Jon Moss

[The Doctor]

I always hated this argument when we were in the Championship and I'm not gonna change my opinion now.

Why should Championship teams be made to suffer because the **** of a "referee" has made mistakes?

What have the Championship teams done wrong to put up with his sub standard performances?

No matter what level the matches are just as important to those individuals as they are for us/any big game.

I don't see what demoting him to a lower league does as regards "punishing" him.

Agreed. Say he's demoted to league one. He's still incompetent and should be banned from the sport, it just means rather than screwing us over he can derail burtons promotion bid. Referees need to be punished for poor performances rather than punishing lower league clubs for them.

[Babylon]

Carragher made some good points, particularly about our penalty which does look clear from the refs view.

 

However he believes Vardy's first was a yellow because Okazaki fouled someone just before. That is not justification!

 

I'd love to see analysis of Payet's dive and Reid fouling Ulloa on the halfway line. These haven't even been mentioned in the press.

I've seen some utter shit written justifying certain incidents. Like theirs was a penalty as we had been warned about holding in the box, but West Ham hadn't when they were all over Huth.... THAT"S NOT HOW IT BLOODY WORKS!!!!

[Lionator]

Agreed. Say he's demoted to league one. He's still incompetent and should be banned from the sport, it just means rather than screwing us over he can derail burtons promotion bid. Referees need to be punished for poor performances rather than punishing lower league clubs for them.

 

Do we ban players for poor performances? So OTT.

[Ricey]

I've seen some utter shit written justifying certain incidents. Like theirs was a penalty as we had been warned about holding in the box, but West Ham hadn't when they were all over Huth.... THAT"S NOT HOW IT BLOODY WORKS!!!!

 

It highlights Morgan's idiocy but doesn't make the decision correct.

 

What next, some kind of foul totalizer that once you reach a certain number of fouls in the match you're next foul is punished with a card?

 

Moss is there to control the game and be consistent, neither of which he did and surely Carragher, Alan Smith etc can't argue with that.

[Thracian]

Do we ban players for poor performances? So OTT.

 

 

 

No but we often sideline them and give them chance to re-hone their skills and/or focus for a while.  

[jayfox26]

Do we ban players for poor performances? So OTT.

No but if a player was consistently bad like this ref is then they wouldn't get picked for the 1st team squad and we would get rid of them. All refs make mistakes, they are human, it's part of the game but this guy constantly makes mistakes and has never ever had a good performance when refing us

[EastAnglianFox]

The thing is he actually knows he is terrible.

There was a story on Soccer Saturday a few months back (where they all agreed Moss was the most inept ref in the league). Anyway he was the 4th official in a match and the manager at the time was shouting at him saying "I've managed in 4 different countries and this has to be the worst referee I have ever seen" to which Moss put his arm around him and said "Wow really, you haven't seen me yet"

At the time I thought it was funny and showed he had a sense of humour, but now it just shows they are untouchable to the point that he can even admit he's awful yet still get the gig every week.

[Out Foxed]

The thing is he actually knows he is terrible.

There was a story on Soccer Saturday a few months back (where they all agreed Moss was the most inept ref in the league). Anyway he was the 4th official in a match and the manager at the time was shouting at him saying "I've managed in 4 different countries and this has to be the worst referee I have ever seen" to which Moss put his arm around him and said "Wow really, you haven't seen me yet"

At the time I thought it was funny and showed he had a sense of humour, but now it just shows they are untouchable to the point that he can even admit he's awful yet still get the gig every week.

that can't be true

[Alf Bentley]

Do we ban players for poor performances? So OTT.

 

 

I wouldn't ban him, but send him to a Maoist re-education camp! 

 

Any reasonable fan will accept that refs are human, so make occasional mistakes like players and the rest of us. If they get the odd decision wrong, c'est la vie.

 

The issue was his grotesque inconsistency. If a striker started shooting from 50m but passing in front of an open goal or a defender played the offside trap half the time, but not the other half, they'd soon be dropped. 

 

Moss's inconsistency:

- Booked certain players (e.g. Vardy) for minor fouls, but let others go with a free-kick (both sides)

- Holding in the box: Gives Reid a penalty, but gives Vardy (twice), Huth & one of their players nothing.

- Players looking for questionable free-kicks/penalties: Books Vardy for simulation, but ignores Payet - and gives Reid & Schlupp penalties

- Warns Huth & Morgan about holding, but doesn't warn West Ham players, who are also regularly holding

 

Anyway, as Webbo says, time to move on now. It's part of football for a ref to occasionally ruin a match (which I think we'd have probably won, but might not have). Unfortunate timing this one, but it hasn't happened often this season.

 

I'm sure the players and management team are focused on the next match and making the best of the hand they've been dealt. Our role is to support their confidence in doing that.

[jayfox26]

The thing is he actually knows he is terrible.

There was a story on Soccer Saturday a few months back (where they all agreed Moss was the most inept ref in the league). Anyway he was the 4th official in a match and the manager at the time was shouting at him saying "I've managed in 4 different countries and this has to be the worst referee I have ever seen" to which Moss put his arm around him and said "Wow really, you haven't seen me yet"

At the time I thought it was funny and showed he had a sense of humour, but now it just shows they are untouchable to the point that he can even admit he's awful yet still get the gig every week.

All true but the difficulty we have I'M England is there is a massive shortage of refs right through the game. The fa needs to do more to 1. Get more refs and 2. Get a better standard of refs. Demoting/banning poor refs may not be the answer but something has to be done and the fa can't keep protecting refs like they do

[DJ Barry Hammond]

All true but the difficulty we have I'M England is there is a massive shortage of refs right through the game. The fa needs to do more to 1. Get more refs and 2. Get a better standard of refs. Demoting/banning poor refs may not be the answer but something has to be done and the fa can't keep protecting refs like they do

Interesting comment - you recognise the shortage (in no part due to abuse referees receive especially at the lower end of the pyramid - it's very intimidating when you are on your own), but then suggest the FA can't keep protecting referees like they do?

The problem football has, to a large degree compared to any other sport, is that it's culture has moved away from respecting its officials and this is excused by a corporate 'need to win at all costs' culture.

Officials will make bad decisions in any sport, but if you look at Rugby and Cricket, there is mutual respect for the roles of officials and funnily enough these are games that have also seen the biggest advancement in technology to help officials - something I expect has come partly because officials can concentrate on officiating and getting the majority of decisions correct without fear or pressure being applied on them and that in turn makes them more open to ideas to improve their performance in that role (because believe it or not, the majority of officials want to make the right decisions).

If we want things to change, then we as fans need to make a stand first and foremost... We can't be apologists for our own players, we have to look to call things on a balanced view and condem the behaviour of our own when we see unacceptable behaviour.

We also need to be more understanding of the difficulty and limitations officials have at the moment in terms of the games rules, given that we have key decision areas that require a great deal of interpretation - some of which are mixed in with mandatory sanctions that make producing the right call in each situation a balancing act.

For example, where a debatable handball is made in the box and the outcome of penalising would also result in a red card, that puts added pressure on the situation. There is even more pressure applied if the game situation is considered - the stakes of the fixture, whether it's early or late in the game, the decisions that have been made immediately before that, the atmosphere of the crowd.

You can tell how mixed up our rules are when you have one discussion point that can throw up 3 different answers from 3 different pundits/fans - we can cry "where's the consistancy" yet our views are very often inconsistent. How many times have you heard the comment - "ok it may have been a red, but it ruined the game" concerning a decision.

So whilst football has very little respect for its officials, i believe it's right for the FA to protect them. Having officials doing post game interviews is unfair, because they will only be asked to do so because they made a controversial decision - it would be a witch hunt and determental to standard of refereeing.

If football didn't have such a problem with foul & abusive language, maybe the referees could be microphoned so you can hear them explaining the decisions to players in real time and I have no doubt that introduction would have a big impact on improving both understanding and standards - but fans and players need to act first by respecting the official in order to make this even possible (no league would look to do this right now, where a players every third word is an expletive, because this would risk their sponsorship / tv deals).

[Onikage82]

This is all fixed my foxes fans, start to get ready for the title to slip.

 

Underhanded tactics going on outside this club, we can't control them no matter how positive we are, it will only hurt more when it's gone.  Forget about it.

[Babylon]

Interesting comment - you recognise the shortage (in no part due to abuse referees receive especially at the lower end of the pyramid - it's very intimidating when you are on your own), but then suggest the FA can't keep protecting referees like they do?

The problem football has, to a large degree compared to any other sport, is that it's culture has moved away from respecting its officials and this is excused by a corporate 'need to win at all costs' culture.

Officials will make bad decisions in any sport, but if you look at Rugby and Cricket, there is mutual respect for the roles of officials and funnily enough these are games that have also seen the biggest advancement in technology to help officials - something I expect has come partly because officials can concentrate on officiating and getting the majority of decisions correct without fear or pressure being applied on them and that in turn makes them more open to ideas to improve their performance in that role (because believe it or not, the majority of officials want to make the right decisions).

