Topic: Referee decisions and their impact in Liverpool games

[Chakan]

To have 12 refs (figure taken out of thin air) and they all have their own idea about football and how it's supposed to be refereed, there is a big, big issue.

Oh don't get me wrong i'm not saying it's not an issue, it definitely is an issue, it's the main issue, what i'm saying is that there is no reason to change what they are doing because no one cares if they are not doing a good job of it other than the managers or the players. The FA sure as shit don't give a damn if the refs fuck up.

[Gerry Attrick]

Don't really have a problem with referees getting decisions wrong, as they can be ridiculously difficult to get right in real time but I do have a problem with how timewasting is handled. You hardly ever see more than 5 added minutes unless there's been a serious injury, despite the fact some teams can make 1 sub last about a minute and a goal kick can take over 30 seconds. Would be nice to see a ref add about 10 minutes on for timewasting one day.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

Oh don't get me wrong i'm not saying it's not an issue, it definitely is an issue, it's the main issue, what i'm saying is that there is no reason to change what they are doing because no one cares if they are not doing a good job of it other than the managers or the players. The FA sure as shit don't give a damn if the refs fuck up.

Ah, got you. There seems to be very little "punishment" for performing badly. I find it hard to believe that there aren't better refs in the leagues below the PL, than the likes of Mason, Pawson, Moss, Taylor, Jones etc etc. These guys are continually making big mistakes, numerous times every season, season after season, yet they are still employed.

[Chakan]

Ah, got you. There seems to be very little "punishment" for performing badly. I find it hard to believe that there aren't better refs in the leagues below the PL, than the likes of Mason, Pawson, Moss, Taylor, Jones etc etc. These guys are continually making big mistakes, numerous times every season, season after season, yet they are still employed.

It's baffling to me how they are still employed but it's the FA, the back slapping "why don't england managers get the top jobs"  organization.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

It's baffling to me how they are still employed but it's the FA, the back slapping "why don't england managers get the top jobs"  organization.

Equally baffling how the fat cats in the FA are still there too.

[Chakan]

Equally baffling how the fat cats in the FA are still there too.

Because they answer to no one.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

Because they answer to no one.

Indeed. For any change to come around, some outside force has to set it in motion.

[Alan_X]

If one reads the rule re: handball, it's pretty clear the goal should have stood, especially with the Koscielny goal the other season. The ref committed and error by not knowing the rule. It does not give the ref any leeway at all IMO, like other rules of the game might.

That said, the biggest grief for me is with the refs, both in the game and between refs. There has to be more consensus within the group of referees.

And of course, as others have said, time wasting. A game of football is 90 minutes and if I were to hazard a guess, I'd say 30 minutes of that the ball is dead, one way or another. Does anyone know the actual number? Throw ins take forever, the 6 second rule isn't enforced at all, well towards anyone but Mignolet that is. It's taking the speed out of the game, sometimes it feels like I'm watching american football.

The human factor re: referees' decisions is something we will have to accept as long as the powers that be refuses to insert technology. The time wasting part is easy to rectify, the consistency shouldn't be to hard if refs judged every decision on its own. The consensus part will be difficult I suspect.

Handball does give leeway - that's the problem. How do you know 100% whether Solanke intentionally moved his arm to control the ball? It could have been given if the ref or linesman thought it was accidental but they must have decided the arm was moving towards the ball. It doesn't matter what happened with Koscielny - the ref applies the laws and the guidance to the game he's in charge of. It's highly unlikely that the ref and the linesman don't know the Laws of the Game.

There have been plenty of studies showing the actual time the ball is in play but that's the way the game works. It's a fluid game not stop-and-start. 60 minutes of 'play' and 30 minutes when the ball is dead in some fashion.

And I'm still waiting to hear how VAR will make decisions about intent. Goal line technology works because it's an absolute. Offside could feasibly work if the technology could accurately sense when a player is offside and signal the linesman in real time. Video recall won't work. But there are a lot of laws that rely on judgement to assess intent.

[Mutton Geoff]

Personally i feel that the standard of refereeing was better before they went professional .

[Eeyore]

Don't really have a problem with referees getting decisions wrong, as they can be ridiculously difficult to get right in real time but I do have a problem with how timewasting is handled. You hardly ever see more than 5 added minutes unless there's been a serious injury, despite the fact some teams can make 1 sub last about a minute and a goal kick can take over 30 seconds. Would be nice to see a ref add about 10 minutes on for timewasting one day.

It is dead simple instead of giving a player a yellow card that is pointless and often self defeating because the actual time to book the player is often not added on. Give a 3 minute penalty, next time a 5 minute penalty.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

Handball does give leeway - that's the problem. How do you know 100% whether Solanke intentionally moved his arm to control the ball?

Yeah, reading it again I agree with that. I think using technology would have given us the win. Replays showed pretty clearly that it was ball to hand and no intentio on Solanke's part. I am very ambiguous towards the whole idea though.

[Gerry Attrick]

It is dead simple instead of giving a player a yellow card that is pointless and often self defeating because the actual time to book the player is often not added on. Give a 3 minute penalty, next time a 5 minute penalty.

Booking a goalie for timewasting has to be one of the most pointless exercises in the sport. It just allows them to time waste even more for the rest of the game as they know a ref would never have the balls to give them another. A time penalty would be a decent idea, they certainly need to sort it out though.

[PhaseOfPlay]

The main issue with the ambiguity of the handball is that - if the ref deemed it to be a deliberate attempt to use the hand, then it should have been a yellow card to Solanke. If it wasn't a deliberate use of the hand, then the goal should have stood.

That's not evidence of a conspiracy, but it is evidence of incompetence.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

That's not evidence of a conspiracy, but it is evidence of incompetence.

Excellently put.

[Alan_X]

It's baffling to me how they are still employed but it's the FA, the back slapping "why don't england managers get the top jobs"  organization.

Referees aren't employed by the FA.

https://www.premierleague.com/referees

This is the problem with these discussions. Most fans don't know the Laws of the Game and they don't know how referees are employed, how they are marked or the disciplinary process when a referee performs below par.

That's not a dig at you personally - it's a general observation.

I probably come across as reactionary but I'm worried that the obsession with referees could lead to unforeseen consequences. The best game in the world is not perfect but it is human. Played by humans, refereed by humans and watched by humans in their hundreds of millions. The potential for fucking it up is real if we play into the hands of the TV companies who would love more controversy and a stop-start game with the chance to have in-game commercials. It's a game most of us have played as kids and its history is rich with great play and dodgy decisions.

What was interesting in the study I linked to (and based on past experience, no one has read) is that social pressures are a good indicator for bias. Studies suggest referees give more home pens than the away pens. They add more time if the home team is behind, and crowd reaction has a measurable impact on referee's decisions. A reasonable assumption is that the modern obsession with refereeing has made them more risk averse than they used to be. If in doubt give the decision that will cause the least controversy in the media.

And as everyone agrees that Liverpool's defence is shite (especially Liverpool fans on social media) it's relatively uncontroversial to award a penalty against the Liverpool defence. If we insist on telling everyone that Lovren (or Henderson) is shite and an accident waiting to happen we cant turn around and say the referee has to assume he's expertly shepherded the opposition player away from the goal.

[Chakan]

Referees aren't employed by the FA.

https://www.premierleague.com/referees

This is the problem with these discussions. Most fans don't know the Laws of the Game and they don't know how referees are employed, how they are marked or the disciplinary process when a referee performs below par.

Fair enough it's not the FA, substitute PGMOL and it's the same argument for me. They're assessed by former senior refs and former players and managers. Well that makes it all better.

Although I will say i'm not sure what the recourse is if a manager wants to complain about a ref, do you have an idea how that happens?

Btw I used to be a former ref many years ago, so I do know most of the rules of the game.

[Alan_X]

The main issue with the ambiguity of the handball is that - if the ref deemed it to be a deliberate attempt to use the hand, then it should have been a yellow card to Solanke. If it wasn't a deliberate use of the hand, then the goal should have stood.

That's not evidence of a conspiracy, but it is evidence of incompetence.

Or it's evidence of the referee using discretion. The referee is not a robot. They don't have to give a yellow or a red. If they did the number of reds and yellows in derbies and other blood-and-thunder games would always be far higher than in a meaningless mid table clash.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

Referees aren't employed by the FA.

https://www.premierleague.com/referees

This is the problem with these discussions. Most fans don't know the Laws of the Game and they don't know how referees are employed, how they are marked or the disciplinary process when a referee performs below par.

That's not a dig at you personally - it's a general observation.

I probably come across as reactionary but I'm worried that the obsession with referees could lead to unforeseen consequences. The best game in the world is not perfect but it is human. Played by humans, refereed by humans and watched by humans in their hundreds of millions. The potential for fucking it up is real if we play into the hands of the TV companies who would love more controversy and a stop-start game with the chance to have in-game commercials. It's a game most of us have played as kids and its history is rich with great play and dodgy decisions.

What was interesting in the study I linked to (and based on past experience, no one has read) is that social pressures are a good indicator for bias. Studies suggest referees give more home pens than the away pens. They add more time if the home team is behind, and crowd reaction has a measurable impact on referee's decisions. A reasonable assumption is that the modern obsession with refereeing has made them more risk averse than they used to be. If in doubt give the decision that will cause the least controversy in the media.

And as everyone agrees that Liverpool's defence is shite (especially Liverpool fans on social media) it's relatively uncontroversial to award a penalty against the Liverpool defence. If we insist on telling everyone that Lovren (or Henderson) is shite and an accident waiting to happen we cant turn around and say the referee has to assume he's expertly shepherded the opposition player away from the goal.

Learned something new. But I guess the point he made in the beginning of our conversation stands. There seems to be little done about raising the standards or any repercussions for poor performances. I think there needs to be more openess when it comes to referees, it's too much of a shielded community. That isn't just a problem in the Premier League or in football, it's an issue in many other sports in many other countries.

I alluded in one of my posts that the human factor is something we have to live with. But if your risk averse theory is true, then the ref yesterday should have given the goal?

Being a ref is a hard job, I know from experience, so after the heat dies down inside me, I can have some sympathy. And as others have said, we shouldn't have to rely on the refs to win at home to WBA.

[PhaseOfPlay]

Or it's evidence of the referee using discretion. The referee is not a robot. They don't have to give a yellow or a red. If they did the number of reds and yellows in derbies and other blood-and-thunder games would always be far higher than in a meaningless mid table clash.

Law 12 isn't written like that, though, Alan:

17
Handling the Ball
Disciplinary sanctions:

- there are circumstances when a caution for unsporting
behaviour is required when a player deliberately hand
the ball, e.g. when a player:

= deliberately and blatantly handles the ball to prevent
an opponent gaining possession

= attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the
ball

A "requirement" isn't the same as a "discretion", wouldn't you agree?

[PhaseOfPlay]

Fair enough it's not the FA, substitute PGMOL and it's the same argument for me. They're assessed by former senior refs and former players and managers. Well that makes it all better.

Although I will say i'm not sure what the recourse is if a manager wants to complain about a ref, do you have an idea how that happens?

Btw I used to be a former ref many years ago, so I do know most of the rules of the game.

Wait - you USED to be a former ref?

[Eeyore]

Or it's evidence of the referee using discretion. The referee is not a robot. They don't have to give a yellow or a red. If they did the number of reds and yellows in derbies and other blood-and-thunder games would always be far higher than in a meaningless mid table clash.

No Al there is no ambiguity in the laws of the game.

https://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/law_12_fouls_misconduct_en_47379.pdf Law 12

Disciplinary sanctions:

there are circumstances when a caution for unsporting
behaviour is required when a player deliberately hand
the ball, e.g. when a player:
•
deliberately and blatantly handles the ball to prevent
an opponent gaining possession
•
attempts to score a goal by deliberately handling the ball.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

Wait - you USED to be a former ref?

[Chakan]

Wait - you USED to be a former ref?

Haha wrong wording yes. I used to a ref. Now i'm a former ref.

I will caveat this by saying it was many years ago. But I did all the tests and passed and reffed a few games.

[Gerry Attrick]

I'm surprised the best foreign refs haven't been recruited though to be honest. I'm not sure how the salaries compare across Europe but some of the best around come from countries without high profile leagues and so would probably jump at the chance to officiate in the Premier League. I'd be in favour of it happening.

[Eeyore]

Haha wrong wording yes. I used to a ref. Now i'm a former ref.

I will caveat this by saying it was many years ago. But I did all the tests and passed and reffed a few games.

The best bit for me was you saying you knew most of the laws.

[Chakan]

The best bit for me was you saying you knew most of the laws.

Lots of law changes since I took the test, and besides no one really knows how the offside rule functions now anyway

[Eeyore]

I'm surprised the best foreign refs haven't been recruited though to be honest. I'm not sure how the salaries compare across Europe but some of the best around come from countries without high profile leagues and so would probably jump at the chance to officiate in the Premier League. I'd be in favour of it happening.

This fella would of been perfect for the Derby.






Imagine the Fewm.

[Alan_X]

Fair enough it's not the FA, substitute PGMOL and it's the same argument for me. They're assessed by former senior refs and former players and managers. Well that makes it all better.

Btw I used to be a former ref many years ago, so I do know most of the rules of the game.

It's the Laws of the Game and I'd have hoped you would have known all of them

There is a really interesting view that the people who know the most about the Laws somehow shouldn't be the ones to decide whether they are being applied properly. Who should? Fans, who generally know fuck all apart from a passing interest based on playing Sunday morning footie in the park. Ex-footballers? many of whom also know fuck all if their media punditry is anything to go by. The media? See fans and ex-footballers...

I'll keep saying it till I'm blue in the face. Football is great because it's not perfect. It's a fluid game played in the moment and players, managers and referees all make errors.

I may be fighting a rearguard action and a sixty-minute game with a time clock and four quarters is the way forward. Maybe technology will come in and take every ambiguity out of the game - the best teams with the best players will always win and eventually we can do away with the actual game altogether. After all, once you get rid of referee error the next step is surely to do away with managerial error and player error. Feed in the characteristics of the team and the playing style, run a hundred simulations of the game and award the points accordingly.

[PhaseOfPlay]

This fella would of been perfect for the Derby.






Imagine the Fewm.

Steven Berkoff?

[jed the red]

Steven Berkoff?

Gary Mac

[ChaChaMooMoo]

Gary Mac

More like the top half of a big mac.

[PhaseOfPlay]

I'll keep saying it till I'm blue in the face. Football is great because it's not perfect. It's a fluid game played in the moment and players, managers and referees all make errors.

I may be fighting a rearguard action and a sixty-minute game with a time clock and four quarters is the way forward. Maybe technology will come in and take every ambiguity out of the game - the best teams with the best players will always win and eventually we can do away with the actual game altogether. After all, once you get rid of referee error the next step is surely to do away with managerial error and player error. Feed in the characteristics of the team and the playing style, run a hundred simulations of the game and award the points accordingly.

Agree wholeheartedly. The game is not perfect, but it's loved because of the imperfections. I think delving too much towards technology will create two codes of the game, and the football played on the streets (which is already disappearing) will become obsolete, because it won't bear any resemblance to what is watched in the stands and on telly.

[Groundskeeper Willie]

Football is great because it's not perfect.

I agree with that. The joy of winning is made better by the frustrations of not doing so.

[Chakan]

It's the Laws of the Game and I'd have hoped you would have known all of them

There is a really interesting view that the people who know the most about the Laws somehow shouldn't be the ones to decide whether they are being applied properly. Who should? Fans, who generally know fuck all apart from a passing interest based on playing Sunday morning footie in the park. Ex-footballers? many of whom also know fuck all if their media punditry is anything to go by. The media? See fans and ex-footballers...

I'll keep saying it till I'm blue in the face. Football is great because it's not perfect. It's a fluid game played in the moment and players, managers and referees all make errors.

I may be fighting a rearguard action and a sixty-minute game with a time clock and four quarters is the way forward. Maybe technology will come in and take every ambiguity out of the game - the best teams with the best players will always win and eventually we can do away with the actual game altogether. After all, once you get rid of referee error the next step is surely to do away with managerial error and player error. Feed in the characteristics of the team and the playing style, run a hundred simulations of the game and award the points accordingly.

I've explained why I said most.

Alan I don't think anyone is asking for a ABC game where we run simulations and award points, I think all people want is consistency. What applies in one game in applied to another. Hell how about consistency in one game then, what's a foul for one person ends up not being a foul for another player.

If the rules of the game or even the rules of an official were applied even marginally from game to game then I don't think people would have so much of an issue with the refs. But as we can see what usually happens is the opposite, a push in one game is a foul whereas the same push in another game isn't. A high boot results in a red card in one game and then play isn't even stopped for the same action in another game. It's frustrating as hell. Sure refs are people but the game shouldn't be decided on the actions or inactions of refs because of who the ref is.

[Alan_X]

Law 12 isn't written like that, though, Alan:

A "requirement" isn't the same as a "discretion", wouldn't you agree?

Fair enough. That means one of two things - either you're right he didn't think it was deliberate handball which goes against the clear signal he made that it was deliberate handball, or he didn't apply the law correctly by giving a yellow.

Again, I'm not arguing that referees are perfect. I'm arguing that it has always been part of the game and we run the risk of making things far worse with the obsession over refereeing decisions.

[smicer07]

Fair enough. That means one of two things - either you're right he didn't think it was deliberate handball which goes against the clear signal he made that it was deliberate handball, or he didn't apply the law correctly by giving a yellow.

Again, I'm not arguing that referees are perfect. I'm arguing that it has always been part of the game and we run the risk of making things far worse with the obsession over refereeing decisions.

They just guessed.

[Eeyore]

Agree wholeheartedly. The game is not perfect, but it's loved because of the imperfections. I think delving too much towards technology will create two codes of the game, and the football played on the streets (which is already disappearing) will become obsolete, because it won't bear any resemblance to what is watched in the stands and on telly.

Which would be fine if everyone treated the game that way but sadly you get twats like Mourinho who explicitly look to exploit those imperfections to a sickening degree.

The biggest issue for me is that cheating has become acceptable. Right infront of me last night a West Brom defender clearly headed the ball out with no one near him, yet his arm went up and he appealed for a goal kick. It has become endemic and no one bats an eyelid. Compare that to say Snooker where players call fouls on themselves and agree where the white should be in the case of the balls being replaced after a miss.

Time wasting is for me cheating pure and simple. Yet we get the bellend pundits looking to legitimise it, time and time again.

[Alan_X]

I've explained why I said most.

Alan I don't think anyone is asking for a ABC game where we run simulations and award points, I think all people want is consistency. What applies in one game in applied to another. Hell how about consistency in one game then, what's a foul in one part of the area should be a foul in another part, just because it's in the penalty area doesn't make it any less or any more of a foul.

If the rules of the game or even the rules of an official were applied even marginally from game to game then I don't think people would have so much of an issue with the refs. But as we can see what usually happens is the opposite, a push in one game is a foul whereas the same push in another game isn't. A high boot results in a red card in one game and then play isn't even stopped for the same action in another game. It's frustrating as hell. Sure refs are people but the game shouldn't be decided on the actions or inactions of refs because of who the ref is.

And I disagree wholeheartedly. Each game should be refereed on its own merits an in context. When I started watching the game over forty years ago, Tommy Smith would go in on the player he was marking with a 'welcome to Anfield' tackle to put the shits up him for the rest of the game.  He would get away with it because no ref would caution him or send him off in the fisrt five minutes. We all know that. How many times do we hear a shocked pundit express in amazement that "if that tackle had happened in midfield it would have been a yellow..."  No fucking shit Sherlock. And a full-blooded tackle in a Liverpool derby might not get a yellow when the same tackle in a mid-table nothing clash would be absolutely deserving of a red. I have no problem whatsoever with inconsistency. I want the ref to apply the Laws in context of the game I am watching. I couldb't give a flying fuck what happens in any other game.

It's a sport for fucks sake. It's meant to be uncertain. If you want certainty watch a predictable three-act Hollywood movie. There will be a beginning, a problem in the middle and resolution in the end. In football at least one and sometimes both sides will be disappointed with the result.

Anyway, hopefully I'll be dead or senile when all this technology takes the fun (and disappointment) out of the game.

[Alan_X]

Which would be fine if everyone treated the game that way but sadly you get twats like Mourinho who explicitly look to exploit those imperfections to a sickening degree.

The biggest issue for me is that cheating has become acceptable. Right infront of me last night a West Brom defender clearly headed the ball out with no one near him, yet his arm went up and he appealed for a goal kick. It has become endemic and no one bats an eyelid. Compare that to say Snooker where players call fouls on themselves and agree where the white should be in the case of the balls being replaced after a miss.

Time wasting is for me cheating pure and simple. Yet we get the bellend pundits looking to legitimise it, time and time again.

Come on Al, cheating and time wasting is as old as the hills.

[Alan_X]

They just guessed.

And you know that how?