Man City v Spurs

[David G]

They make mistakes because they are human & everything is relative. For example, a PL Referee can make a similar mistake as a L5, 4, 3, 2B, 2A & EFL/Select Group 2 Referee, but the pace of the game, the players, club reps, tv, 30,00-60,000 spectators places them under high level of scrutiny & the expectations of them to get everything correct in every game, especially at MCS & the incident at the end of the City game is unreasonable imo. However, there are certain mistakes that an elite Referee would not be expected to make, but the Grealish incident is not one of them. In events, was it a mistake - probably, was it a howler - not in my view. Being an elite Referee doesn’t make them superhuman.

I totally disagree with you that Refereeing has never been in such a bad state. Why would you say that (because of VAR controversies), what are you comparing it to?

 

[Big Cat]

but the Grealish incident is not one of them

The game definitely does not expect a Professional Referee to make that mistake. It was unthinkably bad. God forbid I ever do the same, 8 leagues below

I totally disagree with you that Refereeing has never been in such a bad state. Why would you say that (because of VAR controversies), what are you comparing it to?

Yes, we could safely pin that statement on VAR. I'm sick to death of Referees being the headline act

 

[David G]

It’s happened before (but the scrutiny was not so intense as it is now with Sky etc) & it will happen again at some point, but probably not for a long time at elite level because the PGMOL & the Referee(s) himself/themselves will put things in place for it not to happen.

 

[santa sangria]

I don’t believe PGMOL are remotely in control (!) here. And we are well off topic. The daft protocol dreamed up by IFAB and the international associations I think is obviously designed to generate column inches, not make football better. The ridiculous media hype stemming from VAR is why referees are getting crucified more than ever. Webb and PGMOL are bystanders fiddling and creating even more confusion and coverage. For the Prem, Uefa, Fifa and the TV companies that’s great right now. But it’s not sustainable because the product is weaker. VAR is boring. The protocol is killing the fan experimence. Wenger will “come up” with timed VAR breaks next The sooner we divorce Hunger Games televised football from the real game the better.

 

[Runner-Ref]

I think referees are subconsciously relying on VAR too much. Its easier to not give something and have it overturned on VAR than it is to give something and then have it overturned.

But I do think that the current crop aren't up to much. Barring Taylor, Oliver, Jones & Hooper (he was fantastic last season) I don't think the others are particularly great.

To counteract that, I will say that refereeing has probably never been more difficult. But doesn't change the fact that some of them aren't good enough. Not quite Mason & Jones levels, but not far off

 

[RustyRef]

Why therefore, do PGMOL Referees make similar mistakes to their amateur colleagues, arguably (a strong argument) with the same sort of frequency? My beliefs are in no way disparaging towards these Professional Referees. If you've interpreted that then you've misinterpreted me. I'm aware that they are not just elite referees, but elite individuals in many respects (I've met enough of them in person)

I've observed at grass roots and supply league for years, as well as refereeing for 10 years at L3 and L4, suggesting that PGMOL officials make similar mistakes to their amateur colleagues is probably fair, but certainly not with the same kind of frequency. There's two big differences, first if an amateur referee makes a mistake it isn't done so in front of millions of people, therefore no one knows about it. The other is that amateur referees aren't observed by qualified people very often, and even when they are observers who are afforded just one view won't see everything.

 

[David G]

I think referees are subconsciously relying on VAR too much. Its easier to not give something and have it overturned on VAR than it is to give something and then have it overturned.

But I do think that the current crop aren't up to much. Barring Taylor, Oliver, Jones & Hooper (he was fantastic last season) I don't think the others are particularly great.

To counteract that, I will say that refereeing has probably never been more difficult. But doesn't change the fact that some of them aren't good enough. Not quite Mason & Jones levels, but not far off

I agree with you that Refereeing has probably never been more difficult. However, I think we should also be aware that whilst we would like to see SG2 Referees who have been promoted to hit the ground running at SG1, it is a massive jump - the biggest jump of all levels and by a massive amount. With the lilies of Atkinson, Marriner & Dean etc all going at roughly the same time, those coming up will need some time. Unfortunately, any mistake they make or perceived to have made will not matter to tv pundits or the public.

 

[Runner-Ref]

I agree with you that Refereeing has probably never been more difficult. However, I think we should also be aware that whilst we would like to see SG2 Referees who have been promoted to hit the ground running at SG1, it is a massive jump - the biggest jump of all levels and by a massive amount. With the lilies of Atkinson, Marriner & Dean etc all going at roughly the same time, those coming up will need some time. Unfortunately, any mistake they make or perceived to have made will not matter to tv pundits or the public.

I'd agree that the newly promoted lot will take him to acclimatise, but they aren't the issue. The likes of Pawson, Atwell & Coote are the problem.

 

[Big Cat]

I've observed at grass roots and supply league for years, as well as refereeing for 10 years at L3 and L4, suggesting that PGMOL officials make similar mistakes to their amateur colleagues is probably fair, but certainly not with the same kind of frequency. There's two big differences, first if an amateur referee makes a mistake it isn't done so in front of millions of people, therefore no one knows about it. The other is that amateur referees aren't observed by qualified people very often, and even when they are observers who are afforded just one view won't see everything.

