Inconsistent Refereeing....

[keenzy]

Watching the championship this morning and noticed that one of bristol city's goals against coventry, involved flattening the keeper in a 50/50 ball and putting the ball in the back of the net while the keeper is laid out with concussion. Allowed to stand.

In our game at blackpool, relish goes in for a 50/50 ball with the keeper and wins it. Relish then gets booked and a free kick awarded.

The referee's need retraining to have some consistency across the games. Not well this referee might give a red for that other will give a yellow. A set rule for them all.


Also an ipswitch player got a straight red for a lunge similar to halfords in which he got a yellow.

 

[happyhippy]

Thing is, we'd all start complaining about 'the rules being too rigid ...... referees not being allowed to have any flexibility ...... might as well have robots ...... killing the spirit of the game ...... not like the old days ......', then.

I agree completely that there are loads of mystifying decisions which are made, but that's just part of sport. The game's already sanitised enough - we need controversy!

 

[keenzy]

yeah i understand what your saying, but the thing with the keepers in 50/50 challenges. Keepers get too much protection these days, so to have relish get booked for alot less than what the bristol player did and scored from it, it needs sorting out.


Always seems like united is on the wrong end of them. remember the opening day against lpool and then at manure?

 

[The One]

You'll also find that if a keeper won the ball and clattered the outfield player going for the ball then the referee wouldn't do a thing.

 

[DazBlade88]

You'll also find that if a keeper won the ball and clattered the outfield player going for the ball then the referee wouldn't do a thing.

Or just push him out of the way with nobody near him before the corner was taken... like Cech did to Boyce yesterday.

If we'd not won on Saturday, there'd have been alot more complaints about that Henderson "foul", because he won the ball and took the man... perfect tackle in most people's books?

 

[shorehamview]

The reason we have had and will continue to get inconsistent refereeing decisions is because the match officials are like us. People. It's true that they've had a lot of training and experience when they eventually officiate at a professional level, but they are still human beings, even Rob Stiles.

Until we get robo-refs, or unless we want the play to be stopped every two minutes for a TV ref to watch and review every contentious incident the it will carry on as it's always done.
The old cliche that "these things even themselves out" might not be true over one match, or possibly even a season, but in the end they do. Remember when we couldn't get a penalty for love nor money? It doesn't help when we've been the victims of crap decisions, but have we ever profited from them? Yes we have.

 

[keenzy]

rob stiles first game of the season, awards a penalty to liverpool for no contact made. that mistake, could be said, sent us down. SO no it didn't even out for us. He then went and waved away a clear penalty at manure where contact was made.


This is the Inconsistent Refereeing im talking about. Maybe with robo refs we wont have the refs bumming the bigger teams.


Some decisions are going to be wrong, but once you have set the standard of your refereeing then keep to it.

 

[happyhippy]

rob stiles first game of the season, awards a penalty to liverpool for no contact made. that mistake, could be said, sent us down. SO no it didn't even out for us. He then went and waved away a clear penalty at manure where contact was made.

This is the Inconsistent Refereeing im talking about. Maybe with robo refs we wont have the refs bumming the bigger teams.

Some decisions are going to be wrong, but once you have set the standard of your refereeing then keep to it.

And it could also be said that the winning 'goal' away at Watford which was allowed (when Webber was way offside) gave us the chance to stay up.

Anyway, I'd much rather bitch about a crap decision from the officials after we've been dicked, than have to say "The technology available to the officials certainly proved to be accurate when awarding Day Before Thursday the 98th minute penalty to give them the winner."

Being hacked off is part of being a fan, and certainly part of being a Blade!

 

[keenzy]

it is, but if they are going to make a dicking decision against us one week then do it different the other week. at least do it the same!


i have to moan at something, seen as were playing well at the mo. cant moan at the players, ill take it out on the refs

 

[metalblade]

My pet hate is to see defenders shielding the ball out for a goal kick with no attempt to play the ball, surely this is an obstruction and an indirect free kick or have the rules changed so you can now stand yards from the ball blocking a player trying to get it. If the attacker does get past the defender after a wrestling match the ref always gives a free kick to the defender. I think the ref's make it up as they go along half the time.

 

[happyhippy]

My pet hate is to see defenders shielding the ball out for a goal kick with no attempt to play the ball, surely this is an obstruction and an indirect free kick or have the rules changed so you can now stand yards from the ball blocking a player trying to get it. If the attacker does get past the defender after a wrestling match the ref always gives a free kick to the defender. I think the ref's make it up as they go along half the time.

Don't get MAQ started on that ... there is no obstruction law, as he (rightly) said ages ago.

I do generally agree with you though .....

 

[TonyAgana]

Don't get MAQ started on that ... there is no obstruction law, as he (rightly) said ages ago.

I do generally agree with you though .....

There is however a rule which states that the ball must remain within "playable" distance. This does get ignored very often.

 

[happyhippy]

There is however a rule which states that the ball must remain within "playable" distance. This does get ignored very often.

Verily, verily, yea and verily.

 

[MAQ]

I think the ref's make it up as they go along half the time.

the cheek of it!!!

There is however a rule which states that the ball must remain within "playable" distance. This does get ignored very often.

I may be splitting hairs here but ill give you this one TA. The actual wording is as follows:

Impeding the progress of an opponent

Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct,
block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within
playing distance of either player.
All players have a right to their position on the field of play, being in the way of an opponent is
not the same as moving into the way of an opponent.
Shielding the ball is permitted. A player who places himself between an opponent and the ball
for tactical reasons has not committed an offence as long as the ball is kept in playing distance
and the player does not hold off the opponent with his arms or body. If the ball is within
playing distance, the player may be fairly charged by an opponent.

Can anyone point out the obvious reason why decisions are usually given in favour of the defending team?

There is a simple response to this thread, however i shall refrain from ranting and outlining this to see if anyone may establish this on there own.