The Footie Thread

[Deleted member 21784]

However much we want it, you will never ever get consistent decisions in sports that involve the subjective opinion of an official. Its like asking all fans to agree on all decisions! Just won't happen ?

Some degree of miking-up could work, a brief explanation of decisions, NFL style. Post match ref interviews on occasions may add value, but you can see that this post match ref interview would soon become repetitive and continually negative.

I'm sure there is room on Sky and BT football coverage to run a series of ref decisions workshops to show what the rules and ref interpretations should be. It could help some pundits and fans understand the rules better. ?

Don't bt bring in Peter Walton to explain the decision the Ref has made and why he might have come to that decision?

 

[Orikoru]

Don't bt bring in Peter Walton to explain the decision the Ref has made and why he might have come to that decision?

Don't start on that idiot. What a waste of space he is.

 

[Slime]

I'd mic them up, like rugby and let them explain their decisions
So take the west ham game, could hear the convo in his ear, then he goes over to the captain and explains that it's red because of x, y and z.
At least we then might then understand what's going through their heads!

 

[Billysboots]

However much we want it, you will never ever get consistent decisions in sports that involve the subjective opinion of an official. Its like asking all fans to agree on all decisions! Just won't happen ?

I absolutely agree, but there still needs to be some remedial action taken when decisions are shown to be spectacularly wrong.

I watched a re-run of the West Ham game knowing there had been a controversial red card, but no more than that. The second I saw the incident and realised what was coming my immediate reaction was “Please tell me he’s not going to send him off for kicking the ball.” They were my exact words.

There have been some poor decisions this season. I think Mike Dean saw two red card decisions, made after he had reviewed incidents pitch side, overturned earlier this year in as many weeks. Both really bad decisions. But Chris Kavanagh’s decision on Saturday was beyond woeful. It was shockingly bad. The only ones I have heard speak in favour are either those relying on seeing a still image or those who, from the language and terminology used, seem to know little about football. I have seen some frankly ludicrous arguments raised in order to justify the red.

Chris Kavanagh is not a good referee. He has demonstrated more than once this season that he does not understand the feel of the game. He appears to consider incidents out of context and his decisions have been roundly criticised by people far more knowledgeable than any of us here. And yet he comes back week after week and makes similar mistakes.

We all called last year for the on-pitch referee to be allowed to review incidents on pitch side monitors, to take key decisions away from the VAR. By allowing this, it was argued, the officiating referee would be allowed to consider his decision in the context of the game he was refereeing. If anything this has made things even worse.

I accept we will never get the absolute consistency we crave. But if referees continue to make monumental blunders even after reviewing incidents on monitors then some action needs taking to prevent the same officials becoming repeat offenders.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

What if the officials we have are the best that are out there? There is a pathway through the league system so presumably these guys are the best there are right now.

Has there ever been a period, since the inception of more than 2 cameras in a ground, where people thought that refs were good?

 

[Billysboots]

I get that referees will make mistakes. It’s part and parcel of the game. But to see some of the howlers still being made after incidents have been watched half a dozen times is really worrying.

There can only be two explanations. Poor refereeing or nobody, including pundits and commentators, have been made aware of rule changes or interpretations.

Either way it needs sorting. I like the suggestion of refs being wired for sound.

 

[Orikoru]

What if the officials we have are the best that are out there? There is a pathway through the league system so presumably these guys are the best there are right now.

Has there ever been a period, since the inception of more than 2 cameras in a ground, where people thought that refs were good?

Normally there seems to be one or two refs you'd say were good, and the rest just, erm, do their best I suppose.

One problem (of many) with VAR is that every foul looks worse in slow motion. Perhaps it would be beneficial to only let the ref watch it at real time speed. I doubt the West Ham one would have ended up as a red if they hadn't have slowed it down so much - it makes it look as if he had time to plant his foot elsewhere when he clearly didn't.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

In football there does seem a reluctance to accept that a ref will make a mistake in real time that other sports aceept as part and parcel of the game, they are human after all. Some of the decisions with VAR seem very odd as at that point the ref gets another chance in slow motion and from 20 angles. No excuse then. That is where hearing them speak in real time, as per cricket and rugby would be so beneficial as at least we could then understand the train of thought, and also perhaps learn some rules that we were not clear on. I hope at some point they will allow fans to hear the discussions between VAR and the onfield ref, it can only help.

 

[Blue in Munich]

I absolutely agree, but there still needs to be some remedial action taken when decisions are shown to be spectacularly wrong.

I watched a re-run of the West Ham game knowing there had been a controversial red card, but no more than that. The second I saw the incident and realised what was coming my immediate reaction was “Please tell me he’s not going to send him off for kicking the ball.” They were my exact words.

There have been some poor decisions this season. I think Mike Dean saw two red card decisions, made after he had reviewed incidents pitch side, overturned earlier this year in as many weeks. Both really bad decisions. But Chris Kavanagh’s decision on Saturday was beyond woeful. It was shockingly bad. The only ones I have heard speak in favour are either those relying on seeing a still image or those who, from the language and terminology used, seem to know little about football. I have seen some frankly ludicrous arguments raised in order to justify the red.

Chris Kavanagh is not a good referee. He has demonstrated more than once this season that he does not understand the feel of the game. He appears to consider incidents out of context and his decisions have been roundly criticised by people far more knowledgeable than any of us here. And yet he comes back week after week and makes similar mistakes.

We all called last year for the on-pitch referee to be allowed to review incidents on pitch side monitors, to take key decisions away from the VAR. By allowing this, it was argued, the officiating referee would be allowed to consider his decision in the context of the game he was refereeing. If anything this has made things even worse.

