The game can't be fixed from the bottom up. Risky penalty awards which surprise everyone are no good for self-preservation. I know this, because I've found out for myself
Hartlepool v Dover
- Thread starter ladbroke8745
- Start date
PinnerPaul
RefChat Addict
The game can't be fixed from the bottom up. Risky penalty awards which surprise everyone are no good for self-preservation. I know this, because I've found out for myself
Agree, and its also a useful aid to making decisions - we're not right all the time!
Recently as an AR I'm right on top of the play, ball goes out for what I thought was 100% a red throw, blue player picks up the ball , throws it in, not a murmur from anyone - I'm certainly not disagreeing!
I know some don't like it, but player reaction SHOULD be taken into account when making some decisions.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
The game can't be fixed from the bottom up. Risky penalty awards which surprise everyone are no good for self-preservation. I know this, because I've found out for myself
That's not the equivalent of no appeal. I don't dispute that there is an element of "if no one is looking for it then it was probably trifling." And I'm certainly not advocating for the calls that an R makes to show he is smarter than everyone else (those guys drive me out of my mind). But I hate the mentality of no appeal=no call, which bleeds into the more active the appeal the more likely the call, which encourages diving and clamoring for calls all the time. When we don't give the right call because a player tries to keep playing (as we say they are supposed to) instead of flinging his arms in the air, we teach the player to fall down and appeal--and then as referees we bemoan the prevalence of diving. We can't fix it from the bottom, but that doesn't mean we have to make it worse.
I doubt either of us would 'make it worse'
Give the decision that 'football expects', is the phrase. Throw-ins best fit this paradigm. We frequently 'go with the flow'!