I didn't mention Contrib or Supply League Referees

 

[RustyRef]

I didn't mention Contrib or Supply Leagues

You said amateur colleagues, that can mean anything from grass roots to the EFL.

 

[Big Cat]

You said amateur colleagues, that can mean anything from grass roots to the EFL.

Yes, but I did specifically list levels
I'd discount a level below 2B (arbitrarily) from my argument on the basis that a 2B has achieved two promotions of note etc
Quite possibly 2B should also be ignored, after which there's very little discernible difference in refereeing ability, aside from having the minerals to avoid melting under pressure. I watch a lot of football at all levels and that's my opinion
Like I say, I believe that the 'standard expected' at higher levels is impossible, so I'm not blaming the referees. The culture of the game and opacity of the rules (amongst other factors) render the 'standard expected' beyond the capabilities of virtually every referee
That said, I'd be very interested to see SG1 referees officiate games to their own agenda, rather than that of FIFA/UEFA/EPL/PGMOL
That would be interesting. We might actually see THE REFEREE's ABILITY and there's a realistic chance some of them would leave me eating my words

Another way of understanding my thinking is an analogy of golf
A scratch handicap in refereeing is as far as anyone can take their game. Beyond which, improvement is neither here nor there and mistakes remain amateurish in appearance and fairly commonplace
Golfers however (and footballers) can and do have scope for further massive improvement end up with equivalent handicaps of +8 and beyond. Maybe if Referees could do their own thing (instead of being told exactly how to officiate), we could see discernible ability. Alas, we'll never find out

 

[Joshref]

, then realised the referee had given the strangest decision of the season,

Diaz’s is definitely strangest decision of the season

 

[Russell Jones]

Why therefore, do PGMOL Referees make similar mistakes to their amateur colleagues, arguably (a strong argument) with the same sort of frequency? My beliefs are in no way disparaging towards these Professional Referees. If you've interpreted that then you've misinterpreted me. I'm aware that they are not just elite referees, but elite individuals in many respects (I've met enough of them in person)

One stark contrast between Elite Refs and amateur counterparts , is their proven ability and immense courage to officiate under the unimaginable cauldron of a massive arena and the World's gaze and scrutiny. But they don't have a monopoly on physical and mental capabilities that others can match

The overall refereeing of the game has never been in such a bad state. A very in-depth discussion would be needed to get at why that's the case
I don't think it's possible for any individual (SG1/SG2/L1/L2a/L2b etc) to meet the 'expected standard', because the 'expected standard' is impossible. But the evidence is there for us all to see, PGMOL R's make mistakes all of the time, the likes of which are no different from those seen down the leagues

When I'm pitching refereeing as a profession at clubs / schools, I have a slide with the following 'Philosophy' on Refereeing:

1) Refereeing is difficult
2) Referees are human and (just like every other participant) they WILL make mistakes
3) Coaching / training can lead to referees making less mistakes (at the same level) or the same amount of mistakes (at higher levels).

That's why my philosophical objection to VAR (as it stands) is that it reinforces the (IMO horribly misplaced) widely held belief that referees should be consistently getting all decisions 'right'. Impossible in a world where the Laws need to be / are extremely subjective.

For what it's worth, I believe the standard of officiating in the Premier League is extremely high. It's just that the media / clubs / fans fixate on any refereeing errors. As is evidenced by the furore over the isolated error in this game, versus a balanced view regarding the whole match performance of the referee and / or outrage over the 'best striker in the world' missing two gilt edged chances in the first half alone.

 

[RustyRef]

Yes, but I did specifically list levels
I'd discount a level below 2B (arbitrarily) from my argument on the basis that a 2B has achieved two promotions of note etc
Quite possibly 2B should also be ignored, after which there's very little discernible difference in refereeing ability, aside from having the minerals to avoid melting under pressure. I watch a lot of football at all levels and that's my opinion
Like I say, I believe that the 'standard expected' at higher levels is impossible, so I'm not blaming the referees. The culture of the game and opacity of the rules (amongst other factors) render the 'standard expected' beyond the capabilities of virtually every referee
That said, I'd be very interested to see SG1 referees officiate games to their own agenda, rather than that of FIFA/UEFA/EPL/PGMOL
That would be interesting. We might actually see THE REFEREE's ABILITY and there's a realistic chance some of them would leave me eating my words

Another way of understanding my thinking is an analogy of golf
A scratch handicap in refereeing is as far as anyone can take their game. Beyond which, improvement is neither here nor there and mistakes remain amateurish in appearance and fairly commonplace
Golfers however (and footballers) can and do have scope for further massive improvement end up with equivalent handicaps of +8 and beyond. Maybe if Referees could do their own thing (instead of being told exactly how to officiate), we could see discernible ability. Alas, we'll never find out

Still disagree. I worked with a lot of L2A referees, some I thought were very robotic and "by the book" others were much more relaxed and refereed more by their natural game. It is mainly the "by the book" referees that have never progressed, the ones that I viewed as more laid back and relaxed are now / were in the EFL or above.

