The problem with English referees…

[Swinton Blade]

Until they bring in/fast-track refs who have played the game to a decent level you are going to get numerous rubbish decisions and controversy. Even then it won't be plain sailing. Thank God Jon Moss isn't in the chump. He's utter garbage, but he gets games, somehow!

How would fast tracking referees improve decisions?

 

[Swinton Blade]

Have you seen it? It’s the last man, on the linesman’s side and unobstructed.

Seen replays and images posted on here, linesman was not inline with play.

 

[Sheff de party]

Not sure of the full rules, but Colin Murray said that if the contact continues into the box, it's a penalty. I have no reason to doubt him. Neville said similar yesterday in the LIV v MNC game when Foden (I think) got taken down. He said "the challenge continued into the box, it's a pen".

Worth bearing in mind too, if Solankes foot is on the 18yard line, that's in the box too.

Let's be honest, the tackle was a shocker and a definite foul.

That is the rule, and it is a foul, but the foul itself doesn’t continue into the box.

Free kick. Red card.

I’m over it now anyway! Haha

 

[SUFC Handsworth]

Great tackle, never a pen in a million years for me.

 

[ForgeBlade]

I think part of the problem is that the refs just aren't as fit/fast as the players. Ex-players would be ideal, but by the time they retire, they've naturally lost a yard or 2 of pace and will struggle to keep up with play.

I like the idea of 2 refs, 1 in each half. Would reduce the need for referees to make lung-busting pitch length runs to keep up, and hopefully mean that the ref in each half was more up with play.

 

[Hull Blade]

How would fast tracking referees improve decisions?

IMHO old pros tend to know the game better than a bloke who hasn't played in the professional levels. They'll know when a player is trying to pull the wool. They can better judge the game and what is a foul and what isn't. I'm not for one second suggesting they won't make mistakes. They're human, after all. But they are worth trying because too many refs are making iffy decisions.

 

[Balham]

Great tackle, never a pen in a million years for me.

He's gone in with his wrong foot. As a left-footed player his preferred slide tackle would be left foot for the ball with right foot behind him but for some reason he went right foot first. That meant he didn't know what he was doing with his left foot and is probably why it ended up taking Solanke out above the knee. The irony of all this is that he got the ball cleanly with his right foot before fouling Solanke with his right. If he'd have tackled correctly (ie left foot first) it would have been perfect.

 

[SUFC Handsworth]

He's gone in with his wrong foot. As a left-footed player his preferred slide tackle would be left foot for the ball with right foot behind him but for some reason he went right foot first. That meant he didn't know what he was doing with his left foot and is probably why it ended up taking Solanke out above the knee. The irony of all this is that he got the ball cleanly with his right foot before fouling Solanke with his right. If he'd have tackled correctly (ie left foot first) it would have been perfect.

He's won the ball first, the ball's carried on in the same direction as Stevens, the Bournemouth player is going in another direction, great tackle, play on.

In my day, if you got the man as well so much the better. If the rules have changed to say that type of fair, even classic, tackle is now a "foul" then it really is time to pack in with football.

 

[1889]

To qualify to be a referee you have to have an understanding of the game. Maybe most referees have played the game at some level.

What did Tierney bottle yesterday?

I think you’ve fallen upon the crux of the problem with regard to referees.

The problem is, if you want to be a Premier League referee you need to start reffing at about 13-14 years of age and slowly work your way up the pyramid.
Consequently, none of them have played adult football to a decent level and we end up with the justifiable criticism that ‘They know the rules but they don’t know the game’

 

[Stu_Blade]

I think you’ve fallen upon the crux of the problem with regard to referees.

The problem is, if you want to be a Premier League referee you need to start reffing at about 13-14 years of age and slowly work your way up the pyramid.
Consequently, none of them have played adult football to a decent level and we end up with the justifiable criticism that ‘They know the rules but they don’t know the game’

Although top officials are well paid in regular society starting pay of circa £38,000 in the Premier League it's absolutely peanuts compared to the players salaries when some earn 10 times that in a week who in their right mind as a player would opt to be under the spotlight and pressure of a referee and come under more abuse for making less mistakes than a player.

 

[1889]

Although top officials are well paid in regular society starting pay of circa £38,000 in the Premier League it's absolutely peanuts compared to the players salaries when some earn 10 times that in a week who in their right mind as a player would opt to be under the spotlight and pressure of a referee and come under more abuse for making less mistakes than a player.

According to Goal, Premier League referees receive a regular yearly wage of between £38,500 and £42,000, depending on their level of experience. They then receive around £1,150
in additional match fees paid on top of that for every game they referee.

In reality they easily earn £70,000 pa, but their salary is irrelevant to my original post tbh

 

[Stu_Blade]

According to Goal, Premier League referees receive a regular yearly wage of between £38,500 and £42,000, depending on their level of experience. They then receive around £1,150
in additional match fees paid on top of that for every game they referee.

In reality they easily earn £70,000 pa, but their salary is irrelevant to my original post tbh

Even at the higher figure a good pay grade its fine if you establish yourself at the top level as imagine you could put away some for retirement.

The point I was coming from a former player even in the Championship will be on £800,000-£1mill quite easily per year. At say 36 which is an average playing retirement age what is the incentive for higher end players to be pushed into refereeing. You might get National League players up for it but then the argument will be that they haven't played at a higher level when there are any mistakes.