If we want things to change, then we as fans need to make a stand first and foremost... We can't be apologists for our own players, we have to look to call things on a balanced view and condem the behaviour of our own when we see unacceptable behaviour.

We also need to be more understanding of the difficulty and limitations officials have at the moment in terms of the games rules, given that we have key decision areas that require a great deal of interpretation - some of which are mixed in with mandatory sanctions that make producing the right call in each situation a balancing act.

For example, where a debatable handball is made in the box and the outcome of penalising would also result in a red card, that puts added pressure on the situation. There is even more pressure applied if the game situation is considered - the stakes of the fixture, whether it's early or late in the game, the decisions that have been made immediately before that, the atmosphere of the crowd.

You can tell how mixed up our rules are when you have one discussion point that can throw up 3 different answers from 3 different pundits/fans - we can cry "where's the consistancy" yet our views are very often inconsistent. How many times have you heard the comment - "ok it may have been a red, but it ruined the game" concerning a decision.

So whilst football has very little respect for its officials, i believe it's right for the FA to protect them. Having officials doing post game interviews is unfair, because they will only be asked to do so because they made a controversial decision - it would be a witch hunt and determental to standard of refereeing.

If football didn't have such a problem with foul & abusive language, maybe the referees could be microphoned so you can hear them explaining the decisions to players in real time and I have no doubt that introduction would have a big impact on improving both understanding and standards - but fans and players need to act first by respecting the official in order to make this even possible (no league would look to do this right now, where a players every third word is an expletive, because this would risk their sponsorship / tv deals).

I wonder how a change to what they do in Rugby would alter things. You look at how they deal with an incident, lets say it's a yellow card. They pull the player and the captain to the side, explain what has been seen and then issue the punishment. Compare that to football, where quite often all you have is a referee running at you, flinging a card in the air, refusing to explain a decision and pointing you off the pitch.

 

Those few key seconds where he explains a situation calmly are often enough to diffuse a situation, even if the player is fuming. Respect is a two way street and the arrogance and refusal to discuss decisions only fuels the fire.

[yorkie1999]

This is all fixed my foxes fans, start to get ready for the title to slip.

Underhanded tactics going on outside this club, we can't control them no matter how positive we are, it will only hurt more when it's gone. Forget about it.

Thats right, according to thr london based press, we are a bunch of chavy racists who are on a lucky streak in a poor league, but spurs are being made out to be whiter than white footballing gods who are going to win the greatest league in the world because theyve scored the most goals and then save english football by winning us euro 16....yid army.

[Isle of Wight Fox 86]

Interesting comment - you recognise the shortage (in no part due to abuse referees receive especially at the lower end of the pyramid - it's very intimidating when you are on your own), but then suggest the FA can't keep protecting referees like they do?

The problem football has, to a large degree compared to any other sport, is that it's culture has moved away from respecting its officials and this is excused by a corporate 'need to win at all costs' culture.

Officials will make bad decisions in any sport, but if you look at Rugby and Cricket, there is mutual respect for the roles of officials and funnily enough these are games that have also seen the biggest advancement in technology to help officials - something I expect has come partly because officials can concentrate on officiating and getting the majority of decisions correct without fear or pressure being applied on them and that in turn makes them more open to ideas to improve their performance in that role (because believe it or not, the majority of officials want to make the right decisions).

If we want things to change, then we as fans need to make a stand first and foremost... We can't be apologists for our own players, we have to look to call things on a balanced view and condem the behaviour of our own when we see unacceptable behaviour.

We also need to be more understanding of the difficulty and limitations officials have at the moment in terms of the games rules, given that we have key decision areas that require a great deal of interpretation - some of which are mixed in with mandatory sanctions that make producing the right call in each situation a balancing act.

For example, where a debatable handball is made in the box and the outcome of penalising would also result in a red card, that puts added pressure on the situation. There is even more pressure applied if the game situation is considered - the stakes of the fixture, whether it's early or late in the game, the decisions that have been made immediately before that, the atmosphere of the crowd.

You can tell how mixed up our rules are when you have one discussion point that can throw up 3 different answers from 3 different pundits/fans - we can cry "where's the consistancy" yet our views are very often inconsistent. How many times have you heard the comment - "ok it may have been a red, but it ruined the game" concerning a decision.

