I guess, have a huge chip on their shoulder about officials.

Even when replays make it clear, they won't change their view.

The ref yesterday wasn't that bad at all compared to some at this level. Instead of expecting officials to be perfect, maybe look at players who look to con them at every opportunity.

With player welfare more in focus, they can't win sometimes. Fair play to the ref making Furlong go off yesterday.

A lot of the pushing and shoving that goes on prior to corners is out of hand. The referees often tell them to stop it but generally they carry on regardless. It's usually 6 of one and half a dozen of the other but I think if the players have to be told twice, both players should be cautioned. That would soon stop it.

Shielding the ball out of play whilst pushing their back into the player behind them - how can they be deemed to be in control of the ball if they haven't touched it?

 

[programmechap]

I know it sounds daft but when he was theough why didn’t he just shoot to the goalie’s right? I thought going around him was the harder option!

It’s a soft yellow but daft too if there was any doubt. But if you’re being so strict then send off the keeper this week and the lad who fouled McCallum last week. It just seems at the moment any decision like this comes down harshly on us and leniently on out opponents.

I agree. Going round the keeper would have made the angle very narrow. I can only assume the plan was to dive all along.

 

[nopigfansintown]

He started falling before the contact. Based on what you've said here, do you still think it's a foul? What if the forward initiated the contact? Still a foul?

No. If it was my rules there'd be no fouls for any infringement that It was deemed was bought by the player. A foul would be when a player was impeded to a level that the referee deemed severely impacted the players ability to prosecute their next action. Minor shirt tugs, pushes and such like wouldn't result in fouls. If a player is trying to win a foul rather than play the ball that wouldn't be a foul. For Bamford's to be a foul the ref would have to adjudge that he was trying to score and that the keeper made it impossible for him to stay upright initiating the contact. Clearly he was trying to win a pen.

It would cut out the vast majority of the crap in the game overnight. That's basically the football I grew up watching. Players try it on now because they've been conditioned to know that gamesmanship and cheating is often rewarded. It's a much poorer game for it.

 

[The Vicar]

Personally I thought he referred the game OK. Decisions went both ways, and he could only judge on what he could see. Let the game flow, as for our second goal when Ohare was flattened, and then booked their player after the goal.

 

[Bladedog]

Anybody caught diving/cheating when there is no contact automatic 2 match ban..see if that makes any difference.

 

[Greenwich Blade]

Personally I thought he referred the game OK. Decisions went both ways, and he could only judge on what he could see. Let the game flow, as for our second goal when Ohare was flattened, and then booked their player after the goal.

It was the first; lay off the communion wine!