Referees

[kennyk2]

Dec 3, 2016 11:53:54 GMT 1 @longdistancerunner said:

Right, I'll level with you. I don't think there's a referees conspiracy against Town. That's a bit fanciful. There is, however, a fundamental problem with refereeing and it is exemplified by what happened on the Monday and Friday Sky games. I am amazed the 'pundits' haven't picked up on the dire officiating and the way both matches were effectively decided by blokes who weren't even kicking the frigging ball.
Saying that, I wouldn't do the job for all the Peroni in Italy. You need the skin of a rhino, selective deafness and eyes in your arsehole.
I think some refs are just shite at their job and that is the same in any profession. It just seems that we keep getting the really shit ones.

That's funny, the Newcastle fans seem to think there is a conspiracy against them, but as I mentioned they need to get used to Championship refereeing. Like I said, it's something that is testable, but the results might not be to some people's liking. Interesting to hear the thoughts of fans from other unfashionable teams such as Burton, Rotherham, Preston. I bet Reading are not complaining about referee's decisions if the 9 penalties so far this year statement is true.

[Deleted]

Dec 3, 2016 12:34:56 GMT 1 kennyk2 said:

Dec 3, 2016 11:53:54 GMT 1 @longdistancerunner said:

Right, I'll level with you. I don't think there's a referees conspiracy against Town. That's a bit fanciful. There is, however, a fundamental problem with refereeing and it is exemplified by what happened on the Monday and Friday Sky games. I am amazed the 'pundits' haven't picked up on the dire officiating and the way both matches were effectively decided by blokes who weren't even kicking the frigging ball.
Saying that, I wouldn't do the job for all the Peroni in Italy. You need the skin of a rhino, selective deafness and eyes in your arsehole.
I think some refs are just shite at their job and that is the same in any profession. It just seems that we keep getting the really shit ones.

That's funny, the Newcastle fans seem to think there is a conspiracy against them, but as I mentioned they need to get used to Championship refereeing. Like I said, it's something that is testable, but the results might not be to some people's liking. Interesting to hear the thoughts of fans from other unfashionable teams such as Burton, Rotherham, Preston. I bet Reading are not complaining about referee's decisions if the 9 penalties so far this year statement is true.

Be interesting to see all the penalties they've had and how they compare to the ones we were denied on Monday. It would also be interesting to see the number of touches they've had in the box this season and whether that positively correlates with them having been awarded the highest number of penalties.

It just doesn't make any sense that one team can have 9 penalties and another have zero. It just points to inconsistent refereeing or at least each referee interpretating/enforcing the rules differently

[kennyk2]

Dec 3, 2016 12:42:56 GMT 1 @pointykay said:

Dec 3, 2016 12:34:56 GMT 1 kennyk2 said:

That's funny, the Newcastle fans seem to think there is a conspiracy against them, but as I mentioned they need to get used to Championship refereeing. Like I said, it's something that is testable, but the results might not be to some people's liking. Interesting to hear the thoughts of fans from other unfashionable teams such as Burton, Rotherham, Preston. I bet Reading are not complaining about referee's decisions if the 9 penalties so far this year statement is true.

Be interesting to see all the penalties they've had and how they compare to the ones we were denied on Monday. It would also be interesting to see the number of touches they've had in the box this season and whether that positively correlates with them having been awarded the highest number of penalties.

It just doesn't make any sense that one team can have 9 penalties and another have zero. It just points to inconsistent refereeing or at least each referee interpretating/enforcing the rules differently

Correlation doesn't mean causation and all that, but I think you might have something there regarding the number of attacking player touches in the penalty area. But then you would think that touches in the penalty area would lead to more attempts on goal and more goals (fag packet calc - Reading are joint 6th highest scorers).

[galpharm2400]

just two things wrong with officials these days..

the ones who has a guess(if you didnt see it or are not sure, dont give it)

the ones who think we came to see them and cant have a word with players without stopping the whole game and bringing the player unto them for 'admonishment'.. its bollox..

[detox]

refs get pretty well paid nowadays, and are full time in the job.But my old chestnut which I keep prattling on about ..is the secret society that surrounds refs...What marks did they get,how did the assessor rate them, what consequences (if any) were there from the refs association,were errors admitted afterwards but kept within the 4 walls of the post match discussion..why don't refs have to face the TV /radio pundits after games like managers ..etc ? Everyone makes an error,I accept that - but why not be open and honest about it, and apologise to the club and the fans ? Transparency is what is needed but we have the opposite,one word of (justified) criticism for a wrong decision and managers are fined !! What ?

