It seems that pretty much every PL game these days produces one shockingly bad call or decision from a referee or lino.
The speed of the games definitely plays a part but quite often it boils down to officials being completely incompetent.

SamDaGooner wrote:

And i may sound like a liverpool fan but then thats what all the fans of every pl team are saying, whenever a decision goes against manure there is a huge backlash and it ends up with them getting decisions like the young one.

The problem with that view is that it's so selective. Does anyone else remember when Evra got suspended because he got into an off-field fight with some Chelsea cunt who threw a racist remark at him? They could never prove the racist allegation but Evra got banned for four games during United's most important part of the season. Ferguson got a couple of games too for criticising the FA in the aftermath. It's rarely mentioned though because it doesn't fit the argument.

SamDaGooner wrote:

There is certainly a certain amount of influence on referees where they hold prejudices against players and the perfect example is walcott, when he admitted to diving the next game a stonewall penalty rejected.

There's an inescapable bias towards the top clubs among referees, but that's true everywhere and not just for United. You see it with Barcelona and Real too. I think it boils down to this for the most part: Usually the benefit of a doubt is given to the better player more often than to the lesser one.

Regardless, the level of quality of PL referees has taken a downward turn...
How Atkinson, who I thought was fairly decent a couple of seasons ago, said that he made the correct non call with the Song hit is beyond my comprehension...
The game has changed, and referees have a difficult time keeping up with it.
Just wish the FA would consider the use of technology or some sort of challenge system.....The refs job is not to influence the outcome of the game...So tired of the governing bodies at all levels refusing to deal with this crap....They all want to control the game, greedy twats...
What honest fan doesn't want a game that is called in a fair way?

Referees have got an increasingly difficult job, because the game has become faster and every decision they make can be scrutinised by multiple camera angles. However, I don't think there is much capacity for technology to improve officiating during the course of a game other than goal line technology. Technology should be used retrospectively to correct obvious mistakes though.

There are 5 main areas I would change to hopefully improve the quality of officiating. The cost would make them viable only for the professional game, but I think they would definitely improve on the current situation:

• Introduce goal-line technology. It may not be 100% accurate, but it should help reduce the errors made in this area significantly.

-Extra Officials - I don't agree with Platini's idea of extra officials behind the goal as I have yet to see them be a positive influence on the decision making in the games that I have seen with them present. However, I would put 2 extra linesman to help split the workload and allow them to concentrate on specific duties. Out of the four linesmen, 2 would be responsible for monitoring the offsides, while the other two would aid the referee in the policing of other infringements.

- Simplify the Offside Rule - I don't agree with this current active vs passive stance as it confusing and open to abuse. I would go back to the old system whereby everything beyond the last defender is offside.

• Change on field punishments - The penalty for incidents should fit the crime and allow a reasonable advantage to the offended team. I would introduce sin-bins as a means of penalising teams in the same game rather than allowing another team to benefit from the effect later on.

Red cards should be used exclusively to punish very dangerous behaviour, and also be used when the same player tots up 2 yellows. The red would not be used for professional fouls denying a clear goal-scoring chance. As far as I know FIFA is already looking at changes to the potential triple whammy of red card offences for professional fouls (intentional or not) whereby a team can be hit by player expulsion, penalty kick conceded and subsequent player suspension.

Yellow cards should result in a 10min departure for the guilty player. This will benefit the opposing team. As a result, the threshold to recieve a yellow card should be much higher. i.e. bad (but not red card) challenges and cynical fouls would be covered by yellow cards.

Ordinary fouls would be penalised by a simple free-kick, but dissent and other non-game offences would be penalised by appropriate fines. Severe dissent could be penalised by a yellow card though.

• Retrospective Punishments - apart from covering the obvious mistakes, certain behaviour should be targeted within reason even if the evidence is not 100% conclusive. For example, instances where diving is heavily suspected to have gained a significant advantage should be targeted with an appropriate penalty to act as a deterrent. This would mean on-field referees may find it easier if players realise that efforts to dupe the referee could have further consequences and thus act accordingly. This is probably the most difficult to put into practice, but common agreement between clubs and managers with the FAs should allow a suitable framework to work with and enforce.