I accept we will never get the absolute consistency we crave. But if referees continue to make monumental blunders even after reviewing incidents on monitors then some action needs taking to prevent the same officials becoming repeat offenders.

But it wasn't't just Chris Kavanagh's decision, was it? Chris Kavanagh's decision was, if I remember correctly, to allow play to go on without even awarding a foul. That was until the VAR, who I believe was Michael Oliver & whom I think would be deemed a better referee than Kavanagh by the majority, interfered and persuaded/undermined Kavanagh sufficiently that he went to the screen & subsequently changed his decision.

As far as the red itself went I'd like to see what the referee's report says it was given for. I have no problem with the way the collision came about, but I'd agree with those that say Balbuena left more on Chilwell than was entirely necessary and that's what got him the card. And one of those was a former player who said he'd done the same in the past.

 

[Billysboots]

But it wasn't't just Chris Kavanagh's decision, was it? Chris Kavanagh's decision was, if I remember correctly, to allow play to go on without even awarding a foul. That was until the VAR, who I believe was Michael Oliver & whom I think would be deemed a better referee than Kavanagh by the majority, interfered and persuaded/undermined Kavanagh sufficiently that he went to the screen & subsequently changed his decision.

As far as the red itself went I'd like to see what the referee's report says it was given for. I have no problem with the way the collision came about, but I'd agree with those that say Balbuena left more on Chilwell than was entirely necessary and that's what got him the card. And one of those was a former player who said he'd done the same in the past.

But the final decision was Kavanagh’s.

Once I can perhaps forgive. But following so close after his decision to award a foul against Scott McTominay for failing to run with his arms in a straight jacket would tend to suggest Kavanagh thinks he’s refereeing a non-contact sport ?

 

[Orikoru]

But the final decision was Kavanagh’s.

Once I can perhaps forgive. But following so close after his decision to award a foul against Scott McTominay for failing to run with his arms in a straight jacket would tend to suggest Kavanagh thinks he’s refereeing a non-contact sport ?

Get over it, he caught Son in the face, it's a foul anywhere on the pitch. It doesn't cease to be a foul just because they scored a minute later and that somehow makes it unfair.

 

[Billysboots]

Get over it, he caught Son in the face, it's a foul anywhere on the pitch. It doesn't cease to be a foul just because they scored a minute later and that somehow makes it unfair.

You’ll say it’s a foul because you’re a Spurs fan, I’ll say it’s not because I support United! So neither of us can really be that impartial.

But every pundit I heard, and match report I read, were universal in that, if that was a foul, we should all pack up and go home.

Still, at least it didn’t effect the outcome ??

 

[Orikoru]

You’ll say it’s a foul because you’re a Spurs fan, I’ll say it’s not because I support United! So neither of us can really be that impartial.

But every pundit I heard, and match report I read, were universal in that, if that was a foul, we should all pack up and go home.

Still, at least it didn’t effect the outcome ??

I say it was a foul because it was a foul, he hit a man in the face.

 

[Blue in Munich]

But the final decision was Kavanagh’s.

Once I can perhaps forgive. But following so close after his decision to award a foul against Scott McTominay for failing to run with his arms in a straight jacket would tend to suggest Kavanagh thinks he’s refereeing a non-contact sport ?

And his decision was no foul until a senior referee intervened. I get your point but I'm not without some sympathy for Kavanagh in the circumstances.

 

[Orikoru]

And his decision was no foul until a senior referee intervened. I get your point but I'm not without some sympathy for Kavanagh in the circumstances.

Yeah, I think the point stands that no foul would have been awarded without VAR. And once VAR tells them to look at it, the refs feel under pressure to change their decision, as they believe that's why they've been told to look.

 

[Billysboots]

Yeah, I think the point stands that no foul would have been awarded without VAR. And once VAR tells them to look at it, the refs feel under pressure to change their decision, as they believe that's why they've been told to look.

I understand the thinking, but if any referee lacks the testicular fortitude to have a mind of their own, they should not be refereeing Sunday League football, never mind Premier League.

There are two issues in play here - VAR and the standard of refereeing. One needs sacking off entirely, the other a considerable amount of work.

 

[Orikoru]

I understand the thinking, but if any referee lacks the testicular fortitude to have a mind of their own, they should not be refereeing Sunday League football, never mind Premier League.

There are two issues in play here - VAR and the standard of refereeing. One needs sacking off entirely, the other a considerable amount of work.

Just another reason I believe there shouldn't be a Stockley Park team or whatever - it should be that if the ref wants to review something, he is able to. Not somebody telling him to. Because currently they are not reffing the games.

 

[Blue in Munich]

I understand the thinking, but if any referee lacks the testicular fortitude to have a mind of their own, they should not be refereeing Sunday League football, never mind Premier League.

There are two issues in play here - VAR and the standard of refereeing. One needs sacking off entirely, the other a considerable amount of work.

There are 3 issues in play here; the third being the amount of simulation cheating that the modern players bring into the game. We complain about the referees but how much can we really expect them to get right when the players go out of their way to have them over?

Edit: make that four; add the pundits defending the cheats with their "right to go down" mantra.

 

[Liverbirdie]

There are 3 issues in play here; the third being the amount of simulation cheating that the modern players bring into the game. We complain about the referees but how much can we really expect them to get right when the players go out of their way to have them over?

Edit: make that four; add the pundits defending the cheats with their "right to go down" mantra.

Self-imposed exile suits you so well.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Self-imposed exile suits you so well.

I was told you missed me.