At the end of the season if Town miss put on the play-offs by a couple of points,how much will that have cost the club in £££'s - all down to a ref making wrong calls...I don't accept the argument about swings and roundabouts...that's just a cop out to ...and who actually keeps a factual record of the gains and losses each club has from duff refereeing ?

[Deleted]

I think they are all wankers.

[impact]

Dec 3, 2016 12:49:49 GMT 1 kennyk2 said:

Dec 3, 2016 12:42:56 GMT 1 @pointykay said:

Be interesting to see all the penalties they've had and how they compare to the ones we were denied on Monday. It would also be interesting to see the number of touches they've had in the box this season and whether that positively correlates with them having been awarded the highest number of penalties.

It just doesn't make any sense that one team can have 9 penalties and another have zero. It just points to inconsistent refereeing or at least each referee interpretating/enforcing the rules differently

Correlation doesn't mean causation and all that, but I think you might have something there regarding the number of attacking player touches in the penalty area. But then you would think that touches in the penalty area would lead to more attempts on goal and more goals (fag packet calc - Reading are joint 6th highest scorers).

Take off the 5 penalties that they've scored (they've missed 4) and they have exactly the same number of goals we have.

[Deleted]

What about getting rid of the 4th official? All they do is annoy the managers/coaches and get involved in every day bollocks like kicking water bottles. Have two refs on the pitch with equal refereering powers who can quickly consult regarding important decisions. All the linesmen do is offside and throw-ins. Nothing else.
And finally, make them accountable and take away some of this higher power mentality that currently exists, and makes everyone think they are wankers.

[impact]

Dec 3, 2016 13:25:36 GMT 1 @longdistancerunner said:

What about getting rid of the 4th official? All they do is annoy the managers/coaches and get involved in every day bollocks like kicking water bottles. Have two refs on the pitch with equal refereering powers who can quickly consult regarding important decisions. All the linesmen do is offside and throw-ins. Nothing else.
And finally, make them accountable and take away some of this higher power mentality that currently exists, and makes everyone think they are wankers.

We have enough problem with 1 ref making a decision, imagine the farce having 2 giving completely different ones?

[Deleted]

Dec 3, 2016 13:27:47 GMT 1 impact said:

Dec 3, 2016 13:25:36 GMT 1 @longdistancerunner said:

What about getting rid of the 4th official? All they do is annoy the managers/coaches and get involved in every day bollocks like kicking water bottles. Have two refs on the pitch with equal refereering powers who can quickly consult regarding important decisions. All the linesmen do is offside and throw-ins. Nothing else.
And finally, make them accountable and take away some of this higher power mentality that currently exists, and makes everyone think they are wankers.

We have enough problem with 1 ref making a decision, imagine the farce having 2 giving completely different ones?

Good point I suppose. But at the moment we one prima donna and three yes men who never challenge the ref.

[Headless Chicken]

Dec 3, 2016 12:34:56 GMT 1 kennyk2 said:

Dec 3, 2016 11:53:54 GMT 1 @longdistancerunner said:

Right, I'll level with you. I don't think there's a referees conspiracy against Town. That's a bit fanciful. There is, however, a fundamental problem with refereeing and it is exemplified by what happened on the Monday and Friday Sky games. I am amazed the 'pundits' haven't picked up on the dire officiating and the way both matches were effectively decided by blokes who weren't even kicking the frigging ball.
Saying that, I wouldn't do the job for all the Peroni in Italy. You need the skin of a rhino, selective deafness and eyes in your arsehole.
I think some refs are just shite at their job and that is the same in any profession. It just seems that we keep getting the really shit ones.

That's funny, the Newcastle fans seem to think there is a conspiracy against them, but as I mentioned they need to get used to Championship refereeing. Like I said, it's something that is testable, but the results might not be to some people's liking. Interesting to hear the thoughts of fans from other unfashionable teams such as Burton, Rotherham, Preston. I bet Reading are not complaining about referee's decisions if the 9 penalties so far this year statement is true.

All club's have fans that do, just like they think the media is against them. You always get them ringing Talksport and whining that they're victimised or ignored. Paranoid weirdos.

