Liverpool banter 209259


Use our rumours form to send us liverpool transfer rumours.

(single word yields best result)

18 Apr 2017 23:09:57
Hey ed's I understand if this can't be posted but I'm intrigued to know your opinions and others on the site on the standards of refs at the top end of the game.

{Ed002's Note - The standard of refereeing has been acknowledged to be poor over recent years. I don't watch much football but it is often mentioned. Personally I don't think video refereeing is the answer, but an additional official linked by radio high up in the stands might well be.}

Agree1 Disagree0

19 Apr 2017 08:00:55
Anyone who thinks referees in EPL are poor should go and watch some league 1 and 2 games. Ranges from the very rare very good through to far too many that are woeful. Mistakes that only show up from the benefit of a dozen slow mo replays are excusable but being totally inconsistent about free kicks, advantage, bookings etc ruins games. I've seen far too many games where refs and ARs have wound up the teams and fans and created the problems they then berate the players over. outside EPL right down to grass roots the better refs tend to be the younger ones.

19 Apr 2017 08:05:55
What standards are we comparing them to?
What criteria are we using?

Are we talking about accuracy of decisions or are we talking about "handling of the game"?
I think if you look at the number of decisions in a game the percentage of correct decisions is high. I think the refs are fitter these days and able to keep up with the game more. I think they are under more scrutiny these days than 20 years ago and they have more directives to follow. 20 years ago a lot was down to interpretation of the ref. Now it's all standardised by the powers that be.

If SkyTV had to show every refereeing decision in the same detail, people would be a lot more appreciative of the demands. But Sky only show the contentious decisions in minute detail.

I'm not a ref. My old man (RIP) was a ref in the good old days. I don't think he'd do it these days.
Standard of refs vs standard of players or managers or pundits? I'd take the refs over all of them.
Can they improve? Of course, but they need support to do it.

19 Apr 2017 08:20:53
Good points Ron and having slated them one thing I'd say doesn't help is most fans are contributing to the problem. Refs who don't communicate get slated and those who do get skated. The number of shouts for handball you hear every match where the definition of handball clearly doesn't apply is comical. I honestly think the 4th official also calling stuff like ARs and use of replays would help even if it just showed fans and players how crap the game would become if refs were allowed to take the time Sky pundits get to dissect every piece of play before they gave a decision.

19 Apr 2017 08:47:11
Thanks Ron. It was a good read, gave me another perspective to look at.

19 Apr 2017 09:10:06
Ron, the standard isn't high. 80%, considering how many decisions are ridiculously easy, is low. Refs, considering the importance of their job, their professionalism etc should be getting so many decision right that major incorrect decisions should be a big talking point, not a 5 minute reel per game.

19 Apr 2017 09:34:04
If you think it's easy, the simple answer is to try doing it.
How many professionals do you know who have dozens of slow mo high def TV cameras pointing at them for 90 minutes of their week with millions of people watching?

80%? Don't know where you get that number from.

19 Apr 2017 10:42:11
I'm against video refereeing, I think tend to believe that the game in the stadium should reflect the game played in the parks. Besides, who doesn't enjoy talking about contentious decisions?

19 Apr 2017 10:44:43
standards aside, the interpretations that we see in the game itself are not even consistent. a push in this game is a penalty, while another is not.

a rough lunging tackle is a yellow in a normal game, and not in derbies? just because its a derby, it doesn't mean its a game with a different rule. i understand that standards could be different, could change from year to year, following reviews and changes should be made when it is needed, for the rules to remain relevant and of course, to protect the players.

but in the game itself there must be a way for all these decisions to be at the very least, highly consistent. without videos and what not, you'd expect them to miss some and i get it. again, id like to repeat, its inconsistencies of the decision made from similar incidents in different games that bothers me. i know its difficult, but it doesn't mean we can't point that out.

19 Apr 2017 13:51:12
I'm really pleased video reffing is coming, it will allow us to focus on what's important, the game, rather than talking about refs all the time.

19 Apr 2017 14:32:08
For me it's more the case of they don't seem to be in a position where they have to explain a decision or be actually held accountable for a poor performance. They have few repercussions if they make mistakes so there seems to be no incentive to improve.

19 Apr 2017 14:36:02
Ron - first of all it's an example number and you well know it, so stop being pedantic for no reason.

Secondly, no one said it was easy. Nor did I say I could do it. But I also can't build a car, doesn't mean I don't have a right to say something about my car breaking down 20 minutes after driving off the forecourt! If the job is too hard for them then they need to stop doing it, if they want to tell us they can do it then cut the excuses and do it.

Refs at the professional level are highly paid professionals, they need to be good enough to earn that and the fact that there are cameras pointing at them doesn't dissolve them of blame. They get too many major decisions wrong per game and it's having a direct influence on both the outcomes of games and the safety of players. And if they need help to do it properly, sodding well get together and campaign from the stance of experts for help! If they spent half the energy they spend moaning about a lack of respect for refs on improving their performances, the game would be in a much better state on field (although I do apprecaite the need to refs respect at a lower/ grassroots level)

19 Apr 2017 17:55:03
At least in the PL, the refs are awful. Worse, they make mistakes that are detrimental to both teams BUT that is seen as being good officiating. Awful, awful, awful.

19 Apr 2017 19:54:39
They are not highly paid in the industry they work in.
They do not get so many decisions wrong.
You are being deceived by the likes of SkyTV who only show contentious moments in contentious decisions.
Refs make thousands of decisions in a game, you just aren't aware of them.

19 Apr 2017 20:30:24
Ron did you happen to watch real Madrid v Bayern Munich last night a team went out of the quarter final of the champions league due entirely to the ref and his assistants with an outrageous sending off
and two offside goals that were not even hard to spot. this has cost Bayern millions of Euros and a possible place in the final.

In refs defence i do think since the assistant refs were given more powers they are so busy trying to spot things going on in the game than doing their job looking for off sides leaving the ref to take the blame because of a radio in his ear and they never get brought up on bad decisions like last night.

19 Apr 2017 20:55:35
If you say so Ron. But I am aware of them. And when in the name of some fictional game management they allow dangerous tackles to go unpunished right in front of them, when linesmen fail to keep up with the game and are left guessing about important offside decisions, when they have unobstructed views of handballs so ignore the rulebook and start making subjective decisions about intentions - they are not doing a good job, no matter how many minor decisions they make during a game.

19 Apr 2017 21:25:05
they should run a trial were there is a ref in each half, so keeping up with play would not be a problem, and each ref would be under less pressure .

19 Apr 2017 22:55:56
I didn't watch Madrid V Bayern so I take your word on that.
Refs are simply there to implement the laws of the game.
Players don't have to put dangerous tackles in or dive when there's no contact.
Players are very highly paid professionals who are coached by very highly paid managers to try and deliberately gain an advantage by deceiving the referee.
You blame the ref for getting it wrong, how about the players and managers take some responsibility for playing by the rules? Obviously offsides are different but these calls are made by referee assistants.

{Ed007's Note - Did you see the penalty against Celtic at the weekend, Ron? One of THE worst decisions I've ever seen at any level of football....

20 Apr 2017 00:04:34
Ron makes some very good points. Loss aversion is a basic fact of human psychology, i.e. we react far more negatively to bad outcomes than we do positively to good outcomes. It's inevitable that refs get slated for poor decisions and we overlook the many good decisions they make.

20 Apr 2017 06:41:45
All 2 refs on the pitch will do is create a higher chance of inconsistency. And when i mentioned that lack of consistency before I meant in the same game from the same ref. Doesn't help that the view is if they're a poor ref then drop them down a level cos the leagues below the EPL don't need good refs. The standards need to be set across the leagues.

20 Apr 2017 10:46:52
Wow, that is a woeful ref in that Celtic game no contact at all what a joke.



Log In or Register to post

Remember me

Forgot Pass