Fucking Refs: Page 3 - The Arsenal discussion community: One More in the Tolly

Fucking Refs

Claudius

goon wrote:
But then you prevent a chance for Tottenham to counter and if there was no foul you punish them for no reason.

... or you prevent City being robbed

goon

Right, but each situation is different. On another day it's not a penalty so you're penalising the team with the ball.

Qwiss

goon wrote:
Howard Webb doesn't instantly call it, he waits to see the replay like everyone else but gives his initial impression first. In practice you'd have to watch it from at least a couple of angles too before making a decision.

Exactly. Most of the time the play has started again by the time they get to Howard Webb.

Claudius

True. I think the answer that will work is only a few years away, but will be even more abhorrent to those who cannot even stomach the idea of video replay. Robots. You can leave the refereeing of a game to a computer. It would have more eyes than all the officials put together, and will be able to solve a lot of today's niggling problems

offside rule is very difficult because in a split second the linesman needs to look at the passer, and then the recipient and the defenders around him to make a judgment of offside. A computer would not have this problem. It sees both simultaneously and makes a decision instantly
fouls: referee is always criticised because he gets one view from one angle, while we rant as we see even more replays that confirm that a player was pushed or hacked. Again, a computer will not have this problem

When that's installed, we can direct our vitriol towards a clutch of computer scientists and a computer with a silly name

Qwiss

Claudius wrote:
True. I think the answer that will work is only a few years away, but will be even more abhorrent to those who cannot even stomach the idea of video replay. Robots. You can leave the refereeing of a game to a computer. It would have more eyes than all the officials put together, and will be able to solve a lot of today's niggling problems

offside rule is very difficult because in a split second the linesman needs to look at the passer, and then the recipient and the defenders around him to make a judgment of offside. A computer would not have this problem. It sees both simultaneously and makes a decision instantly

fouls: referee is always criticised because he gets one view from one angle, while we rant as we see even more replays that confirm that a player was pushed or hacked. Again, a computer will not have this problem

When that's installed, we can direct our vitriol towards a clutch of computer scientists and a computer with a silly name

Offsides could definitely be done by robots, that would be ideal. Computers are perfect because they deliver instant results that cannot be contested.

I don't know how computers are going to call fouls though. There are too many variables.

General

Of course it would fun watching a computer decide whether a player is active or not active in an offside situation.

General

Claudius wrote:
Oh. And for those who insist that refereeing in Premier League is worse than it's ever been or inferior to Europe, please refer to some research that substantiates this.

It's based on observation. What makes it worse is boys club that PGMOL have created. In these country if you leave a bunch of self important muppets to self regulation it never works.

General

http://7amkickoff.com/index.php/2016/09/06/its-time-for-pgmol-and-the-fa-to-stop-lying/

What sparked all of this debate, however, is that Mark Halsey, former PGMOL referee said that he was instructed to write reports with “I didn’t see it” as part of the report. It’s a repeat of a claim he has made before in his book Added Time. Added Time was published three years ago and included a number of shocking revelations; that Halsey and Ferguson were text buddies, and that Mourinho paid for Halsey and his family to stay at a 4-star hotel. Mourinho even does Halsey the favor of writing the intro to the book. Imagine bragging about Mourinho buying you off with a four-star hotel.

‘That came before a conversation with Mike Riley when he said I would be getting a phone call from Tarik Shamel, head of on-field regulation at the FA, about the incidents involving Nzonzi.

‘When the call came, Tarik told me that Mike had told him there should have been a sending-off. Not for me, there shouldn’t, I said. Tarik left it up to me to decide the next step.

‘Reluctantly, feeling under pressure to deliver the result Mike wanted, I agreed rather than cause a problem and have yet more bad blood with him.

Coombs

Qwiss! wrote:
goon wrote:
Howard Webb doesn't instantly call it, he waits to see the replay like everyone else but gives his initial impression first. In practice you'd have to watch it from at least a couple of angles too before making a decision.

Exactly. Most of the time the play has started again by the time they get to Howard Webb.

He's seen it within 2 or 3 seconds and if he communicated with the ref via headset, he'd know 2 seconds later. When we see him, hes already prepared a statement after replays shown by the broadcaster. This whole debate is not based on the reality of communication technology. Ive often texted my own verdict after seeing replays before they get the ball back in play.

marv3llous

We need the help of video reviews for offsides (in goal scoring situations) exactly as we needed goal line technology. Its clear that the game is too fast for just one or two pairs of eyes to capture everything that's going on.

Also, if all the incidents could be reviewed later, after the match, despite what the original decision by the referee was, it would help a lot. Retrospective bans is the answer to get most guys acting straight, if they knew they wont get away with it.

Rex

In basketball for instance they have a long time ago come to the realization that they need 3 proper referees, and that's in a game played on a much smaller pitch, with a lower overall pace to it, and with fewer players on the pitch. Of course they also have video technology. Now, HOW video is used in basketball is a continuous debate and tweaks are being made to improve the total experience, but at least they have it.

I yell at shit refs as much as the next guy, but the reality is that what is asked of them at this point is an overwhelming task.

Klaus

I think they need two referees in football too, maybe one for each half of the pitch. I remember Mark Halsey talking about how they just can't keep up anymore in the modern game. And it's not about being middleaged or out of shape or anything, it's about the fact that the referee needs to follow the ball, and the ball is passed around on a field much quicker than any person could ever run.

Qwiss

Thats partly what those beside the goal refs were supposed to be but they never bloody did anything. If you had your idea for a ref per half and the extra guys at the box and they were all useful it would solve a lot.

marv3llous

I think we need to combine all of it. Two refs for half and half is also excellent idea. Combine that some sensible video replay and retrospective stuff and the game would be so much better. Just look how goal line technology helped.

Tam

I think one problem with one ref in each half is that we don't currently have the consistency from game to game. There's an argument for a lack of consistency for one ref in any given game (home support, player pressure, whatever influence there may be), but going to two refs is going to magnify that and make it even worse. It also dilutes the pool of referees. We currently don't have a large enough group of qualified, skilled and experienced referees, and two to a game is only going to further dilute that.

Klaus

There might be a small risk, but one thing to consider is that we already have at least three referees at each game: one main and two assistants (formerly called linesmen). They're already part of a group dynamic. If you need two main referees to work consistently with eachother in order to be on the same page then maybe that's not such a bad idea. Officials already stick together in teams during big tournaments like CL, WC, Euros, etc.

I think the point about stretching the talent pool is fair on the other hand, but then again if refereeing weren't such a thankless job we might see more of them emerge in a short-term perspective. It beats me why anyone would want the job under current circumstances.

Qwiss

I think you could up the pay scale for refs too and allow the PL to sign refs from abroad. Make them like players where they are held responsible for their actions and their bottom line is effected by their performance.

Tam

Jeez, think of the ego someone like Dean would have if referees suddenly had a 'value' outwith their own FA! Tongue in cheek but not a bad idea, however I would worry that there would be a tendency for foreign referees coming from differing footballing cultures to be more or less lenient in certain aspects of the game. In general I think the idea of spreading around the talent pool - communication/language skills permitting - could only be beneficial.

Klaus wrote:
There might be a small risk, but one thing to consider is that we already have at least three referees at each game: one main and two assistants (formerly called linesmen). They're already part of a group dynamic. If you need two main referees to work consistently with eachother in order to be on the same page then maybe that's not such a bad idea. Officials already stick together in teams during big tournaments like CL, WC, Euros, etc.

I think the point about stretching the talent pool is fair on the other hand, but then again if refereeing weren't such a thankless job we might see more of them emerge in a short-term perspective. It beats me why anyone would want the job under current circumstances.

I'm not sure I necessarily agree on the point about assistants/linesmen. The referee can ultimately overrule the assistants. If there are two with equal powers then there's the potential for disagreement, especially on incidents on or near the halfway line, if that is indeed the arbitrary line between their set areas. Or do they have crossover into each half? It's all no doubt details would could be fleshed out but I'm a bit ignorant as to how multiple refs work in practice in other sports so I suppose I'm erring more towards the negatives in this case.

As for the role being a thankless job. These big headed refs are the top of the game are handsomely rewarded for it, I can completely understand their motivation. At grassroots level, where they're doing it for free or for token amounts on weekend mornings is where the real mystery lies when you think of all the stories of harassment and assaults they have to deal with.

flobaba

How many whistles tho?

Klaus

Tam wrote:
Klaus wrote:
There might be a small risk, but one thing to consider is that we already have at least three referees at each game: one main and two assistants (formerly called linesmen). They're already part of a group dynamic. If you need two main referees to work consistently with eachother in order to be on the same page then maybe that's not such a bad idea. Officials already stick together in teams during big tournaments like CL, WC, Euros, etc.

I think the point about stretching the talent pool is fair on the other hand, but then again if refereeing weren't such a thankless job we might see more of them emerge in a short-term perspective. It beats me why anyone would want the job under current circumstances.

I'm not sure I necessarily agree on the point about assistants/linesmen. The referee can ultimately overrule the assistants. If there are two with equal powers then there's the potential for disagreement, especially on incidents on or near the halfway line, if that is indeed the arbitrary line between their set areas. Or do they have crossover into each half? It's all no doubt details would could be fleshed out but I'm a bit ignorant as to how multiple refs work in practice in other sports so I suppose I'm erring more towards the negatives in this case.

I honestly don't know Tam. It's going to take more than an afternoon to reinvent the role of the officials within the sport. I think the will is what is lacking rather than the practicality to make it work though. Football has been governed by ultra-conservatives for a very long time, and when they want to think radical it's always ridiculous stuff like scrapping the offside rule or removing the away advantage in two-leg fixtures or introducing point penalties for 0-0 games that gets floated around. I've never once thought the rules of the game were broken myself. What we need is a better way to apply them.

« Previous Page Next Page »