est The FA has to have someone independent review the ref's performances and shit decisions like these need to be punished by demoting to the lower leagues/match bans for the officials and new (foreign if needed?) refs need to be brought in to referee the games.

I don't disagree with this but I think for real improvement in refereeing in the PL, much deeper reform would be needed. PGMOL is an amazingly amateur organisation, more remiscient of an old boys club (or a corrupt police force as arseblog put it) than a modern, professional body. There are totally unaccountable, they know it, and I'm certain they see themselves as the victims of a wide range of grievances and are cultivating a siege mentality (I have a certain amount of sympathy as they shouldn't be subject to violence or threats, no matter how badly they do their jobs). But they are a serious, serious problem for the PL that needs to be addressed.

For me, a lot of things need to change. Here's a few.

1.
Referee remuneration, career prospects, ethics
Referees should be paid FAR more. I think the top refs earn about 100k a year, which is a pathetic amount given how much money is swishing around in the PL and how much stress refs are put under. It also creates problems. It incentivises refs to think about careers in the media after they 'hang up their whistle', and thus I think referees should be banned from paid work in the media either during or after their careers. Media organisations that involve them should be blackballed and hiring them should be explicitly barred in all matchday rights contracts. A key principle of good refereeing is that referees should not put themselves in the centre of attention, and this recent phenomenon of refs appearing on panel shows to discuss their decisions etc works completely against that. It encourages active referees to build their brand and profile for a lucrative media career later by being provocative as a ref. A ref who quietly does his job well and nobody hears about it is going to have less media opportunities later than a ref who always seeks the spotlight. It's perverse. Pay them more, and make them shut up.

Further, poor remuneration also encourages refs to take up paid gigs in the UAE and other places (clear evidence of the broken 'celebrity ref' culture the current setup has created), which is a clear conflict of interest and could be considered bribery in a lot of other industries. It's so amazingly obvious that this should be banned yet the PL still turns a blind eye to it.

Poor pay also makes it harder to attract talent. Looking at some of the decisions being made right now, I think anyone can see that this is having real consequences.

2.
Referee visibility
As mentioned above, refs are encouraged to seek out the spotlight by the current economics and rules of PL refereeing, as well as by human nature generally. In addition to them being paid more but banned from any involvement in media, I think their identities should not be circulated, at all. They should be removed completely from the match discussion - no more 'today's referee is X', no including their name in match reports, no reporting on it in any sense. This may seem counterintuitive as it could reduce accountability (if that's even possible), but I think it'd eventually take the heat out of refereeing, make it easier to attract talent, and it would get rid of the limelight seekers. This may sound a little wacky, but the only way for this to actually work would to also physically hide ref's identities - have them wear a mask during games. Yes, I'm serious.

Anonymising refereeing would in theory mean fans would have nobody specific to rage against when their team is wronged, but I think it'd lead to more professional, better refereeing generally, would improve working conditions for refs, and would reduce the impact of particularly intimidating grounds (studies have shown that certain grounds with noisier atmospheres, like Anfield, do result in more favourable decisions for the home team). It'd also reduce the celebrity-adjacent attraction effect that some referees clearly enjoy (as we saw with David Coote), whereby their near celebrity status acts as something of a perk in the absence of good pay or healthy working conditions. Anonymity is also an important prerequisite, in my opinion, for the next reform:

3.
Refereeing selection
As humans, we all have biases, some are obvious, some are subtle, and eliminating bias completely is impossible. But the PL could do an awful lot more to build confidence amongst clubs and fans that it was doing everything in its power to minimise it. The PL should be well resourced with data analytics teams that continually evaluate and scan for potential biases in refs. For example, as mentioned above, some grounds can intimidate referees and lead to more favourable outcomes for the home team, but this isn't universal amongst refs. Some are more prone to home bias than others. Some refs will have biases against certain clubs, certain regions, etc. There are a million ways humans can be biased and the PL should be continually evaluating, and sharing what they are doing with the PL clubs to build confidence and trust in the integrity of the process. Their current process, which is to deny that bias even exists and to accuse anyone who opines otherwise of 'bringing the game into disrepute', ironically, itself brings the game into disrepute.

When biases in refs are found, the information should not be shared with the media or the ref subjected to a witchhunt, but rather, the PL should simply quietly move the ref in question away from scenarios where their biases would be exposed. This should be done proactively, not reactively. I think information on the various checks it does could be shared with the public to build trust, but sensitive information (such as when the PL identifies a suspicion that a referee may have signs of bias against a specific team) should not be released to the public. It could probably be released to the clubs, under very strict rules about information sharing. This would make the clubs responsible for building trust amongst their fanbases in the process, and encourage them to buy into it, rather than rail against it in the media.

4.
Conflict reporting & resolution
Related to the above, I consider the recent controversy with David Coote, caught sounding off, probably under the influence, about a PL manager, their fans and so on. To me, the affair was utterly predictable - everybody knows refs hold such opinions on PL teams and managers and know the PL/PGMOLs protestations of integrity to be total bullshit. PGMOL's reaction, to sacrifice Coote and allow him to be painted him as a bad egg rather than to admit the reality that their entire organisation is rotten, was equally predictable.

I have sympathy for Coote. I have no doubt that behind closed doors, all the referees regularly sound off to each other and others about the various teams and personalities they work with. Most just don't get caught. But refs are mostly average people whose job it is to babysit a bunch of millionaire narcissist crybabies every week, be subject to constant abuse and to get paid fuck all for the privilege. It'd turn me to drugs too tbh, and I think some understanding needs to be shown.

But obviously, a referee opining that a manager is a cunt is a bit of a problem from the perspective of bias, so I think a whole lot of processes are needed here. I think referees should have to disclose any and all interactions with managers, clubs or fans they are responsible for officiating. That can help inform bias analysis carried out as part of item 3. In the case of serious disputes with senior officials from clubs under their purview, a conflict resolution process is needed to try to defuse such situations before they build up and turn into an emotional triggerpoint that will impact decision making. If such efforts fail, refs should be moved off games involving their subjects. But also, on the flipside, if you have a manager who gets into disputes with so many referees that the PL has difficulty finding referees to allocate for that manager's games, then the PL should have the power to ban that manager from the touchline for such games until they resolve their disputes. I don't think such a scenario is too much of a stretch, given that most managers are former footballers, a group I'd argue is more prone to anti-social personality disorders than the general public. I think it's likely that some managers are just awful people who create toxic workplace environments (while simultaneously cultivating a positive public persona), and that shouldn't be acceptable anywhere, not even in the PL.

5.
Governance reform
Finally, it's crucial to build more accountability with refereeing and PGMOL is a laughably inept organisation with precious little accountability. I'm not sure what reforms need to take place here - my first thought is to have the refereeing body rights put out to tender every couple of years so that at the very least, the closed shop nature of PGMOL can be rectified and if results don't improve, they can turfed out. It is amazing to me, given the amount of wealth in the PL, that its refereeing body is so unprofessional as to not even establish clear and battle tested procedures for VAR (I'm thinking of farcical things like VAR forgetting to draw the offside lines, failing to establish with the referee what his actual on field decision was, and so on) before starting a season. That sort of shit wouldn't be acceptable in any of the average joe organisations I've worked in, and a proper league would have dumped and replaced the entire organisation ages ago. Maybe an independent regulator with power to sack officials and enforce root and branch reform would be enough, but I dunno.

Anyway, that's my 2c. What changes do y'all think ought to happen?

    1) Agree about salaries.
    2) Make refs direct employees of the league, subject to discipline, promotion, etc., by league.
    3) Put more refs on field of play, give them assigned angles and responsibilities. Watch how NBA refs (3 of them) move around the court.
    4) Formalize system of warnings prior to yellow cards for time wasting, crowding, etc.
    5) From an American sports perspective I find the ex-refs the TV networks have to be a good addition to understanding calls, but maybe that's because of the formalization of criteria for each call.

    Oh, and a huge amount of controversy could be a avoided if they just fixed the rules around yellow/red cards and penalties. The yellow/red system gives refs two options: effectively do nothing or completely turn the game on its head. Replacing yellows with a sin bin would gradiate punishments and go a long way towards taking the sting out of bad decisions. Introducing similar for penalties so that it isn't so all or nothing would help a lot too.

    I like all of these. I would add two

    1) Recruitment: cast the net wider to build the base. We tend to see the same referees over and over. I think we need a larger base of referees, so they aren't so stressed out doing so many games. But also so we can have more perspectives approaching the game, including more younger referees to refresh the pool. Ensure there is diversity, particularly regional diversity.

    2) Debate: i think one of the big issues here is that once a referee has leaned in and given a decision (penalty, red card), we rarely see him reverse it due to this idea that "we do not want to re-referee the game". that's incredibly stupid. you've spent millions on technology and extra eyes. use it, and create an environment where it's okay to tell the leader that "hey, you got it wrong, we are going to reverse your decision". and also lean on data to encourage referees to take a second look. data shows that teams that suffer red cards are fucked and penalties are 7x more likely to be scored than a regular shot. so treat these decisions with gravity.

    Good thread. I am actually sympathetic to the referees. This is not an easy job. I don't think they are corrupt. But they do need to modernize and be more in touch with the advances of the game and tech

      Claudius sorry mate, had to unlike again when I read the last paragraph. Couldn't have my signature on there. Agree on the first two points though.

        Building on number 5, acknowledge that the skills need to be a good on field referee aren't the same skills needed in the VAR booth. And get rid of arbitrary criteria like only intervening when an error is 'clear and obvious' for something that is factual and verifiable.

        1. Referee remuneration, career prospects, ethics.

        Agreed. Pay must be commensurate to standards and expectations. The key aspect to this, though, is that the pay increase must come with clearer standards and expectations from a legitimately higher authority than the referees themselves. Fail to meet standards, fail to get PL games. Simple as that.

        1. Referee visibility

        I don't really agree with this. The identity of the refereeing team should be transparent and readily available information, especially if point 1 is adopted. This is a key part of accountability. With the increased pay, however, I do think its reasonable to put strict rules on referees themselves in terms of what they are allowed to do and say in public, what kinds of media appearances they're allowed to make, etc. Breaching those terms for fame (or infamy) should constitute grounds for termination.

        1. Refereeing selection

        Many good points here. Bias is fine, actually. The idea that it doesn't exist is absurd, so my solution would be to simply have more referees, and to assign referees based on self-reported biases.

        1. Conflict reporting & resolution

        Generally agreed. However, managers yell at refs because refs respond to being yelled at, are incompetent, and are corrupt and deserve to be treated as such. Mitigate these problems in the refereeing pool, and you then have the ethical standing to start cracking down on manager and player behavior. It's not an aporia - refereeing improvements must come first.

        Self-reporting biases should be normalized and de-stigmatized at every level of referee recruitment and training. Refs should probably not be refereeing games involving their childhood clubs, whether or not they feel they can be objective. Have more refs, pay them more, and select from the pool based on performance and known biases. This protects everyone, including refs.

        1. Governance reform

        PGMOL must be disbanded. Referees should probably be governed by the FA as a final decision-making authority.

        I think we also need to get rid of the subjective clock. Time-wasting shouldn't even be possible.

        Perhaps more radically, I believe we need to add a referee. The lone schoolmaster/cop model is just not a good one. Running the diagonal seems so ridiculously old-fashioned at this point. Put a ref in each half, let them have a quick chat for big decisions, let them choose whether to go to a monitor as well as VAR recommendation, play what they see on the big screen, and give the 4th official a mic to explain decisions. Allow referees to consult with each other in general, and have them explain any yellow, red, or penalty decision. The fact that fans often only learn what a card is for after the match is over is ridiculous.

        VAR must be entirely reformed, and be considered an different skill set. Game-day refs should be in the VAR room as consultants only, while the VAR should be specially trained for that purpose. They should advise on literally every single decision when requested, no weird rules. If a corner is contentious, they should just say who kicked the fucking ball out.

        Furthermore, the Guidance Handbook should only be used to create more measurable and clear interpretations of the Laws of the Game, and never provide additional discretion or ambiguity. Furthermore, I see no reason why clubs should be subject to interpretations they don't agree with. Any new "guidance" should be ratified by representatives of the clubs in some way.

        The biggest problem is fundamentally cultural. You could implement all or none of these changes, but there still needs to be a new, visionary plan that is well-implemented to radically transform refereeing at every level of the game. This includes recruitment and training. We need new understandings of what referees actually do. I very strongly disagree with the idea that referees are there to "manage" games. This is not only archaic, but an essentially impossible task. Referees are there to call the game for maximum fairness and safety, not to play the psychologist or the schoolmaster. They should make and explain decisions according to the laws of the game + any clarifying interpretations agreed upon by the league they are working in. The qualities that should be ingrained through training and awarded through promotion should be consistency, accuracy, speed, comprehensive understanding of the laws, and maintaining the respect of players and coaches - maybe even fans! These are the people they serve, because these are the people who are the game. If referees can hold a high standard (they must) then they can begin to expect such a standard from others, and deliver harsh sanctions on those who do not meet them (i.e., when Arteta goes ballistic at the fourth official, or Klopp tries to eat a linesman's head).

        It's the biggest most watched, most well paid league in the world.

        Yes by all means pay them more, but also bring in the best referees from around the world. That helps remove the bias accusations.

        And yes the referees body should be accountable to the Premier League. They are tarnishing the brand.

        I think there should be ex referees in the media though. if done properly it could help young kids who want to be referees learn some more.

          Asterix we need to solve the VAR/referee thing.
          I was watching two exco members in a meeting recently. One was presenting. The other noticed funny numbers and started asking out of interest. The presenter was clearly not having it out. Later I saw them outside, and it was clear the presenter was taking the interrogator to task.
          It's not easy to build cultures where people are open to dialogue and being questioned. So I do not think it's a small task to solve the VAR-Referee dynamic and a lot of thought needs to be put into it. The referees will not accept a non-referee in the VAR room, so the solution will require somebody qualified (whether PGMOL or not) who is empowered to call out the referee. But likewise the referees will need to be trained to listen and distance themselves from decisions

              Claudius Debate: i think one of the big issues here is that once a referee has leaned in and given a decision (penalty, red card), we rarely see him reverse it due to this idea that "we do not want to re-referee the game". that's incredibly stupid. you've spent millions on technology and extra eyes. use it, and create an environment where it's okay to tell the leader that "hey, you got it wrong, we are going to reverse your decision". and also lean on data to encourage referees to take a second look.

              Absolutely this. The point of it should be to ensure the correct decision, not to back up the mate in the middle. We're all human and you can't get everything right in real time, that's why the technology should be there. Football could learn a lot from how it works in say cricket or rugby where there is no problem with reversing the on field decision if the replays show it to be wrong and you generally get to hear the whole discussion explaining the decision on TV too.

                Claudius

                That's how a firm's organised. The executives lead the various business activities, the Board oversees the executives with the purpose of challenging them, the second-line is tasked with ensuring risk is correctly identified and mitigated, and the third line audits aspects of the business as an additional layer of security. That's three layers of defence against poor decisions, notwithstanding the business which should have it's own measures in place to identify and mitigate all forms of risk.

                The risk of a wrong decision will always exist. VAR was supposed to come in and mitigate that risk by correcting the ref when necessary. Instead, they're in cahoots with each other, when they should be independent from one another. The sad thing is we're more likely to see VAR removed from the game before there's any reform. Blaming the tool instead of the people using the tool.

                  In a surprise to literally no one besides Oliver and the PGMOL. Good news for MLS and the club, but lets see how this shakes out with PGMOL. They will not be too happy about it.

                    USArsenal casting my mind back to the game, I’m actually really annoyed. Not only did they dismiss MLS, we had to sacrifice Nwaneri. They denied two children an opportunity to grow. It’s heinous.

                    I wonder if there’ll tread carefully around us for a few weeks given the media attention. They will want us to know who is boss down the line though. They will not enjoy being fucked around with

                        They’ll give us a dodgy penalty or something so that they can counter the claims of bias. Then it will start again

                        • IBL likes this.

                        Claudius I wonder if there’ll tread carefully around us for a few weeks given the media attention. They will want us to know who is boss down the line though. They will not enjoy being fucked around with

                        Are you sure you don't think these guys are corrupt? 😃

                            • Tam

                            • Post #17

                            USArsenal they won’t be surprised by it. They absolutely know what’s what.

                              • Tam

                              • Post #18

                              Claudius Not only did they dismiss MLS, we had to sacrifice Nwaneri. They denied two children an opportunity to grow. It’s heinous.

                              This is a bit of a reach. Denied two children. Heinous. Really?

                              It’s a terrible decision. I actually don’t think it’s the worst in recent years. The only reason I think the footballing world has thrown their collective toys out the pram is because they know their player could have been the one making that tackle. MLS could have been any one of the dozens of players up and down the country every weekend making tackles like that, so they’re now exposed.

                              Martinelli’s double yellow? Rice’s time wasting red? Trossard’s time wasting red? Saliba’s header? Those don’t happen to other clubs so they’ve been amusing incidents that don’t threaten them in any way. Now it’s real though, now it could be them.

                                QuincyAbeyie i associate corruption with misuse of office for favors/cash.

                                I don't think that is what is happening here. What is happening seems to be an abuse of power. They've created a small, closed group that holds an inordinate amount of power over a larger group. They know they have leverage because they are a valuable resource so should typically be tricky to replace. This power means that they can go unchecked. But until I find solid evidence that they are being paid to throw games, I will avoid calling them corrupt.

                                • Tam replied to this.
                                • Tam likes this.

                                    • Tam

                                    • Post #20

                                    Claudius I agree with you. The Middle Eastern earnings do make it a bit murky but I don’t think it’s straight corruption. It’s a system which benefits referee’s reputations over that of football.