The ref (see PGMOL thread)

[samaistonsrightfoot]

Be careful not to blink too aggressively.

Maybe a wink would be better. Double blinking could be classed as aggressiveness like capital letters.

Although winking could be deemed as sexually suggestive so it’s a fine line.

 

[Roker-73]

On the previous page you criticised a poster for a ridiculous comparison, and then you posted this.

How is it ridiculous? Being incompetent at your job gets you sacked

 

[Mowgli]

Again you keep trying to pin me down on individual decisions. You haven't got the intelligence to take a step back and get into a wider discussion. He's obviously just made a fuck up given his view at full speed from one angle.

I understand the wider aspect of refereeing. I just don't understand how fouls like the one posted can be given. You also defend the cretins when they get it wrong after seeing a still image on a screen


What makes that a difficult decision to get right?

 

[Matnab]

You will get inconsistancies in how a tackle is judged as at speed in a game its difficult with 1 view, however dissent is an easy one, if you swear at the ref you are carded and yesterday he chose to pick and choose when to enforce this, personally i would deem being told to fuck off to ny face worse than what Neil did.

I don't think it just comes down to swearing though. Dissent is measured on many more significant indicators than whether someone swore or not.

 

[Mowgli]

No I am saying just becuase one bad mistake is made, does not mean loads of good ones are not made in other games.

Just like a forward missing a easy chance does not mean great goals are scored in others.

Putting a link up of a agreed bad error, does prove fuck all.

I dont understand how it is an error though. The official is 5 yards away.

Hes either invented a foul, bottled it incase it leads to a goal or is bent.

Which is it? I understand alot of decisions are tough and subjective but they have zero excuse here. I'd be interested to know which of the 3 reasons it is.

 

[AC Mack]

How is it ridiculous? Being incompetent at your job gets you sacked

It's extreme hyperbole as well you know.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Doctors get sacked if they make mistakes

Bus Drivers would get sacked if they kept driving on the pavement

This!!!

How many doctors and bus drives, have people screaming at them while they doing their job, how many people try to purposefully cheat and con them occupations.

For what it’s worth the ref made a bad decision yesterday and had a bad game.

But if you genuinely can’t see going to a football matches how hard a ref job is then I give up.

As it’s f***ing obvious

 

[yossarian31]

One will always view the performance of a ref through a skewed lens

 

[soapster]

It's a mistake like all the others you have posted. Why do you think it keeps happening for? It's either every ref in the world ever has been absolutely shite or the job is tougher than you think. Stop focusing on individual decisions and lot at the wider picture. Why does every ref in the world continue to get individual decisions wrong?

we ALL KNOW that referees do sometimes get it badly wrong.

That really is not the issue. The issue is consistency within that game. (impossible to be over all games due to various permutations of events).

The second card for Neil was a terrible decision especially as the referee had already said he would emphasise with the players.

The decision not to send coburn off was staggering. I understand he may not have witnessed it, but he had the 4th official and linesman as witnesses.

we the supporters know nothing will happen over this.
If it was liverpool it would be headlines

 

[Roker-73]

It's extreme hyperbole as well you know.

Hope yesterdays ref is having a good day and isn’t struggling with the guilt of causing harm to 50,000 people through being a complete and utter arrogant fuck wit

 

[Methusalah]

I don't think it just comes down to swearing though. Dissent is measured on many more significant indicators than whether someone swore or not.

This seems incredibly arbitrary and gives the ref carte blanche depending on his mood.

 

[yossarian31]

How many doctors and bus drives, have people screaming at them while they doing their job, how many people try to purposefully cheat and con them occupations.

For what it’s worth the ref made a bad decision yesterday and had a bad game.

But if you genuinely can’t see going to a football matches how hard a ref job is then I give up.

As it’s f***ing obvious

In Rugby now they have taken away the pressure of the red card from the ref - he gives a yellow and its get referred to the video team - they have 10 mins to make a decision and look at everything before deciding to up it to a red or not

 

[Voice of fair play]

By that logic, why take any job in the world when you’re subject to performance reviews which could lead to dismissal if not adequate?

Because I would say there is many other processes at least there is in mind and suspect others to improve that performance rather than sacking after a few bad ratings.

 

[Roker-73]

How many doctors and bus drives, have people screaming at them while they doing their job, how many people try to purposefully cheat and con them occupations.

For what it’s worth the ref made a bad decision yesterday and had a bad game.

But if you genuinely can’t see going to a football matches how hard a ref job is then I give up.

As it’s f***ing obvious

Trying to con the ref is part of the game (and FWIW Ballard should have stayed down writhing in agony holding his face after Coburn caught him, rather than jumping up and getting in his face). That’s why they’re there

If all players were honest and admitted every time they made a foul, didn’t try to claim a foul that wasn’t etc - then you wouldn’t need a ref. The players would just ref it amongst them

 

[Georgewhitt]

It’s a ridiculous rule, and it’s inconsistently applied.

It's not a ridiculous rule. It is needed.

But you are right, it is inconsistently applied. That's the issue.

 

[redandwhiterob]

I understand the wider aspect of refereeing. I just don't understand how fouls like the one posted can be given. You also defend the cretins when they get it wrong after seeing a still image on a screen


What makes that a difficult decision to get right?

If it makes you feel better putting words in my mouth then you crack on. I do take great solace in the point that you had zero interest in any type of debate. Just continue to ignore any point I put to you then continue to put your fingers in your ears and scream about an individual decision. Like I said it's like dealing with a bairn

 

[Matnab]

This seems incredibly arbitrary and gives the ref carte blanche depending on his mood.

The refereeing of games needs to be arbitrary unless you want football being administered by really stupid binary rules. The 'inconsistency' feature that gets constantly trotted out is incredibly misguided.

How on earth can you begin to come up with a sensible ruling on dissent that satisfies fans weird misunderstanding of the concept of consistency.

It's not a ridiculous rule. It is needed.

But you are right, it is inconsistently applied. That's the issue.

How can it be applied consistently?

 

[Mowgli]

If it makes you feel better putting words in my mouth then you crack on. I do take great solace in the point that you had zero interest in any type of debate. Just continue to ignore any point I put to you then continue to put your fingers in your ears and scream about an individual decision. Like I said it's like dealing with a bairn

Still can't explain how it's a free kick then as usual.

Because some decisions are hard that means they all must be in your head.

 

[Dick Fitzwell]

Every foul and every instance is seen from better or worse angles and has better or worse views and all have to be given in spilt seconds.

Consistently will never happen even in same game, because all fouls are different, every game you have different arguments about the same foul some saying it was some saying it isn’t, and that is even after replays.

Of course with one look and split seconds to decide some fouls are going to look worse or better than they actually are, happens every single game, it’s not an exact science.

How about consistency over swearing?

Also are you agreeing that they missed so many incidents surely between the 4th official, the ref and the 2 assistants they would’ve seen the elbow and headbutt

 

[Methusalah]

The refereeing of games needs to be arbitrary unless you want football being administered by really stupid binary rules. The 'inconsistency' feature that gets constantly trotted out is incredibly misguided.

How on earth can you begin to come up with a sensible ruling on dissent that satisfies fans weird misunderstanding of the concept of consistency.


How can it be applied consistently?

I would suggest that appealing for a decision is very very different from giving the ref personal abuse. In the last week I have seen the former yellow carded and the latter ignored. Inconsistent or what?