 

[1889]

Even at the higher figure a good pay grade its fine if you establish yourself at the top level as imagine you could put away some for retirement.

The point I was coming from a former player even in the Championship will be on £800,000-£1mill quite easily per year. At say 36 which is an average playing retirement age what is the incentive for higher end players to be pushed into refereeing. You might get National League players up for it but then the argument will be that they haven't played at a higher level when there are any mistakes.

I don’t disagree, I don’t think any ex pro from the Championship or above would do the job purely for financial reasons.
But I think it would be beneficial if there was a fast track for ex players of perhaps National League and above to become referees. Their knowledge and experience of the ‘dark arts’ of the game, would in my opinion give them a totally different and more accurate perspective than anyone graduating via the established route

 

[Stu_Blade]

I don’t disagree, I don’t think any ex pro from the Championship or above would do the job purely for financial reasons.
But I think it would be beneficial if there was a fast track for ex players of perhaps National League and above to become referees. Their knowledge and experience of the ‘dark arts’ of the game, would in my opinion give them a totally different and more accurate perspective than anyone graduating via the established route

Fair point, I think they have this in Rugby Union particularly in New Zealand but I certainly get where you are coming from. It was like that Southampton cup game the Southampton players knew all the tricks to bring on a free kick or get away with one.

 

[gordoncharles]

Until they bring in/fast-track refs who have played the game to a decent level you are going to get numerous rubbish decisions and controversy. Even then it won't be plain sailing. Thank God Jon Moss isn't in the chump. He's utter garbage, but he gets games, somehow!

I've heard that claptrap for about 50 years and it was as irrelevant in the 1970s as it is now.

What is "a decent level"? Should refs who have never played in the PL be allowed to referee a PL match because they've never played to that standard?

You could bring in Frank Lampard, Thierry Henry and Paul Scholes to ref games for all I care (though I'd pay to see Roy Keane in the middle). However the amount of respect afforded to any of them would last as long as it takes for them to get their first major decision wrong.

You don't need to have played football to a high level to referee, just as you don't need to have done that to manage or coach. Nor do you need to have played the game at the top level to be able to comment on the standard of players, referees, or daft ideas like that one.

 

[Bennyand the Blades]

Don't care who you have they'll never please everybody in a boarder line case....

As for us, we're lucky he didn't send Stevens off as well........

 

[tincan]

I've heard that claptrap for about 50 years and it was as irrelevant in the 1970s as it is now.

What is "a decent level"? Should refs who have never played in the PL be allowed to referee a PL match because they've never played to that standard?

You could bring in Frank Lampard, Thierry Henry and Paul Scholes to ref games for all I care (though I'd pay to see Roy Keane in the middle). However the amount of respect afforded to any of them would last as long as it takes for them to get their first major decision wrong.

You don't need to have played football to a high level to referee, just as you don't need to have done that to manage or coach. Nor do you need to have played the game at the top level to be able to comment on the standard of players, referees, or daft ideas like that one.

When you listen to the level of intelligence many ex pro's have, glorifying fights cheating in podcasts, they're the last person I want refereeing a game.
They are the thugs who routinely cheat and knowingly foul accepting the risk of breaking a leg. They are the ones who teach the young pro's how to fall with minimal contact. "It's a man's game" is the quote Souness and other similar frauds use. Football is a game for gentleman played by hooligans, and some say put the hooligan in charge!
That's like electing a convicted liar as PM and then wondering why nothing that is said is true.

 

[Foody]

I think you’ve fallen upon the crux of the problem with regard to referees.

The problem is, if you want to be a Premier League referee you need to start reffing at about 13-14 years of age and slowly work your way up the pyramid.
Consequently, none of them have played adult football to a decent level and we end up with the justifiable criticism that ‘They know the rules but they don’t know the game’

I'd argue that someone who's refereed since 13 years old will likely have been on the pitch for around 1000 games, at a progressively higher standard. That person definitely knows the game and have proven themselves to have the : knowledge, decision making, people skills and ability to handle pressure.

An ex pro doesn't necessarily fulfill that. It's the same with the most talented players being fast tracked into big management jobs. Two different skill sets

 

[JJ Sefton]

I do think that refs should have to make a short statement after a match explaining why they made a particular decision and whether, having seen replays, they think it was the correct one. These things would sit better if refs said “It’s an honest balls up, sorry”

 

[Swinton Blade]

I do think that refs should have to make a short statement after a match explaining why they made a particular decision and whether, having seen replays, they think it was the correct one. These things would sit better if refs said “It’s an honest balls up, sorry”

Don't think that would be a good idea and any help tbh of a ref said 'sorry, I made a mistake.

How often do you see Goalkeepers at the end of game saying 'sorry, I should have save that one' or Strikers 'sorry I missed an open goal'.

 

[Stu_Blade]

I do think that refs should have to make a short statement after a match explaining why they made a particular decision and whether, having seen replays, they think it was the correct one. These things would sit better if refs said “It’s an honest balls up, sorry”

I agree on retrospective debate as long as its not a lynch mob. I remember on MoTD some referees did explain decisions on occasions, Graham Poll might have been one of them? It would be good similar to Rugby if you could listen into the referee as most do communicate with players but the FA are probably worried about the bad language being used. There does seem to be less gestures given by football referees I know these aren't mandatory but it does help clarify a situation if the referee gestures a pull or push etc.