So whilst football has very little respect for its officials, i believe it's right for the FA to protect them. Having officials doing post game interviews is unfair, because they will only be asked to do so because they made a controversial decision - it would be a witch hunt and determental to standard of refereeing.

If football didn't have such a problem with foul & abusive language, maybe the referees could be microphoned so you can hear them explaining the decisions to players in real time and I have no doubt that introduction would have a big impact on improving both understanding and standards - but fans and players need to act first by respecting the official in order to make this even possible (no league would look to do this right now, where a players every third word is an expletive, because this would risk their sponsorship / tv deals).

 

Excellent post. I have no sympathy for Vardy being charged with improper conduct. The way he shouted and pointed at Moss wasn't professional, and I think we can all agree that you would be pretty p!ssed if this happened in your place of work for making a mistake. I know that he wasn't happy with getting a 2nd yellow, however from the referee's position, if you look at the way he has gone down, then it looked like a dive. I think the right call would have been to play on, but its on the first time this season that Vardy has got his legs tangled with a defender (Arsenal away)

 

Its still crap that he will be missed for a couple of games, however we aren't a one man team, and we can still do this. 3 more wins, thats all it takes - which we will get in the next 3 i think as well.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

I wonder how a change to what they do in Rugby would alter things. You look at how they deal with an incident, lets say it's a yellow card. They pull the player and the captain to the side, explain what has been seen and then issue the punishment. Compare that to football, where quite often all you have is a referee running at you, flinging a card in the air, refusing to explain a decision and pointing you off the pitch.

 

Those few key seconds where he explains a situation calmly are often enough to diffuse a situation, even if the player is fuming. Respect is a two way street and the arrogance and refusal to discuss decisions only fuels the fire.

The vast majority of referees I've encountered - both in games I've played and seen officiating on TV do what you say, but you have to set the tone to enable them to do that. If you have players surrounding a referee, like we saw, it makes it impossible to do that because everyone is having their own two pence piece into the bargain.

It also helps that Rugby have an effective controls against dissent - with the moving of a penalty 10 yards forward and the middle ground option of a 10 minute sin bin.

To be honest I don't think a sin bin would work in football, but the issue of clear descent could do with a much more effective an obvious disadvantage punishment. A yellow card to these professionals is nothing - so maybe stronger post game sanctions where a certain number of yellow cards for dissent in a season results in not only a ban - but say a "referee awareness course" (where a pro will go an do some officiating themselves) might do the trick?

[Babylon]

The vast majority of referees I've encountered - both in games I've played and seen officiating on TV do what you say, but you have to set the tone to enable them to do that.

Well, considering the cards were out of his pocket and Vardy was booked and sent off before he even got off the ground or anyone even got close to the ref. I'm not sure what tone you expect the players to set there.

 

I'm talking about order in which events happen, In Rugby the ref will often stop play, even consult with a linesman sometimes or TMO, call across the player and captain, explain the decision and issue the punishment. Football tends to be instant punishment.

 

Not saying it would work, just that it would be interesting to see if a change in the way the punishment is dished out, got a different reaction from players. Things happen in the heat of the moment and things like that can take the sting out of it.

[Manwell Pablo]

You can't ban every ref who puts in a shite performance each week there would be non left inside three weeks.

[General Smuts]

Danny Baker quote;

 

"It was scandalous, an absolute scandal … football has a maggot at its golden core, and that maggot is referees … we've been at that game for two hours and the referee was bad all the way through it … what is the point of people running themselves to a standstill, what is the point supporters investing time money and emotion, what is the point in anyone investing millions in football when the whole thing rests on some erstwhile van driver from Folkestone who's probably had a row with his wife? If this was a boxing match and the referee turned round and gave the fight to the bloke who was knocked out on the floor we would say you can't do that … most of them need a good slap round the face … hacks should doorstep this man like he's a member of Oasis … that worm should be on the phone now, Radio Five should be knocking down that ref's dressing room and asking do you know on behalf of all referees how bad you are?"

 

This was about Mike Reed against Chelsea in 1997 and sums up Jon Moss on Sunday perfectly.

 

For what it's worth I didn't think there should have been any penalties in that game.

[RobHawk]

Well, considering the cards were out of his pocket and Vardy was booked and sent off before he even got off the ground or anyone even got close to the ref. I'm not sure what tone you expect the players to set there.

 

I'm talking about order in which events happen, In Rugby the ref will often stop play, even consult with a linesman sometimes or TMO, call across the player and captain, explain the decision and issue the punishment. Football tends to be instant punishment.

 

I agree - Its about taking the time to review things and speak with the other officials. In football if the reaction isn't instant, its blamed on the crowd or players affecting the referees judgement but there's ways to manage this.

 

As for Moss, i wouldn't trust him with an U11's game.  His game management was appalling and was what ruined the game. As said above, mistakes happen, but managing the game is vital and from the start he was not in control. 

 

Meant to add, they should mic up refs too like they do in rugby so we can hear what they are saying. 

[Babylon]

You can't ban every ref who puts in a shite performance each week there would be non left inside three weeks.

I'm amazed some refs seem intent on giving themselves issues. The best refs all season have been the ones who just let it flow, don't chuck around cards (to either team). Once you make a soft decision like the first Vardy card, you just know you've made a rod for your own back and every soft challenge should then warrant a yellow. Same with tangles in the box, the reason they never get given is because they happen at every single corner, with every team doing exactly the same stuff... you give one of them, then you've made a rod for your own back again.

 

There is such a massive disparity in what certain officials have dished out. Atkinson has dished out 100 yellows this year, compared to East who has given 62, in just 7 games less.  Or you compare a Mike Dean to a Mike Jones... I can't believe they have somehow ref'd in loads of wars compared to the ones with few bookings and red. 

[General Smuts]

I'm amazed some refs seem intent on giving themselves issues. The best refs all season have been the ones who just let it flow, don't chuck around cards (to either team). Once you make a soft decision like the first Vardy card, you just know you've made a rod for your own back and every soft challenge should then warrant a yellow. Same with tangles in the box, the reason they never get given is because they happen at every single corner, with every team doing exactly the same stuff... you give one of them, then you've made a rod for your own back again.

 

There is such a massive disparity in what certain officials have dished out. Atkinson has dished out 100 yellows this year, compared to East who has given 62, in just 7 games less.  Or you compare a Mike Dean to a Mike Jones... I can't believe they have somehow ref'd in loads of wars compared to the ones with few bookings and red. 

 

 

Ref's should been seen and not heard. 

[artursteppe]

I'm not quite sure what to think about all the gracious Leicester supporters taking the part of every pundit and journalist who have been criticising our players for bringing all the referees actions upon themselves.

If Jamie dived, so did Reid, who was also on a yellow. We did not get a penalty and had Jamie sent off, they got a penalty and kept eleven players. How Reid survived the match without a red card is testament to disgraceful refereeing. He could have had as many as five yellows with a different ref.

Bilic claiming the ref succumbed to the noise from the Leicester fans...............Oh, and he didn't give in to that geordie long haired twats constant verbals in the ref's ear from the moment he arrived on the pitch at half time..................... Oh and did no-one notice Huth being strangled?...................... Oh, and has nobody mentioned that from the first whistle Moss was giving free kicks against us as though he was on a bonus scheme................. and so on and so on....................

[roylandski]

Moss got every decision right apart from the make-up penalty.

 

The first yellow for Vardy was a little harsh, but there is established precedent for players to get booked for what is seen as a reckless challenge when they slide towards another player, regardless of contact.

The second yellow was for a clear dive.

 

He clearly didn't see the pull on Rob Huth towards the end of the game.

He clearly didn't see Rob Huth's forearm smash on the WHU player just before Leicester's break for the first goal. He missed another Huth forearm in the second half. Moss could not make decisions on these incidents as he did not see them.

 

The main argument against his decision to penalise Morgan at the corner seems to be that he could have given a penalty on every corner in the match. Having watched the game I am inclined to agree with this view. The referee should have given a penalty after every corner. The fact that he didn't suggests he did not see the fouls clearly and was unable to make the correct decisions in those instances.

[Babylon]

Moss got every decision right apart from the make-up penalty.

 

The first yellow for Vardy was a little harsh, but there is established precedent for players to get booked for what is seen as a reckless challenge when they slide towards another player, regardless of contact.

The second yellow was for a clear dive.

 

He clearly didn't see the pull on Rob Huth towards the end of the game.

He clearly didn't see Rob Huth's forearm smash on the WHU player just before Leicester's break for the first goal. He missed another Huth forearm in the second half. Moss could not make decisions on these incidents as he did not see them.

 

The main argument against his decision to penalise Morgan at the corner seems to be that he could have given a penalty on every corner in the match. Having watched the game I am inclined to agree with this view. The referee should have given a penalty after every corner. The fact that he didn't suggests he did not see the fouls clearly and was unable to make the correct decisions in those instances.

Where do you think the ref was looking then on the Huth one, the ball landed right on top of them? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhDWxXDMgLM