Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Nasha]

Phil

As you have seen from previous posts in the past, I have been lenient towards officials at our games. This is mainly due to the poor standard we see at the highest level, hence why I expect very poor decisions at our level. However, today's events have made me question the referees responsibility. They have become such a high profile in the game.

So I put to you. Anthony Taylor. I do not doubt he is one of the best referees in this country. But he has made a few high profile 'errors' to the majority. Do you think it is time referees came out and explained there decisions?

I cannot see any reason why this would have a negative effect. If the ref came out and explained decisions, they may be able to gain the respect that that referees in rugby do

[AltyTunnelSteward]

Nasha

In an ideal world you would be right. However, as you will be aware we don't live in a perfect world

I will pm you with my response some time shortly

[Jimmy Hill]

Nasha

In an ideal world you would be right. However, as you will be aware we don't live in a perfect world

I will pm you with my response some time shortly

Why can't you just reply on this thread?

[Hamilton]

Nasha

In an ideal world you would be right. However, as you will be aware we don't live in a perfect world

I will pm you with my response some time shortly

Why can't you just reply on this thread?

I would be interested to see the answer.

[wayno]

It's like motd all over again ha ha

[AltyTunnelSteward]

Here is the answer I sent to Nasha


As I said, in an ideal world, Match Officials would be able to come out after a game and explain decisions.

There are however two major considerations which make this impractical.

Firstly the Media:

Shall we say, for example, Anthony Taylor has given a penalty for what he percieved to be a foul. In the post match interview he is asked about said penalty and replies that from his position on the edge of the "D" he saw John Terry trip Romelu Lukaku.
The guy interviewing him then shows a clip which proves that there was no contact. This is from a camera behind the goal and is therefore from a vantage point Anthony will never have but still it proves that the decision was in fact arguably wrong. This will then bring into doubt the credibility of decisions made in future games, not only by Anthony but by all officials and also may impugn the integrity of a player who has (arguably) been shown to have dived

Then - Our litigious society:

Continuing the above scenario, Everton score the Penalty and win the game. By so doing they qualify for the Champions League whilst Chelsea miss out on Europe entirely.

As the 'evidence' would suggest that the penalty award was incorrect and given the financial repercussions it is sadly not beyond the realms of possibilty that Chelsea, their owners or their supporters group(s) would instigate legal action to at least have the fixture replayed if not to attempt to extract compensation (damages) from either Anthony, the PL, the FA or all three.

Hope this very brief note helps to explain at least in part.

I could have expanded this and am happy to do so if you wish as there are other potentially relevant matters which might be taken into account

Please do not "shoot the messenger" on this nor interpret it as an excuse for officials to evade responsibility for their actions.

Believe me, if a Referee stuffs up big style there are repercussions

[eightiesrobin]

As the Queen Mother said "Never complain, never explain".

I think ATS makes a good point. I suppose the only alternative is video technology, like cricket's DRS, or in rugby.

Saying that, do you really think you'll get that in the lower echelons of football? Would you want it? Imagine the cost of the gear, paying extra officials etc, the fact that games would last for 2 hours plus.

[Jezza]

for the first excuse....what happens now?...the ref stays silent and tv evidence still proves the decision was wrong......leading onto the second point which is that legal action for a refs mistake  hasn't happened and isn't made any more likely than the ref appearing to be human and admitting to making a human error which he has already been proven to make.....maybe the ref could explain decisions by saying he had seen something not picked up on camera thus avoiding legal action......

all this protecting refs by not having them explain their decisions and not using tv evidence to retrospectively punish things because the ref noted them at the time is having the opposite effect....it is exposing them to criticism that they cannot respond to and causes football fans to make up their own minds.....it is also exposing the football authorities as untouchable dinosaurs hated by fans which is an emotion the refs get by association.

pretty simple really...you earn credibility with honesty...not from hiding away.

everyone accepts refs make mistakes......and we get angry when it costs us.......the holier than thou untouchable 'protection' makes things worse....4

and yes I'd go with video technology.....games of rugby and cricket do not last any longer....I would suggest there is enough money in the game to provide it at every semi pro level.

[jiminlondon]

I personally think that unless you think the ref is bent you just have to accept his decision, all this questioning is a direct result of sky and all the matches being shown from multiple angles and dissected (see also fans thinking they are managers)

My main point is that I always wonder if the advocates of video technology have ever watched any of the sports that use it. Every time I watch rugby (both codes) the game is interrupted for several minutes at a time as they go over a decision that often can be seen with the naked eye. I also believe it undermines referees, when was the last time you saw a cricket umpire give a run out without going to the video, even clear ones?

[Derek Stubbs]

Referees only have 1 angle of view, two maybe if the nearest assistant has a view.

Tv cameras have probably at least 10 different angles to prove if a decision was correct or not & each one might get replayed 10 times.

You can't compare Football to rugby or cricket as football doesn't use video technology to help the officials.

Maybe it's time for Technology to help the officials like in Rugby or Cricket & then we may get explanations from them at the end of the game
or we may not need any explanations as all the decisions would be correct.