Michael Oliver and Mark Clattenburg are probably examples that dispel your theory. Clatts in particular was very anti-establishment and refereed how he thought it should be done, didn't stop him having an outstanding career. Michael Oliver perhaps slightly less so, but he seems to be one of the very few officials who it is accepted is allowed to have his own style of refereeing rather than the supposed accepted norm. Sam Barrott, who is flying through the levels at a rate of knots is probably another that will fall into that category, if you watch him referee he is actually very similar in style to Oliver.

 

[Big Cat]

Another

1) Refereeing is difficult
2) Referees are human and (just like every other participant) they WILL make mistakes
3) Coaching / training can lead to referees making less mistakes (at the same level) or the same amount of mistakes (at higher levels).

Yes, broadly agree

For what it's worth, I believe the standard of officiating in the Premier League is extremely high

I'm not with you there however. No doubt, they're all impressive individual human beings to a greater or lesser extent, but the standard of their refereeing is not where it needs to be. The reasons are far beyond the scope of an internet Forum. I'll go back to Uni and write a dissertation on the subject. The individuals acting as Referees, are low down the list of problems, although I do maintain there's arguably very very little to separate the chaps at the top from those as much as 3 or 4 tiers down. Like my analogy, they're all playing off scratch, but none of them can get a positive handicap that the elite game might expect. Quite obviously, they all have to do as they're told and/or adhere to one 'observer creed'. You know I've always held this view. It leads to consistency.... consistent mediocrity bereft of evolution, the likes of which Lahoz produced in his ECL Final

Michael Oliver and Mark Clattenburg are probably examples that dispel your theory. Clatts in particular was very anti-establishment and refereed how he thought it should be done, didn't stop him having an outstanding career. Michael Oliver perhaps slightly less so, but he seems to be one of the very few officials who it is accepted is allowed to have his own style of refereeing rather than the supposed accepted norm. Sam Barrott, who is flying through the levels at a rate of knots is probably another that will fall into that category, if you watch him referee he is actually very similar in style to Oliver.

Yes, they stand out. So you're echoing one of my points. We need to see a lot more of this
Although the fact you're arguing against a point I've made yet emphatically agreeing with it simultaneously has me confused

 

[RustyRef]

Yes, they stand out. So you're echoing one of my points. We need to see a lot more of this
Although the fact you're arguing against a point I've made yet emphatically agreeing with it simultaneously has me confused

I'm just replying to what you said, and I quote directly ...

That said, I'd be very interested to see SG1 referees officiate games to their own agenda, rather than that of FIFA/UEFA/EPL/PGMOL
That would be interesting. We might actually see THE REFEREE's ABILITY and there's a realistic chance some of them would leave me eating my words

My argument is that is exactly what Clattenburg did and what Oliver is still doing, so does that mean you will be eating your own words?

 

[Big Cat]

so does that mean you will be eating your own words

No, we're a very long way off that
Clatts broke the mould a bit, Oliver less so. I'm aware of Barrott and yes, he has impressed

 

[bloovee]

Can City quote this as mitigation for failing to control players? Or should we just put this down as a non-explanation? It turns out Mr Hooper didn't actually play advantage...

Howard Webb: “I understand the disappointment that ManCity felt on this one [Simon Hooper's decision vs Tottenham] because it would’ve been a wonderful advantage. He just formed the opinion to blow just at the wrong time. It looked like he was ready to play advantage…

“You never actually heard him shout advantage, and I asked him about the arm [pointing out], he said he didn’t even realise he was doing it at the moment. Disappointing for Simon, he would’ve loved to have played advantage there..."

 

[Russell Jones]

Can City quote this as mitigation for failing to control players? Or should we just put this down as a non-explanation? It turns out Mr Hooper didn't actually play advantage...

Howard Webb: “I understand the disappointment that ManCity felt on this one [Simon Hooper's decision vs Tottenham] because it would’ve been a wonderful advantage. He just formed the opinion to blow just at the wrong time. It looked like he was ready to play advantage…

“You never actually heard him shout advantage, and I asked him about the arm [pointing out], he said he didn’t even realise he was doing it at the moment. Disappointing for Simon, he would’ve loved to have played advantage there..."

I'd be strongly against any kind of refereeing "error" being used as post game mitigation for the subsequent behaviour by any team's players. Referees are just as 'entitled' to make mistakes as any other participant and whilst an element of frustration is understandable in situations like these, it in no way justifies the type of reaction we saw in this instance. Where teams can (and often do) benefit is that, in the moment, officials are less likely to take on field action if they know that they have negatively contributed to the incident.

 

[Southerner In The North]

I'd be strongly against any kind of refereeing "error" being used as post game mitigation for the subsequent behaviour by any team's players. Referees are just as 'entitled' to make mistakes as any other participant and whilst an element of frustration is understandable in situations like these, it in no way justifies the type of reaction we saw in this instance. Where teams can (and often do) benefit is that, in the moment, officials are less likely to take on field action if they know that they have negatively contributed to the incident.

I’m the opposite would actually like to see it as it shows common sense and would be a good way to heighten respect down the pyramid.