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!

 

[Blademan89]

It was the first; lay off the communion wine!

O'Hare was also flattened in the build up of the 2nd goal, they smashed into him and ball fell for hamer ref allowed play on, hamer played it out to seriki? Who had a shot saved then it come back out for a other shot blocked? Then it fell to Brooks who found the net.

The referee was pretty poor, very inconsistent & should have had the red out a least 2 maybe 3 times for their players.

 

[jt64]

Surely Seriki should have been booked if the ref didn’t th it was a penalty ?

Believe it or not it is not a coin toss as to whether it is a pen or a dive, there are legit cases where the defender makes legal contact which forces the attacker to the floor, which is exactly what it looked like in real time

 

[Houston_Blade]

I don’t see how anyone can be positive there was no contact, only Bamford and the keeper
know for sure.

Post in thread 'Bamford - referees don't like our captains'

Saturday at 7:12 PM

The view from a camera on The Kop looked like there was contact, still impossible to know for sure and the fact he didn’t complain doesn’t suggest he felt badly wronged.

I’d say it’s pretty clear from these that he’s on his way to the deck before he even reached the keeper. He even appeared to say “that was stupid” to Brooks as he walked off.

• Houston_Blade

• 

See my images from another angle, he was on his way down before he reached the keeper. He also didn’t even argue, a pretty big telltale sign.

 

[The Vicar]

O'Hare was also flattened in the build up of the 2nd goal, they smashed into him and ball fell for hamer ref allowed play on, hamer played it out to seriki? Who had a shot saved then it come back out for a other shot blocked? Then it fell to Brooks who found the net.

The referee was pretty poor, very inconsistent & should have had the red out a least 2 maybe 3 times for their players.

2nd goal Ohare was flattened, ball fell to Bamford, he shot, save rebounded to Davies, he passed to Seriki who shot, save rebounded to Brookes and he scored. Watch the highlights..

No communion wine involved!

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

Don' t buy this Bamford dived shit. If that had been Billy or Didzy we would have been screaming for a penalty.

 

[bartman]

2nd goal Ohare was flattened, ball fell to Bamford, he shot, save rebounded to Davies, he passed to Seriki who shot, save rebounded to Brookes and he scored. Watch the highlights..

No communion wine involved!

And their defender was booked after the goal was scored for the foul

 

[100% part time blade]

People always get upset about diving. I think intentional fouls to stop attacks are much worse and should be a straight red. They are often wildly out of control lunges to block a player's path and kill the whole point of the game. Greatest could very easily have injured Cannon yesterday.

They aren't 'professional', it's cheating.

They should change the rule: a ‘professional’ foul (where someone rugby tackles a player on a break-away) should be punished by a free-kick, yellow card, AND the whole of the offending side have to stand 10 yards BEHIND the ball, so that the break-away is still on.

 

[Blademan89]

Don' t buy this Bamford dived shit. If that had been Billy or Didzy we would have been screaming for a penalty.

I would say it would have been a soft pen whoever went down (only issue is the inconsistency of the referee booking one and not others for similar) & either way it was a poor decision for him to round the keeper, he had chance to take the shot early with either foot, it was same with brookes first half when he did similar rather than squaring it to Bamford who was completely unmarked.

Cant complain too much, as both was excellent and we won convincingly.

 

[Carlton Blade]

They should change the rule: a ‘professional’ foul (where someone rugby tackles a player on a break-away) should be punished by a free-kick, yellow card, AND the whole of the offending side have to stand 10 yards BEHIND the ball, so that the break-away is still on.

Pure chaos. What a brilliant idea!

 

[Badger Blade]

It was a penalty given to Liverpool against Chris Morgan. There was no contact at all but the ref (can’t remember his name but many others will) justified the decision on the basis that Morgs had intended to bring him down. That was the first time any one had said a foul could be given just for intent. I am not sure whether the rules of football state that intent is sufficient!
Liverpool scored from the pen and got a 1-1 draw after we had taken the lead from a Rob Hulse header.

Rob Styles was the ref.

I'm sure he was one in particular that Warnock had plenty of jousts with over the years.

 

[Ned the Donkey]

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

"He couldn't wait to get his card out."

From memory in the case of violent conduct - or something similar that might result in a mass brawl - the refs have been told to make a decision quickly and clearly with the aim of demonstrating that the situation has been dealt with.

The ref might have got Tanganga's decision wrong but I'm pretty sure he made the decision quickly because that's what he's been told to do and not because he couldn't wait to send Tanganga off.

There's:

• what the laws are
• how the laws are applied
• what fans generally believe about the laws

and these aren't always the same thing.

 

[Davalon]

"He couldn't wait to get his card out."

From memory in the case of violent conduct - or something similar that might result in a mass brawl - the refs have been told to make a decision quickly and clearly with the aim of demonstrating that the situation has been dealt with.

The ref might have got Tanganga's decision wrong but I'm pretty sure he made the decision quickly because that's what he's been told to do and not because he couldn't wait to send Tanganga off.

There's:

• what the laws are
• how the laws are applied
• what fans generally believe about the laws

and these aren't always the same thing.

View attachment 229775

Spoke to a Charlton fan on Saturday who lives up here and goes to some of our games.

He was in Charlton's main stand bang opposite the Tanganga incident and said he saw it as a cast iron red.

Like the Bamford penalty/dive, things can look very different from different angles.

Refs get one look and maybe sometimes help from the lino.

 

[Lens instep catch]

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?

Yes Grey Blade I always thought that it should be a indirect free kick for obstructing an opponent

 

[coaxingstar71]

What annoys me about the Bamford one is that he got booked for simulation, but only because it was in the box. Darnell Furlong went down several times during the game, once holding his face when he hadn't been touched, clearly trying to get an opponent sent off, and nothing happened. To me, that is worse or at least no different.

 

[PokerBlade]

Funnily enough a player in the Prem kicked an advertising hoarding yesterday but as far as I could tell he wasn't cautioned.
Daft thing to do but I wish he'd kicked it harder and broken it then there would have been less flashing lights to distract us.

It's probably not an automatic yellow, but at that point in the game I think the ref had booked two Ipswich players for dissent, Bamford had just had a scuffle wrestling a defender. I know it's easy to say from the outside but a bit of game sense and situational awareness is on the players. You know that ref's going to book him there.

 

[MobileBlade]

It's probably not an automatic yellow, but at that point in the game I think the ref had booked two Ipswich players for dissent, Bamford had just had a scuffle wrestling a defender. I know it's easy to say from the outside but a bit of game sense and situational awareness is on the players. You know that ref's going to book him there.

This is what Law 12 states:

CAUTIONS FOR UNSPORTING BEHAVIOUR

There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour including if a player:
- attempts to deceive the referee e.g. by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation)