Deadman and other inept officials.

[Guest Bilo]

Deadman is very poor but I think it's been established we deserved nothing from the game yesterday. Time to move on, dust ourselves down and prepare for the Wigan game. Would we have got a draw if he hadn't made umpteen mistakes? Quite possibly. The thing is, we'd have got all three if we'd played better. 

 

With James suspended, it gives others a big opportunity to stake a claim for the midfield spot. 

 

As I say, he's certainly down there with the worst referees in the league. Moss, Deadman and Ward are all shocking. I'm not sure what the solution is if I'm honest, there'll always be a recruitment problem with referees due to the stick they get. Perhaps if you were to make referees more professional, it seems silly to have somebody working in an office five days a week and then officiating a game in a league with professional players where promotion is worth over £100m.

[THEBIGJOHNSTEADER;]

Deadman is very poor but I think it's been established we deserved nothing from the game yesterday. Time to move on, dust ourselves down and prepare for the Wigan game. Would we have got a draw if he hadn't made umpteen mistakes? Quite possibly. The thing is, we'd have got all three if we'd played better.

With James suspended, it gives others a big opportunity to stake a claim for the midfield spot.

As I say, he's certainly down there with the worst referees in the league. Moss, Deadman and Ward are all shocking. I'm not sure what the solution is if I'm honest, there'll always be a recruitment problem with referees due to the stick they get. Perhaps if you were to make referees more professional, it seems silly to have somebody working in an office five days a week and then officiating a game in a league with professional players where promotion is worth over £100m.

Was it you I saw dropping acid with Mattp in the rainbow and dove last night?

[Guest Bilo]

Was it you I saw dropping acid with Mattp in the rainbow and dove last night?

 

Aye, my arse looked like I sat in a bowl of piping hot porridge this morning.

[GingerrrFox]

Anyone got Liverpool v Man Utd on? Where's Welbeck's card for that?

Fvck off.

That was a stonewall penalty.

[AdamN]

Transparency is key. Right now we're not allowed to hear the opinions of the referees, probably because it'd "bring the game into disrepute" or some shit, but if the referee's performance was brought into question, having them explain their decision or admit to making a mistake would go a long way towards fans, coaches and players showing them more respect.

[leicsmac]

Transparency is the way forward, along with video tech. 

 

Get refs to explain their decisions, and have video refs to help them make the right ones in critical situations. Either that or have better retrospective punishments available.

 

Guess it depends. Do you want controversy and be able to talk/bitch about refs post-game or do you want a game that's exact and follows the laws as closely as possible? If you want the former, then fair enough. If (like me) you want the latter, hope that video aids for refs will come in much sooner than later.

[Corky]

That's what he was doing yesterday. James' first tackle was about 8 minutes in, and he got booked. Yet in the Premier League, the first foul isn't always a yellow card. Antonio Valencia, for example, made three fouls against Chelsea before he was booked.

 

Deadman is a ridiculous referee, we've had him before and he's been very poor. He was always going to send a Leicester City player off yesterday. As I said, James' first tackle he got booked for, yet a Charlton player did the exact same thing and got away with it. Consistency would be nice, even if referee's get it wrong.

 

Wasn't yesterday, Jackson for them was given a warning early on before a booking, the foul was similar to James' first booking.

[Harry - LCFC]

Linesman could sort themselves out as well. Far too pedestrian now, just let the ref deal with everything even if they're clearly in the better the place to see it. Bit too much like passing the buck.

[Ross-Kemp]

Players are just a bad.

Most refs are very lenient, if a player stands and argues with you, claps at you etc, it should be treated as dissent and a yellow card shown.

Some of the players in the premier league would soon stop.

You watch Terry, Ferdinand, Rooney, Evra, Suarez when a decision goes against them, I certainly wouldn't want to be a ref with those overpaid, arrogant arseholes.

[Kitchandro]

That Derby penalty against Burnley

 

The idea isn't to put referees under more pressure. That's half the problem, they are pussies and too easily affected by the crowd and various other people shouting at them. Maybe earmuffs would be a better solution.

 

I like Mike's mic idea. Hiding behind 'the ref's decision is final' card is all well and good but they need to realise that it isn't about them protecting themselves. The main aim is about helping a football match be decided fairly because you have officiated it well. Similarly if the captain sensibly asks them a fair question about the decision they shouldn't be able to just ignore them. They should explain what they saw and didn't see and why they made their decision.

 

I'm not saying the referees over here are bent, but there's nothing to stop them being, because they don't have to back up any of their decisions. They can do what they like and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

 

It's a difficult situation because most decisions are still about opinions. And really, how do you stop them being made wrongly? If this is the best standard that referees can deliver there isn't much we can do.

[Fox92]

Wasn't yesterday, Jackson for them was given a warning early on before a booking, the foul was similar to James' first booking.

 

Yeah that's what I'm trying to say. Jackson was spoken too, yet James got booked. Both first fouls, and both exact same fouls. I didn't get Deadman's performance at all yesterday, ridiculous. 

[Kitchandro]

Players are just a bad.

Most refs are very lenient, if a player stands and argues with you, claps at you etc, it should be treated as dissent and a yellow card shown.

Some of the players in the premier league would soon stop.

You watch Terry, Ferdinand, Rooney, Evra, Suarez when a decision goes against them, I certainly wouldn't want to be a ref with those overpaid, arrogant arseholes.

 

I take your point but when a bastard ref is robbing your team there are thousands of people in the stand who would do the same.

 

Players do argue when they have no right to but I hardly feel any sympathy for the referees themselves.

 

How does booking players for dissent solve the real problem which is referees getting loads of decisions wrong?

[Corky]

Ok, must have missed those posts.

 

Apologies.

 

Let's be clear Matt, the referee was not at fault for us not marking/ defending properly from corners yesterday. He was not at fault for us not being very good in the first half.

 

What he was at fault for were the bookings for James, which had a direct impact on the match, and the inconsistency of his decision-making. If he had been consistent with those I wouldn't have had a problem.

 

I'll say if the ref was poor whatever the result. Often when we lose the ref had no impact on the game. People on here had justifiable complaints about the referee, the same as last week.

[Carl the Llama]

To all the jobsworths saying that people are only moaning because we lost: Just last week we were all astonished by the awful refereeing in our win against Birmingham. Do keep up, chaps.

[Jfox]

The problem isn't the second yellow card shown to James because we don't know what was said and he may well have deserved it, as with Kaspar's and possibly Knockaert could have been shown a second yellow too had Nugent not stepped in. But whether or not he was fouled prior to it is a different story (I have not seen it again) and the first yellow was a mistimed tackle and nothing else, it wasn't reckless and it was his first tackle, a Charlton player then did the same thing and went unpunished.

[Matt]

To all the jobsworths saying that people are only moaning because we lost: Just last week we were all astonished by the awful refereeing in our win against Birmingham. Do keep up, chaps.

 

Do keep up, chap, i've already noted it;

(Infact you even +1ed it)

 

Yes it was.

 

http://www.foxestalk.co.uk/forums/topic/90027-the-ref-today/?p=2701814

 

Give and take by me.

 

And yes, last week, I called the referee a tool myself, and the referee today was a tool, but he wasn't to blame for us losing, however it was quite refreshing to see a referee be mention after we'd won last week for a change rather than simply blaming the referee when we lose!

 

Don't get me wrong, i'm not praising or sticking up for bad referee's, far from it, it's not right, but all I am asking is for people too look abit closer to home before blame or even mentioning the referee when we lose, after that, blame the referee, knock yourselves out!

 

Doesn't happen very often though does it? Coincidence?

[Carl the Llama]

Do keep up, chap, i've already noted it;

 

 

Doesn't happen very often though does it? Coincidence?

Well that's not fair, the comment you quoted's from a different thread! (Although in your defence: In scouring this thread for the comment I 'missed', I did find a different one by you which acknowledges last week's horror show - that'll teach me to skim through.)

 

I disagree with your second point: We're pretty good at putting the ref's performance into perspective on here. Granted there are a few who blindly blame the ref after a defeat, but they're always countered by the doom-mongers who claim it doesn't matter anyway because our performance was 100% inept and Pearson should be sacked, but in the end the voices of reason pipe up to point out that yes we were poor but the ref made it that much harder.  In general.

[pleatout]

That's what he was doing yesterday. James' first tackle was about 8 minutes in, and he got booked. Yet in the Premier League, the first foul isn't always a yellow card. Antonio Valencia, for example, made three fouls against Chelsea before he was booked.

 

Deadman is a ridiculous referee, we've had him before and he's been very poor. He was always going to send a Leicester City player off yesterday. As I said, James' first tackle he got booked for, yet a Charlton player did the exact same thing and got away with it. Consistency would be nice, even if referee's get it wrong.

 

This mantra about consistancy really annoys me.

 

The game changes, attitudes change, passions change.  That's what makes football, football.  A tackle in the 8th minute from one player IS NOT the same as the same tackle made by the same player on the same opponent in the 88th minute.

 

Refs will let things go at some stages of the match and punish them at others, you might not like it or agree with it but that IS the way you have to ref a game.

 

You try and let the game flow, play advantage etc etc UNTIL there is a bit of a set to, tempers start to flare up and then the next 10 mins is spent blowing for everything, just to calm things down.

 

I wasnt at the game yesterday and so I cant really comment but had James already had a couple of bites at Charlton players?  Had the ref already had a word?  Was the game getting a little "tasty" and so he had to throw a caution at someone and James was the unlucky one?

 

I've apologised to players I cautioned.  They only got a caution because I'd decided that I'd got to calm it down and the next player to commit a foul was going to get cautioned.  Reffing is as much about managing the players as it is about getting the laws right.  It really is very very easy to ref a game with a 22 man brawl in it.  It is quite another to stop the brawl when it is clear one [or both] are "up for it".

[Kitchandro]

This mantra about consistancy really annoys me.

 

The game changes, attitudes change, passions change.  That's what makes football, football.  A tackle in the 8th minute from one player IS NOT the same as the same tackle made by the same player on the same opponent in the 88th minute.

 

Refs will let things go at some stages of the match and punish them at others, you might not like it or agree with it but that IS the way you have to ref a game.

 

You try and let the game flow, play advantage etc etc UNTIL there is a bit of a set to, tempers start to flare up and then the next 10 mins is spent blowing for everything, just to calm things down.

 

I wasnt at the game yesterday and so I cant really comment but had James already had a couple of bites at Charlton players?  Had the ref already had a word?  Was the game getting a little "tasty" and so he had to throw a caution at someone and James was the unlucky one?

 

I've apologised to players I cautioned.  They only got a caution because I'd decided that I'd got to calm it down and the next player to commit a foul was going to get cautioned.  Reffing is as much about managing the players as it is about getting the laws right.  It really is very very easy to ref a game with a 22 man brawl in it.  It is quite another to stop the brawl when it is clear one [or both] are "up for it".

 

If this is the attitude of all refs no wonder they don't do their job properly.

 

It's not their job to manage players at all. At all.

[GingerrrFox]

This mantra about consistancy really annoys me.

The game changes, attitudes change, passions change. That's what makes football, football. A tackle in the 8th minute from one player IS NOT the same as the same tackle made by the same player on the same opponent in the 88th minute.

Refs will let things go at some stages of the match and punish them at others, you might not like it or agree with it but that IS the way you have to ref a game.

You try and let the game flow, play advantage etc etc UNTIL there is a bit of a set to, tempers start to flare up and then the next 10 mins is spent blowing for everything, just to calm things down.

I wasnt at the game yesterday and so I cant really comment but had James already had a couple of bites at Charlton players? Had the ref already had a word? Was the game getting a little "tasty" and so he had to throw a caution at someone and James was the unlucky one?

I've apologised to players I cautioned. They only got a caution because I'd decided that I'd got to calm it down and the next player to commit a foul was going to get cautioned. Reffing is as much about managing the players as it is about getting the laws right. It really is very very easy to ref a game with a 22 man brawl in it. It is quite another to stop the brawl when it is clear one [or both] are "up for it".

This is the problem with referees. The game is not about you, it's about the two teams playing, your job is not to control a match or dictate play. Your job simply is to apply the laws of the game and make fair decisions. Nothing else. You aren't a player, you don't have a say in how the game goes, you are there to react to what happens and apply the law.

[pleatout]

Transparency is the way forward, along with video tech. 

 

Get refs to explain their decisions, and have video refs to help them make the right ones in critical situations. Either that or have better retrospective punishments available.

 

Guess it depends. Do you want controversy and be able to talk/bitch about refs post-game or do you want a game that's exact and follows the laws as closely as possible? If you want the former, then fair enough. If (like me) you want the latter, hope that video aids for refs will come in much sooner than later.

 

The problem refs explaining thier decisions is that no one believes us when we are right.  According to the laws of the game.

 

You all watch football, have grown up with football, think you know a fair bit about it but sadly a huge number of fans and players THINK they know the laws of the game but don't.

 

for example

 

Which of these statements does NOT appear in the laws of the game

 

Ungentlemanly conduct

It is an offense not to call a name  [ie you cant shout "mine!"]

You are not offside if the balls comes off a defender.

The captain that wins the toss has a choice of whether to have the kickoff or choose ends.

[GingerrrFox]

The problem refs explaining thier decisions is that no one believes us when we are right. According to the laws of the game.

You all watch football, have grown up with football, think you know a fair bit about it but sadly a huge number of fans and players THINK they know the laws of the game but don't.

for example

Which of these statements does NOT appear in the laws of the game

Ungentlemanly conduct

It is an offense not to call a name [ie you cant shout "mine!"]

You are not offside if the balls comes off a defender.

The captain that wins the toss has a choice of whether to have the kickoff or choose ends.

The calling mine is misleading because you are only infringing if you shout it to deliberately deceive an opposition player as then it is classed as unsporting behaviour.

[Kitchandro]

The problem refs explaining thier decisions is that no one believes us when we are right.  According to the laws of the game.

 

You all watch football, have grown up with football, think you know a fair bit about it but sadly a huge number of fans and players THINK they know the laws of the game but don't.

 

for example

 

Which of these statements does NOT appear in the laws of the game

 

Ungentlemanly conduct

It is an offense not to call a name  [ie you cant shout "mine!"]

You are not offside if the balls comes off a defender.

The captain that wins the toss has a choice of whether to have the kickoff or choose ends.

 

Does it really matter whether fans know the rule book off by heart when you have just openly admitted that referees will make wrong decisions just to calm certain players down? Knowing the rules isn't nearly as important as actually following them.

 

By the way I'm sure the 3rd one isn't in there because 1) it doesn't make any difference whether the player is a defender or not and 2) it's not offside if the opposition player plays the ball but it can still be if it just comes off (deflects) of them.

[pleatout]

This is the problem with referees. The game is not about you, it's about the two teams playing, your job is not to control a match or dictate play. Your job simply is to apply the laws of the game and make fair decisions. Nothing else. You aren't a player, you don't have a say in how the game goes, you are there to react to what happens and apply the law.

Dead right, the game isn't about the officials.  But the game would last about 4 days and be dreadful to watch if the officials applied the letter of the law all the time.

 

The simple ones - watch the centre half/centre forward "tussles" - every game.  The definition of a foul is....... pushing - no, shoving - no, kicking - no.  it is anything that is unfair.  If the no 5 is giving as good as he is getting from the number 9, then as a ref, you let it go, because it is fair.  The alternative is to blow every time the no 9 gets within 2 yards of the number 5 because they are pushing, shoving, pinching, kicking, holding each others shirts etc etc.

 

BTW my job IS to control the match.  I am NOT there to react.  A good ref anticipates what is going to happen.  Do you honestly think that in the last few minutes of a cup tie, team losing 1 nil, the ref is acting as though it is the 1st minute and nil nil?  The players behave differently, the crowd behave differently.  A player wont take the ball into the corner to kill time in the 1st minute, nor will the big number 9 clatter him in frustration.

[Brainy]

Would perhaps stop them making the bad decisions in the first place. 

 

What a stupid thing to say. They don't make the wrong decisions deliberately