www.altyfans.co.uk
General Category => Altrincham FC First Team => Topic started by: Is this it? on May 26, 2021, 08:08:39 AM
-
Rarely the subject of praise, but I thought the ref last night deserves a mention and acknowledged in helping to make last night such an entertaining game. Interesting to see that, the quality and intelligence we sometimes see in a player, also extends to the men in black.
-
I actually thought the ref let too much go in the first half. Eg there was a really bad tackle on (I think) Colclough in the build-up to the incident where their player was booked for diving and a blatant two-handed shove on Senior, both of which went unpunished. But that tendency did indeed work in our favour for our goal with the excellent advantage he played.
The decision on the booking for diving was also a crucial one - brave and absolutely correct.
-
Overall I thought the referee was excellent, the advantage played for our goal was super and the booking for the dive was correct also.
-
I thought that with very few exceptions, including the advantage he was no more than ordinary.
The Eastleigh No 5 should have been cautioned immediately after our goal and his foul identification haphazard at best
-
The performance of last night's referee was one of the best I've seen at this level. You can nitpick all you like about this player should have been booked or he missed a foul at some point, but there were two hugely-important decisions that had a massive influence on the game, and he got both spot-on. Refs are often praised for playing advantage when it's actually an obvious thing to do, but last night's wasn't. It was quite a bad foul, for one thing, which could easily have prompted a hasty whistle, and, in addition, I didn't think the advantage was all that apparent to begin with. Tom Peers was confronted by a couple of defenders and, for a moment at least, didn't particularly seem to have the ball completely under control. Again, the whistle could easily have gone, but it didn't, and we know what happened next. For the penalty that wasn't, he had to be in a good enough position to judge and be able to make his mind up in a split-second on first viewing in real time. Up on the gantry, we were able to confirm he'd got that one right as well, though only after we'd had the benefit of a replay on the TV screen. You can pick on free-kicks he may have missed, but we're talking about two decisions that had to be right or we'd have lost. In fact, just one wrong, and it would have cost us the game. He got both right, and I think that's why Shaun Densmore went up to him all smiles at the end and delivered what looked very much like a heartfelt well done.
-
With one exception: pretty much overall praise for a ref who actually seems to understand football. Got every critical decision right.
-
The performance of last night's referee was one of the best I've seen at this level. You can nitpick all you like about this player should have been booked or he missed a foul at some point, but there were two hugely-important decisions that had a massive influence on the game, and he got both spot-on. Refs are often praised for playing advantage when it's actually an obvious thing to do, but last night's wasn't. It was quite a bad foul, for one thing, which could easily have prompted a hasty whistle, and, in addition, I didn't think the advantage was all that apparent to begin with. Tom Peers was confronted by a couple of defenders and, for a moment at least, didn't particularly seem to have the ball completely under control. Again, the whistle could easily have gone, but it didn't, and we know what happened next. For the penalty that wasn't, he had to be in a good enough position to judge and be able to make his mind up in a split-second on first viewing in real time. Up on the gantry, we were able to confirm he'd got that one right as well, though only after we'd had the benefit of a replay on the TV screen. You can pick on free-kicks he may have missed, but we're talking about two decisions that had to be right or we'd have lost. In fact, just one wrong, and it would have cost us the game. He got both right, and I think that's why Shaun Densmore went up to him all smiles at the end and delivered what looked very much like a heartfelt well done.
Whilst taking your point, to base an evaluation on two decisions is dangerous.
There are more criteria to evaluate a performance on than tha
-
Not remotely dangerous in this instance. If he missed one or two things - as all refs will because they are only human - they were not major ones that greatly affected the outcome. The two that did, he got completely right. They were the really, really important decisions - neither one straightforward, at that - and he was spot-on for both, so that adds up to a top performance for me.
-
Guess we'll have to agree to disagree then.
All I'll say in closing is that if I, operating 5 levels below Mr Parsons in the Refereeing rankings and about 12 league levels, performed similarly I would be put into "special measures " to use a frequently utilised phrase
-
And my closing remark would be that if missing a few things that had no bearing on the outcome but getting two absolutely major decisions that did directly affect it 100 per cent right ended up putting a referee in special measures, then the system is fundamentally wrong. That is what I would call 'dangerous'.
-
I thought that referee was awful;
1) Took an age to make decisions after a foul had clearly been committed
2) Missed a two footed foul on Colclough in the half way line
3) From my position on the golf road it looked like a penalty not a dive (their player was still moaning about it at half time).
4) Didn’t book their centre back for the foul on Hancock leading to the equaliser.
5) Got very lucky with the advantage (didn’t play one 5 mins before when Colclough was clear down the left wing).
6) Didnt fill me with confidence he was in control of the game.
The fact there is a thread about the referee says that he was noticed. To me a good referee isn’t noticed during the game. The female ref from the game before was head and shoulders better. The guy from Tuesday would have sent Kossy off when he saw the injury to the Yeovil player, she rightly judged the tackle and gave a yellow.
-
I’m not one to shy away from criticising a ref but to criticise him for a mistake he might have made in a game he wasn’t at does feel a little harsh!
-
The fact there is a thread about the referee says that he was noticed. To me a good referee isn’t noticed during the game.
I haven't got the stats to prove it, but I'm guessing that the vast majority of posts on here where a referee is mentioned, do so from a negative perspective. I started this post because I felt the ref's performance on Tuesday (and I'd include the female ref on Saturday) merited mentioning for its positives. He was 'noticed' only when required to make key key decisions and on those occasions he got it right.
-
I think that it is quite telling when mention is made of the two things he got right.
At this level, 1 below football league, getting something right shouldn't be so remarkable
-
I think that it is quite telling when mention is made of the two things he got right.
At this level, 1 below football league, getting something right shouldn't be so remarkable
I'm glad you said "shouldn't". We've had some unbelievably poor officials at this level over the years. On a scale from 1-10 I thought Mr.Parsons rated 7. Ms.Welch impressed me, and was a 9.
-
Most of the comments re. Officials is indeed often negative (mine included). I thought the female ref on Saturday was superb, though I thought she had a bit of a stinker in a match involving us earlier in the season. I suppose consistency is the key determinant to a good official and I suppose you'd hope for more of that the higher up you go in the pyramid.
-
I think that it is quite telling when mention is made of the two things he got right.
At this level, 1 below football league, getting something right shouldn't be so remarkable
I think a couple of the big decisions he got right have been praised not because he got them right, but because they were potentially critical but also decisions that you could easily understand had he got them wrong.
-
Which was the basis of my initial point.
In my opinion he got a lot more wrong than right, including not cautioning the Eastleigh No 5
I was expressing that I would have hoped a level 2A would have put in an overall better show