Saying that we don't seem to be getting the rub of the green 😆

[morleyterrier]

.............................

[impact]

Blackburn are another to add to the list of teams who have had more penalties this season than we have had in 21 months.

[Terriersmad]

It'd be easier to take decisions against us if we ever benefited from any. You'd think after Monday we'd get a bit of luck, but nope. Sounds like it was a penalty, but it doesn't make it any easier to stomach - we simply don't get what other teams do.

[Deleted]

Dec 2, 2016 21:39:41 GMT 1 @pointykay said:

Amazing 15 minutes of football

I wonder what percentage of penalties hit down the middle at waste height are saved? I bet it's very low yet there are still very few who do it

Less than 24 hours later we are on the receiving end of a penalty hit down the middle at waste height and surprise surprise it goes in. Your chances of success going down the middle must be far greater than putting it to either side given the keepers hardly ever stand still

[Doc Halladay 32]

Dec 3, 2016 19:45:59 GMT 1 @pointykay said:

Dec 2, 2016 21:39:41 GMT 1 @pointykay said:

Amazing 15 minutes of football

I wonder what percentage of penalties hit down the middle at waste height are saved? I bet it's very low yet there are still very few who do it

Less than 24 hours later we are on the receiving end of a penalty hit down the middle at waste height and surprise surprise it goes in. Your chances of success going down the middle must be far greater than putting it to either side given the keepers hardly ever stand still

You know which way those odds will go if it is a Town player taking the spot kick.

If we hit it down the middle at waist height, the keeper will still be too stunned by the actual award of a penalty to Town that he wont be able to dive and will make an easy catch to make it look the worst spot kick ever taken

[Deleted]

There's enough money in the game nowadays to have a video Ref like they do in both codes of Rugby, cricket etc.

No excuse really. I'm sure it'll happen one day, just like goal line technology.

Technology has moved on a little since 1966, so there should be very few contentious calls...

[Bassingham Terrier]

Dec 3, 2016 13:21:07 GMT 1 impact said:

Dec 3, 2016 12:49:49 GMT 1 kennyk2 said:

Correlation doesn't mean causation and all that, but I think you might have something there regarding the number of attacking player touches in the penalty area. But then you would think that touches in the penalty area would lead to more attempts on goal and more goals (fag packet calc - Reading are joint 6th highest scorers).

Take off the 5 penalties that they've scored (they've missed 4) and they have exactly the same number of goals we have.

Actually ... they have missed four, but at least two of those they have scored from the rebound.
Garath McCleary has done that twice (I believe)

[hasta el pueblo]

The previous 4 penalties that Danny Graham has taken, he hit them to the keepers right, yesterday Danny Ward dived to his right and just our luck Graham hits it straight down the middle. 😣

[Deleted]

Human error will always be the weak point in refereeing.

However, if there's a stat geek on here, is there any way to allocate games, such that each Ref has 2 games per club per season. i.e. every club has the same 23 Refs throughout the season?

[terrier25]

If Mondays ref had taken charge of yesterdays game, and yeaterdays ref had done mondays game we could well have had 6 points. You could say the allocation of officials has cost us 5 points. It really shouldnt matter which individual you get.
All i want is 100% consistency and you won't get that with humans. We need video technology to stop these incompetents ruining the game.
The game has the money to do it, it needs to be done as there is too much at stake nowadays.

Man utd would have bewn down to 9 men today with a different ref. How is that fair on Everton?

[huddersfc]

Firstly I dont think they should have video referees at all, I think it would spoil the game completely. Imagine having to sit there while a video ref watches it while everyone waits to see the big screen decision like in rugby. Would you have to then stop the clock while they reviewed it, in which case you would need a time keeper for the whole game, or would they have to add it on at the end in which case we would be playing 5 - 10 mins minimum at the end of each half. Or you could give the video ref only 10 seconds to view it to speed the game up, but then its going to be just as inaccurate as the ref making an on field call and people would be complaining that they didnt take enough time to review such a big decision and get it right. For me it would just completely spoil the flow of the game, you would still get opiniated decisions especially for things like handball, that half the time pundits dont even agree on after seeing it about 5 times from different angles.