One other thing that might help as well in terms of keeping the game flowing and reducing abuse of the system is to ban substitutions in injury time while making all injured players be treated off the field, unless it would jeopardise their health to do so. That way managers cannot use subs to time-waste after a certain point and players feigning injury in the later stages may leave their team a man short.

Hopefully all these would help improve the quality of officiating by a combination of rule changes, increased referee coverage and altering player behaviour.

All they need is a proper official in the tv room with a mic linked to the man in the middle. They could have the proper decision relayed within the time it takes most of the players to stop rolling on the floor and the extra cost would be minimal.

The refs should just tazer anyone that they think is being a bit of a cunt.

Tony Montana wrote:

Too much rule changing DK.

Have a look at Burnwinters suggestions in the match thread.

Don't think there's too much rule changing there to be honest. It can be adoopted on mass or just parts of it and can be phased in gradually.

The offside rule would be fairly simple to implement as it has been used before.

The only other rule changes would concern the determination of penalising foul play as opposed to altering the framework of how the game is played. I borrowed heavily from rugby in distinguishing between red cards and yellow cards. I haven't suggested that radical a change in the application of red cards, but with a better clarification of what should constitute a yellow card and giving it a suitable penalty, there should hopefully be more consistency in they way that they are administered by referees. It is the most radical change I have suggested, but is not impossible to implement.

I think if they just corrected bad decisions after the games using video evidence it'd solve an awful lot of problems.

Captain wrote:

All they need is a proper official in the tv room with a mic linked to the man in the middle. They could have the proper decision relayed within the time it takes most of the players to stop rolling on the floor and the extra cost would be minimal.

It is so obvious isn´t it?

Indeed, all the rules are already there we don't need any more, if they were enforced properly.
Who should have the final say though the ref in room or the ref on the pitch......

The one on the pitch as he is in control of the game and has the whistle. Just the same as with the linos.

qs! wrote:

I think if they just corrected bad decisions after the games using video evidence it'd solve an awful lot of problems.

All they need to do is get a committee/bench satisfactorily independent of both clubs and the refs to rescind wrong cards and punishments, and apply suspensions and fines for bad behaviour that was missed, based on all the available evidence.

The only other aspect is a system that takes into account the player's track record.

It's not that hard, I'm basing my ideas entirely on what's done in week in week out in Australian Rules football, a sport that's characterised by brawling on and off the field, cynical fouling, deliberately injuring opponents, foul language directed at officials etc. It works pretty well.

However in Australian Rules football, the problem is that there are no punishments on the day - no cards, no sin bin etc. Major problem in big matches.

Fifa regard the FA’s decision over Balotelli as correct, based on current regulations but, contrary to popular perception, there is nothing to stop national associations pursuing a different policy.

Article 146 of Fifa’s disciplinary code explicitly states that national associations are “at liberty to choose the means and wordings” of the relevant provisions.

A Fifa official told Telegraph Sport: “Article 146 means that any FA are at liberty to choose the wording of certain elements of the disciplinary code. What clearly could not happen would be for any amendments to be made to existing regulations during the course of the season.

Too late for anything to be done in relation to Balotelli but it seems there is scope for the FA to introduce measures that enable such incidents to be punished retrospectively.
The worry seems to be that if on the ball incidents have been seen by match officials any subsequent action taken by the FA will be seen as re-refereeing and has the potential to undermine the authority of the referee and his officials during the match.

The reason these worries exist is that it's clear that neither the referee nor the officials have the competency to view accurately incidents as they occur in real time.
I would still question the competency of some referees to make fair judgements even with a clear view of events, but at least excuses could be eliminated if they are forced into making decisions based on replays.

For me the governing bodies have to accept that as long as they ignore technology as an aid, errors and oversights will continue to exist and will have an undue and significant influence over results.

I'd favour on the spot re-refereeing via playback over retrospective re-refereeing via the FA which effectively seems to be where we are heading if the governing bodies don't move with the times.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/9198568/Fifa-says-FA-could-take-retrospective-action-next-season.html

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story/_/id/1048071/fulham-chairman-mohamed-al-fayed-hits-out-at-authorities?cc=5901

Mohammed Al Fayed chips in.

Last week Atkinson misses the severity of Balotelli's assault on Song. This week he awards a ghost goal. His next game should be for Scunthorpe or Wycombe if the FA has balls.