A&H

Man City v Spurs

Southerner In The North said:
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.
Click to expand...
Don't think it would. It would say to clubs and players that if they think a decision is wrong they can scream in the referee's face as much as they like, after all Man City had the charges dropped against them because the referee was proven to be wrong.

And let's not forget here this was NOT an incorrect decision, Hooper didn't do anything incorrect in law or indeed make an incorrect decision. Advantage is at the discretion of the referee, think we all agree that he should have done so here but he has just switched off.
 
The Referee Store
RustyRef said:
Don't think it would. It would say to clubs and players that if they think a decision is wrong they can scream in the referee's face as much as they like, after all Man City had the charges dropped against them because the referee was proven to be wrong.

And let's not forget here this was NOT an incorrect decision, Hooper didn't do anything incorrect in law or indeed make an incorrect decision. Advantage is at the discretion of the referee, think we all agree that he should have done so here but he has just switched off.
Click to expand...
He was incorrect on PGMOL advice though according to Mr Dean this is sent to clubs at start of season each year let’s not make wrong decisions right.
 
Southerner In The North said:
He was incorrect on PGMOL advice though according to Mr Dean this is sent to clubs at start of season each year let’s not make wrong decisions right.
Click to expand...
Advantage is in the opinion of the referee, it was a bad decision, not a wrong decision. I've had games where the players are behaving so badly I've openly told them I'm going to kill the game and not play any advantage, if that means I blow as someone is about to be through on goal then so be it. That is coached into referees at senior levels, so for that reason any referee not playing advantage can't be wrong per se, but they could be told it would be better to play it.
 
It's unrealistic to ever expect football to be sanitized to the point to which Hooper would not 'cop it' for this mistake. Nor would I want the game ever to reach that point. It's also unreasonable to acquit the players from punishment as it still amounts to misconduct, regardless of the trigger
 
HW did give advice to Simon Hooper that instead of "Calm" Calm" he would have been better putting his hands up apologetically to calm the players. Which is good advice for us all, a quick "Sorry guys I have messed up".
 
Big Cat said:
It's unrealistic to ever expect football to be sanitized to the point to which Hooper would not 'cop it' for this mistake. Nor would I want the game ever to reach that point. It's also unreasonable to acquit the players from punishment as it still amounts to misconduct, regardless of the trigger
Click to expand...
Don't disagree, especially given the point in the game and the score at the time. But as you say that doesn't excuse the player behaviour or give them some get out of jail free card because the referee had a momentary lapse of concentration.
 
bloovee said:
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..."
Click to expand...
It's very rare that players 'know' the referee has made a mistake. The vast majority of time, when dissent happens, player 'think' the referee has made a mistake but in their mind they think the know.

Using this mitigation would increase dissent because as soon as they think the referee has made mistakes (which is pretty much most of the decisions against their team) they would have a go at at the referee thinking they have the right to do it because of their perceived mistake.
 
For serious misconduct I would go so far as to say it is utterly idiotic to consider whether an R made an upsetting mistake. As an R, however, my dissent tolerance is a bit higher when I think I or my AR blew a call—but it sure as heck ain’t a “get out of jail free” card.
 
Biggest game I had ever done in terms of occasion was a cup final. Just into the second half added time of 3min. The attacking team is winning 3-1. Attacker tackled in the PA. Appeal from the fouled player and a few others, big shout of no from me. I bottled a pen. I knew I did (fully expect a question being asked here, why did you then?). No one bothered except for one guy from 30 yards away angrily shouting "are you funking blind?". Everyone on the ground including the 300+ spectators heard it. Gave it a quick thought, blew the whistle and sent him off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top