What I would prefer to see is retrospective bans for diving and play acting, and harsh bans, not the odd game so they would still risk it. Its cheating, and should be erradicated from the game, heavy fines and a long ban would soon stop these wimps cheating. Currently you get the same punishment for taking your shirt off, or celebrating with your own fans, as you do cheating.


On the subject of decisions this season against us, I would tend to agree that there isnt some kind of conspiracy against us, as that is normally a crackpot idea where you think everything is against you. However I do think that there is something fundamentally wrong with the way that games are refereed in terms of fairness and without any kind of bias. You cant tell me that Reading had 9 penalties awarded that were all more obvious than ours that were turned down.
Or what about the penalty that was awarded to sheff wednesday? why was that awarded and the 2 against birmingham not awarded? Look at the differences, against wednesday van la parra was 2 yards away from the ball, yes his hands were in an unnatural position, the ball was blasted at him from 2 yards, so how intentional could it have been? you could have arguments either way, the ref made the call, penalty. Fine. Birmingham handball was a cross, there was about 15 yards inbetween players, lots of time for the Brum player to move his hands away. His hands were in an unnatural position when the ball hit them, out in front rather than by his side. So why werent either of them given if the other was given against us? Surely if the referees are professional they all follow the same guidelines when it comes to handballs? I mean they are trained as to what constitutes different colour cards, the offside rule, handballs and so on.


Its about time we asked the questions and sent all the comparable clips and ask for an explanation as to why we are being cost so many points from such basic simple decisions, when the same decisions are being given every week down the other end of the pitch. If there was consistency then it wouldnt bother me at all, people make mistakes but inconsistency is the most frustrating thing and its becoming very annoying at the moment.

[morleyterrier]

Dec 4, 2016 23:33:15 GMT 1 terrier25 said:

If Mondays ref had taken charge of yesterdays game, and yeaterdays ref had done mondays game we could well have had 6 points. You could say the allocation of officials has cost us 5 points. It really shouldnt matter which individual you get.
All i want is 100% consistency and you won't get that with humans. We need video technology to stop these incompetents ruining the game.
The game has the money to do it, it needs to be done as there is too much at stake nowadays.

Man utd would have bewn down to 9 men today with a different ref. How is that fair on Everton?

Then you bring the Birmingham home game in to it and there's another two points

[trailingleg]

The penalty that Newcastle were awarded against us was given to bring them back into the game IMO. I watched it several times and could not see an infringement that was worth a goal against us. Wednesday were awarded a penalty against us for a 50/50 shout and yet last season their player clearly handled a Billing header on the goal line which was waved away without a second thought. Reading are particularly favoured by referees for a reason that I think is suspicious. You know when Town go there that you will either get a man sent off or a penalty awarded against you in dubious circumstances. There is a referees' 'club' that selects its favoured teams and its scapegoats. I thought so before, but after the events of last week I am more than convinced. If the Hefele incident had been a Blackburn player in our box it categorically would not have been given as a penalty kick.
I believe that it's bias, not inconsistency.

[kennyk2]

Dec 5, 2016 7:49:59 GMT 1 trailingleg said:

The penalty that Newcastle were awarded against us was given to bring them back into the game IMO. I watched it several times and could not see an infringement that was worth a goal against us. Wednesday were awarded a penalty against us for a 50/50 shout and yet last season their player clearly handled a Billing header on the goal line which was waved away without a second thought. Reading are particularly favoured by referees for a reason that I think is suspicious. You know when Town go there that you will either get a man sent off or a penalty awarded against you in dubious circumstances. There is a referees' 'club' that selects its favoured teams and its scapegoats. I thought so before, but after the events of last week I am more than convinced. If the Hefele incident had been a Blackburn player in our box it categorically would not have been given as a penalty kick.
I believe that it's bias, not inconsistency.

Agree with most of what you say, but I think that this is subconscious bias and if recognised by the authorities is something that they could address.

[Henry Mcgee]

Dec 5, 2016 7:49:59 GMT 1 trailingleg said:

The penalty that Newcastle were awarded against us was given to bring them back into the game IMO. I watched it several times and could not see an infringement that was worth a goal against us. Wednesday were awarded a penalty against us for a 50/50 shout and yet last season their player clearly handled a Billing header on the goal line which was waved away without a second thought. Reading are particularly favoured by referees for a reason that I think is suspicious. You know when Town go there that you will either get a man sent off or a penalty awarded against you in dubious circumstances. There is a referees' 'club' that selects its favoured teams and its scapegoats. I thought so before, but after the events of last week I am more than convinced. If the Hefele incident had been a Blackburn player in our box it categorically would not have been given as a penalty kick.
I believe that it's bias, not inconsistency.

100% penalty.  

Believing that refs are biased against your club?  Mad, just mad.

[Deleted]

Dec 5, 2016 19:14:13 GMT 1 Henry Mcgee said:

Dec 5, 2016 7:49:59 GMT 1 trailingleg said:

The penalty that Newcastle were awarded against us was given to bring them back into the game IMO. I watched it several times and could not see an infringement that was worth a goal against us. Wednesday were awarded a penalty against us for a 50/50 shout and yet last season their player clearly handled a Billing header on the goal line which was waved away without a second thought. Reading are particularly favoured by referees for a reason that I think is suspicious. You know when Town go there that you will either get a man sent off or a penalty awarded against you in dubious circumstances. There is a referees' 'club' that selects its favoured teams and its scapegoats. I thought so before, but after the events of last week I am more than convinced. If the Hefele incident had been a Blackburn player in our box it categorically would not have been given as a penalty kick.
I believe that it's bias, not inconsistency.

100% penalty.  

Believing that refs are biased against your club?  Mad, just mad.

Not sure how you can say 100% penalty given referees have a different interpretation of the hand ball rule.

It would be a lot easier if it was just any handball is a penalty. Yes there would be some harsh decisions but at least it would be fair and not open to interpretation. Plus there would be more goals which is never a bad thing

[trailingleg]

Dec 5, 2016 19:14:13 GMT 1 Henry Mcgee said:

Dec 5, 2016 7:49:59 GMT 1 trailingleg said:

The penalty that Newcastle were awarded against us was given to bring them back into the game IMO. I watched it several times and could not see an infringement that was worth a goal against us. Wednesday were awarded a penalty against us for a 50/50 shout and yet last season their player clearly handled a Billing header on the goal line which was waved away without a second thought. Reading are particularly favoured by referees for a reason that I think is suspicious. You know when Town go there that you will either get a man sent off or a penalty awarded against you in dubious circumstances. There is a referees' 'club' that selects its favoured teams and its scapegoats. I thought so before, but after the events of last week I am more than convinced. If the Hefele incident had been a Blackburn player in our box it categorically would not have been given as a penalty kick.
I believe that it's bias, not inconsistency.

100% penalty.  

Believing that refs are biased against your club?  Mad, just mad.

Why thank you sir. It's good to know that there are some sane, balanced people like you still around.

[Bassingham Terrier]

Whilst perhaps not 100% convinced that the RVLP incident should have been a penalty, there is no doubt in my mind that referees and their assistants/linos are NOT biased against Town; they're just universally shite.

[Doc Halladay 32]

Dec 8, 2016 18:41:16 GMT 1 Bassingham Terrier said:

Whilst perhaps not 100% convinced that the RVLP incident should have been a penalty, there is no doubt in my mind that referees and their assistants/linos are NOT biased against Town; they're just universally shite.

Absolutely agree with the sentiment of the ability and unbiased nature of the Refs, but without wanting to reopen the RVLP handball debate again, IMO it wasn't a deliberate attempt to handle the ball but an instinctive defensive movement to cover his face, which by the laws of the game means no penalty, but similarly I have no problem in the penalty decision as it blocked or changed the direction of a goalbound shot!

A tinkering with the wording of the law, which is quite vague in the definition of deliberate, may be required

This article explains what David Elleray used to look for...

Former Premier League referee David Elleray said the referee's interpretation depends on whether the hand or arm is in an "unnatural" position at the point of contact.

Referees often consult their assistants on decisions
"Referees look at two specifics - did the hand or arm go towards the ball or in a manner which would block the ball, or is the hand in a position where it would not normally be?" Elleray told BBC Sport.

"The challenging decisions are if the defending player spreads their arms to make themselves bigger.

"If the ball hits the arm then the referee must decide whether this action was to deliberately block the ball or whether the player has raised their arms to protect themselves - especially if the ball is hit at speed."

The referee and referees' assistants, therefore, have a matter of seconds to weigh up these factors, and take the appropriate action.

And there will always be at least one manager, 11 players and thousands of fans who will insist they have been hard done by.

news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/rules_and_equipment/4524354.stm