How bad are referees?

Is it just my imagination, or are the referees getting worse all the time? I watched the Arsenal vs Wolves game and the ref made so many bad decisions, I lost count. It seems in every game now they are giving red cards when they shouldn't and are not giving them when they should. How many recent penalty decisions have been wrong too? I know it is not an easy job, but I think if they actually played the game, they would understand it more. How many, if any top refs have ever played the game at any decent level?

Id like to see you try and referee a PL game Lorus, Refereeing is much harder then many fans seem to think they all have the benefit of replays from sky etc Refs make instinct decisions within seconds of the incidents they don't have the same view as everyone else they could have a player block their eyeline they could see a player jump in when it's actually one footed because their behind them and think its 2 footed. Their always going to make mistakes its not possible for refs to be flawless in a game.

More to the point, how could an ex professional referee a game completely impartially?

They would be influenced by past team mates or managers etc.

fernando wrote:Id like to see you try and referee a PL game Lorus, Refereeing is much harder then many fans seem to think they all have the benefit of replays from sky etc Refs make instinct decisions within seconds of the incidents they don't have the same view as everyone else they could have a player block their eyeline they could see a player jump in when it's actually one footed because their behind them and think its 2 footed. Their always going to make mistakes its not possible for refs to be flawless in a game.

If they only "think" it is 2-footed, they can't make a definite decision. Unless they are 100% sure they should not act with haste. I know they make mistakes, but they seem to be making more than ever recently. The ref at the Stoke VS Spurs had a real shocker.

lorus59 wrote:

fernando wrote:Id like to see you try and referee a PL game Lorus, Refereeing is much harder then many fans seem to think they all have the benefit of replays from sky etc Refs make instinct decisions within seconds of the incidents they don't have the same view as everyone else they could have a player block their eyeline they could see a player jump in when it's actually one footed because their behind them and think its 2 footed. Their always going to make mistakes its not possible for refs to be flawless in a game.

If they only "think" it is 2-footed, they can't make a definite decision. Unless they are 100% sure they should not act with haste. I know they make mistakes, but they seem to be making more than ever recently. The ref at the Stoke VS Spurs had a real shocker.

If you think it's a 2 footed tackle you'd trust your own judgment wouldn't you? The Stoke vs Spurs wasn't just down to the ref if you go through them all ive probs forgotten an incident but im sure your remind me if missed one.

1) Adebayor goal - down to linesman
2) Shawcross handball - down to ref/linesman
3) Modric pen - Down to ref as got conned barely any contact
4) Kaboul red card was very harsh but only has himself to blame after silly 1st yellow for dissent
5) Crouch handball - down to linesman

If the referee had taken better positions during the course of the action in the Stoke vs Spurs game then he could have seen what had happened in many of the controversial incidents. I am also including the lines people in the standards appearing to be lower. Aren't they all fully qualified refs?

lorus59 wrote:If the referee had taken better positions during the course of the action in the Stoke vs Spurs game then he could have seen what had happened in many of the controversial incidents. I am also including the lines people in the standards appearing to be lower. Aren't they all fully qualified refs?

Referee's are in full time training on a daily basis.
Linesman are qualified to referee but their only on a part time basis so their not up to the standard of the referee's

Rather than a drop in standards, maybe we are just more critical of referees nowadays. We examine every decision with a great deal of scrutiney, and are encouraged to 'spot the mistakes' by the commentary and pundits on the television. This has created an environment where we are actively looking for the mistakes, instead of just noticing the more obvious ones like in days gone past.

I don't think it's a case of referees getting worse at all. It's just that we have the ability to use "hindsight via technology" far more quickly these days and from more angles these days, so it makes referees look as if they are getting worse when they actually aren't.

I think referees get a lot of stick which is harsh. I referee amatuer football and thats hard enough. Nobody wants to seem to congratulate a ref when he gets a big decision right or when he plays a good advantage. As far as the assistants go, i think pro football would benefit from them going full time as well as the refs.

i think referres get too much stick. The way they are treated on and off the pitch is disgraceful.

The ref's in the prem are all terrible. Imo the make they league look like a laughing stock to other sport's. If they had video evidence we would not even be discussing this but they don't have video evidence and they basically can't do their job's without it, also some of them are not fit enough to be ref's, look at Phil Dowd he is too fat to keep up and he often make's terrible howler's. Howard Webb is considered the best Eng ref but how many time's has he made a laughing stock of a game of football namely the world cup final that he totally destroyed. In the end theese awful ref's can hide behind people that say "they are human" " they make mistakes" and theese other weak excuse's but their sometime's laughable error's are way too common for me and the sooner they bring in video ref's so theese clown ref's can do their job's the better. Rugby ref's sometime's get thing's a little wrong even with video evidence but when you get some ref's in football allowing goals that wen't 3 foot wide like last season you will have people question the overall intergrity of the game of football.

It's one thing for referees to make a horrible blunder with a split-second decision that turns out to be poor judgement.

It's something quite different altogether when the sweet FA, with days to think about it, action replays from every conceivable angle and the clear knowledge that they're dealing with one of the cleanest players in the game, still defends the indefensible and denies a red card appeal.

As in the case of Nenad Milijas.

So: Now you've got the stupidity of Steve Hunt's reaction saying Wolves have got to try and persuade the ref to take disciplinary action against the opposition.

Best thing Steve Hunt can do is shut his mouth and score some goals, but the FA almost seem to beg for such a childish reaction. Bunch of idiots.

kwinigolfer wrote:It's one thing for referees to make a horrible blunder with a split-second decision that turns out to be poor judgement.

It's something quite different altogether when the sweet FA, with days to think about it, action replays from every conceivable angle and the clear knowledge that they're dealing with one of the cleanest players in the game, still defends the indefensible and denies a red card appeal.

As in the case of Nenad Milijas.

So: Now you've got the stupidity of Steve Hunt's reaction saying Wolves have got to try and persuade the ref to take disciplinary action against the opposition.

Best thing Steve Hunt can do is shut his mouth and score some goals, but the FA almost seem to beg for such a childish reaction. Bunch of idiots.

I agree, the f.a almost seem corrupt they make such bad decision's, it's one rule for England player's and a different rule for everyone else. They got what they deserved when they were mugged in that world cup bid.

I think the issue is the crazy rules they are asked to follow. If I was a ref I dont think I would give 10% of the freekicks that refs give these days. Players know if they are touched and fall over they get freekicks. It is a version of cheating and I dont know how (or why) people accept grown athletes falling over everytime they are touched. Suarez and co are all guilty of this shameful type of play.

Another issue is what you can get a red card for. Taking the art of tackling out the game. Look at Jay Spearings tackle the other week. Brilliant and he gets a ref card. Now, I hate Liverpool so I didnt lose any sleep over this, but the scousers had every right to be upset at the FA (not the ref) because of stupid mincer rules they are enforcing.

Footballl is quickly becoming a wimps game and, sadly, this is only going to get worse until a basketball ball style marking is all that is allowed.

dublfcynwa wrote:Howard Webb is considered the best Eng ref but how many time's has he made a laughing stock of a game of football namely the world cup final that he totally destroyed.

I am sorry but that is utter nonsense! So it was the referee that destroyed that game rather than the rough-house tactics of the Dutch? I suppose he could have flashed a couple of red cards and then he would have faced accusations of ruining the game as a contest by giving the Spanish a numerical advantage.


My theory on why referees may actually be poorer than in the past is that they face so much abuse at any level of the game these days that many sensible, well-adjusted people are put off from becoming referees or walk away from it whilst trying to progress through the system.

As regards ex-players becoming referees, while I can understand that management is probably more stressful than refereeing, I think many would much prefer to be youth team coaches, scouts, matchday hosts, local radio pundits etc.

The decline in the standard of referring is simple, they're now expected to follow all the new whacky rules to the letter rather than use their own opinions, take on the game and common sense to decide what's what

Also, it should be noted, we have British refs, we have it ingrained into us not to cheat, some will but on the whole, British players are less likely to go down, roll about and feign injury, obviously there is exceptions to the rule, but with more oversea's players in Britain now then it's understandable that the ref is going to have far more decisions to make than they would have 15 years ago

Johnson is correct. Refs give far too many free-kicks for the softest of touches. If they let far more go, then the players would soon learn and try to stay on their feet.

dublfcynwa wrote:
Howard Webb is considered the best Eng ref but how many time's has he made a laughing stock of a game of football namely the world cup final that he totally destroyed.


I am sorry but that is utter nonsense!

Well imo he totally lost control of the game early on by not showing a red card when a red card was totally deserved. Are you telling me a clear red card offence should be ignored because it's the world cup final and the game could be ruined by sending some one off?? the game was ruined when he was appointed as ref because he's a rubbish ref.

dublfcynwa wrote:dublfcynwa wrote:
Howard Webb is considered the best Eng ref but how many time's has he made a laughing stock of a game of football namely the world cup final that he totally destroyed.


I am sorry but that is utter nonsense!

Well imo he totally lost control of the game early on by not showing a red card when a red card was totally deserved. Are you telling me a clear red card offence should be ignored because it's the world cup final and the game could be ruined by sending some one off?? the game was ruined when he was appointed as ref because he's a rubbish ref.

He is a fantastic ref, hence why he refereed the World Cup Final in the first place. To say he is a rubbish ref is a bit of a laugh. An inconsistant ref in my eyes is that bloody young lad! Forget his name, but he annoys me every time he refs a game. Is it Mark Clattenburg?

Yes, there have been some poor decisions of late, and yes, it's a thankless job being a referee, especially as there is so much diving around (come on, you know guys in your own pet team do it as well !).
IMHO a lot of the probs are coming from:
1. Poor tackling technique - studs up, two-footed lunges instead of pushing the side of one, grounded, foot, against the ball to block it and complete a clean tackle (watch Scott Parker for the clean tackle. Don't watch any of the old Paul Scholes "unclean" tackles).
2. Fitness of the players - that enables them to actually reach the opponent and put in the said two-footed lunges.
3. Quality of the pitches - which makes contact with the player possible rather than contact with a huge muddy pool possible.
4. Watering of the pitches - this is contributing to what start out as fair tackles ending with not only the ball contacted but with the tackler sliding "right through" a player. How many times do you see a guy mouthing: "But I got the ball" only for him to see yellow, and sometimes red, for getting the man as well?

d260005p wrote:

dublfcynwa wrote:dublfcynwa wrote:
Howard Webb is considered the best Eng ref but how many time's has he made a laughing stock of a game of football namely the world cup final that he totally destroyed.


I am sorry but that is utter nonsense!

Well imo he totally lost control of the game early on by not showing a red card when a red card was totally deserved. Are you telling me a clear red card offence should be ignored because it's the world cup final and the game could be ruined by sending some one off?? the game was ruined when he was appointed as ref because he's a rubbish ref.

He is a fantastic ref, hence why he refereed the World Cup Final in the first place. To say he is a rubbish ref is a bit of a laugh. An inconsistant ref in my eyes is that bloody young lad! Forget his name, but he annoys me every time he refs a game. Is it Mark Clattenburg?

A fatastic ref? A fantastic ref would not bottle giving somebody a red card in a world cup final when they clearly deserved a red card, the ref is supposed to keep control of the game and he lost control of that game by not showing a red card when it was clear as day and he alone ruined that game. He is a disgraceful ref and the only people that defend him are a minority of English people because he is English.

dublfcynwa wrote:and he alone ruined that game

Sorry but that is utter love sacks.

Fair enough, he should have given the red, but that doesn't mean the players should then think "Hey, I can get away with this" and start battering the opposition. They are equally to blame. He played his part, but to say that "he alone ruined that game" is ridiculously naive.

Celtic Warrior wrote:

dublfcynwa wrote:and he alone ruined that game

Sorry but that is utter love sacks.

Fair enough, he should have given the red, but that doesn't mean the players should then think "Hey, I can get away with this" and start battering the opposition. They are equally to blame. He played his part, but to say that "he alone ruined that game" is ridiculously naive.

That's what the ref is there for to control the game and the player's, if he give's the red card then the player's are going to think this guy does'nt mess about I better not go in too dirty or I might get a red card. If the police on the street don't enforce the law then the criminal's will run riot it's the same with football and the funny thing is he's an ex policeman. P.C Plod I think his nickname is.

Then the fault initially starts with the ref, but the fact that the players then decide to commit fouls is on their heads.

They are equally to blame. You can't just blame the ref.

I don't think all refs are poor, however some are awful. Look at the Liverpool game last night, blows up for a push in the box at a corner, yet when he is no more than 4 yards away he misses Spearing nearly getting his leg broke.

He also got in the way of the ball three or four teams. Every time the camera zoomed in on him he just looked really lost.

He's lucky that none of his mistakes really had that big of an effect on the game.

Yeah I noticed that, he seemed to want to be involved in the build up play

dublfcynwa wrote:

Celtic Warrior wrote:

dublfcynwa wrote:and he alone ruined that game

Sorry but that is utter love sacks.

Fair enough, he should have given the red, but that doesn't mean the players should then think "Hey, I can get away with this" and start battering the opposition. They are equally to blame. He played his part, but to say that "he alone ruined that game" is ridiculously naive.

That's what the ref is there for to control the game and the player's, if he give's the red card then the player's are going to think this guy does'nt mess about I better not go in too dirty or I might get a red card. If the police on the street don't enforce the law then the criminal's will run riot it's the same with football and the funny thing is he's an ex policeman. P.C Plod I think his nickname is.

You appear to be suggesting that footballers will just revert to thuggery unless referees clamp down hard on foul play. This may be true of certain players at certain times but strikes me as a very negative generalisation about footballers in general.

trickstat wrote:

dublfcynwa wrote:

Celtic Warrior wrote:

dublfcynwa wrote:and he alone ruined that game

Sorry but that is utter love sacks.

Fair enough, he should have given the red, but that doesn't mean the players should then think "Hey, I can get away with this" and start battering the opposition. They are equally to blame. He played his part, but to say that "he alone ruined that game" is ridiculously naive.

That's what the ref is there for to control the game and the player's, if he give's the red card then the player's are going to think this guy does'nt mess about I better not go in too dirty or I might get a red card. If the police on the street don't enforce the law then the criminal's will run riot it's the same with football and the funny thing is he's an ex policeman. P.C Plod I think his nickname is.

You appear to be suggesting that footballers will just revert to thuggery unless referees clamp down hard on foul play. This may be true of certain players at certain times but strikes me as a very negative generalisation about footballers in general.

Well that's what happened in the world cup final. There was another absolutley shocking refereeing performance in the Wolves and Chelsea game, Frank lampard nearly broke a guy's leg and get's a yellow but the Wolves player that got sent off against Arsenal has to serve a 3 game ban for a tackle that was not half as bad as Lampards but because he does'nt play for England he get's treated differently. Another thing about all this is Sky Sports news bring that ex ref Dermott Gallagher on every week to discuss the the howlers made by ref's and there are a lot every week, the sooner the better video replay's come in so the ref's can stop embarressing themselves every week with their laughable blunder's.

Why should we have "video replays"? I am AGAINST all of that, It would mean footy becomes "too perfect". Thes poort decisions about sendings off, or goals that should have been, or elbows behind the refs eyes etc are all part of the game. Its makes it what it is! If you take that away from footy, then you take the excitement away in these scenarios! I agree that Lampard should have had a red and Milijas should not have had anything, but decisions like that change the game for good or for worse, but my god does it make it exciting! You come into work discussing the mistakes from the ref, or whether it was a goal or not etc. But if we take that away......well.....you may take away the fans.

i think we have a good system in place, all what we need is goal line tech and we're sorted, as far as tv replays, judging the hawk-eye camera in cricket is based on probability rather than fact and likewise with the tennis version, i think tv replays should be used like it is now only for analysis purpose only

And now they can even send palyer's off despite none of them seeing the incident. Joey Barton get's a red despite none of the clown official's seeing it and Clint Dempsey get's a yellow card for headbutting Bellamy in font of the ref. It would make you wonder if theese ref's are actually either bent and fixing the game or they are just complete in-competent buffon's. And don't give me this rubbish about "ah if you take away the injustice's then we will have nothing to talk about" that sound's like something Sepp Blatter would say, there are a few good reason's for not having video tech but that is not one of them, people are losing job's and club's are losing money over total injustice because of a ref that is not able to do his job.

Whether or not we us video tech or what not,the ref still has to make a decision. One could it was a red and one could say it wasn't. Come down to your belief really.

Use line tech..ones man view says yes,other says no. How do you come to a conclusion? If its still inconclusive after video relays.

Referees will ultimately still have a decision to make.

HitmanOwl wrote:Whether or not we us video tech or what not,the ref still has to make a decision. One could it was a red and one could say it wasn't. Come down to your belief really.

Use line tech..ones man view says yes,other says no. How do you come to a conclusion? If its still inconclusive after video relays.

Referees will ultimately still have a decision to make.

How often do commentators and pundits disagree on a decision after viewing tv replays though? Most of the time they tend to agree and have therefore made the right decision so wouldn't it be the same with referees if they used video evidence. If there was only 1 video referee then there can't be any dispute. If it is conclusive the correct decision will have been made but if it is still inconclusive after replays then the on field official's decision would have to stand.

HitmanOwl wrote:Whether or not we us video tech or what not,the ref still has to make a decision. One could it was a red and one could say it wasn't. Come down to your belief really.

Use line tech..ones man view says yes,other says no. How do you come to a conclusion? If its still inconclusive after video relays.

Referees will ultimately still have a decision to make.

You have hit it on the head there, the main problem is one ref will make one decison and another will have a totally different decison on identical incident's, that's what really annoy's people, surely to god the rule's of football should be enforced in the same way by every ref. I know they have a tough job and im not trying to say it's easy but the amount of blunder's and inconsistent decison's lately is just out of control.

d260005p wrote:Why should we have "video replays"? I am AGAINST all of that, It would mean footy becomes "too perfect". Thes poort decisions about sendings off, or goals that should have been, or elbows behind the refs eyes etc are all part of the game. Its makes it what it is! If you take that away from footy, then you take the excitement away in these scenarios! I agree that Lampard should have had a red and Milijas should not have had anything, but decisions like that change the game for good or for worse, but my god does it make it exciting! You come into work discussing the mistakes from the ref, or whether it was a goal or not etc. But if we take that away......well.....you may take away the fans.

Can football become as you put it 'too perfect' surely if the correct decisions are made that's better for the game and wouldn't take away the excitement. What might happen is the players would accept decisions and stop berating the referees, diving would be reduced if not eliminated etc.
For example wouldn't you have liked video evidence used when Lampard's 'goal' wasn't given against Germany. It could have changed the entire match and prevented England progressing further

dublfcynwa wrote:

HitmanOwl wrote:Whether or not we us video tech or what not,the ref still has to make a decision. One could it was a red and one could say it wasn't. Come down to your belief really.

Use line tech..ones man view says yes,other says no. How do you come to a conclusion? If its still inconclusive after video relays.

Referees will ultimately still have a decision to make.

You have hit it on the head there, the main problem is one ref will make one decison and another will have a totally different decison on identical incident's, that's what really annoy's people, surely to god the rule's of football should be enforced in the same way by every ref. I know they have a tough job and im not trying to say it's easy but the amount of blunder's and inconsistent decison's lately is just out of control.

Isn't that just because it is a split second on field decision? If a number of referees used video footage of most/all contentious decisions wouldn't they all come to the same correct decision?

Another useless decision by a ref. He has totally spoiled this game.

Blackburn striker and BBC pundit Jason Roberts on Twitter: "We ALL know the rules NO two-footed challenges allowed..even with no connection. By the way...it does not matter if it was a good tackle five years ago!"

Even as a United fan I feel it was a bad decision, but according to a current player they're well aware of the consequence of two footed tackles

also

Former referee Dermot Gallagher on BBC Radio 5 live : "It looks harsh but with what has happened lately and the criteria for red cards, he was going to go. The minute he is airborne, he loses control of his body and the referees have sat down and said any player off the ground will be sent off."

gazzyD wrote:also

Former referee Dermot Gallagher on BBC Radio 5 live : "It looks harsh but with what has happened lately and the criteria for red cards, he was going to go. The minute he is airborne, he loses control of his body and the referees have sat down and said any player off the ground will be sent off."

If it's true that the minute you are airborne, you lose control of your body, then anyone who jumps for a header is reckless and should be sent off too. Right?

What if you go airborne to keep a ball in play nowhere near another player? He didn't even touch Nani.

Like I've already said, I don't think it was a red, thought it was a cracking tackle

however as Jason Roberts and Dermot Gallagher (people who'll know more than anybody posting here) say, players know that two footed tackles aren't allowed, successful or not. If a player still wants to go in with two feet then I have no sympathy for them.

I don't think its the referees that are at fault, its the game. Over paid fairies getting far too much protection for playing what was once a contact sport

It was not the refs fault at all but that the rules now over protect the players, actually the major decision the ref did get wrong was Utd not getting a penalty when 3-1 up to kill the game.

If the ref had given a yellow card, there would not have been a word about it. Some even think that would have been harsh. The fact he gave the red made him the center of attention. Maybe that's what he wanted.

But the referee has made that decision based on how he is told to referee the game. Players are told two footed tackles are not tolerated. Its the rules that are letting referees down. Same in most places of work, rules are put in place by the people who sit behind their desks in their suits, its then referees in the firing line who are having to uphold their stupid rules.

Anyway if this game hadn't been a derby and the decision never went in our favour, people wouldn't be highlighting this like they are, it'd be shrugged off and everyone would go on living. Its because its United that people are making a song and dance over it

Going off todays game Man United V Man city, the standard of referees are very poor. But the guy in the middle needs help, the game is too quick now,
videos should come in to help the poor refs
If it was not for the refs there would be no game, help them

Football fans, players and managers get the referees they deserve. Until they are treated with more respect and backed up by the FA, no one in their right mind will do it. Trust me, I've tried.

To compare with rugby refs (I still referee rugby matches), the last football match I refereed saw a player say to me (after I had given a throw-in against him, that's right, not really a game-changing decision was it?) "jeez ref, you are an effing special aren't you?". I promptly sent him off. The RC was promptly recinded on the basis that what he said wasn't really insulting. Now a rugby player once said to me "you should have gone to specsavers, you're effing Poopie" earned himself a red card, and duly got a 6-week ban. Spot the difference?

Of course, football refs are probably as good as they ever have been: they certainly make fewer errors than most of the players (anyone want to count the ammount of times your favourite player keeps the ball - the best passing rates are usually around 80% so there's a few mistakes right there). It's just the technology shows up their errors far more. Then of course, there's the commentators who seem keen to call any marginal decision as wrong, in order to stir up controversy. Couldn't believe the interview of Mancini after today's game, the commentator may just as well have said "clearly that wasn't a red card was it?".

Of course refs could be backed by better technology, but even then some people would moan. Take today's RC and not given PK to Man City: both were debateable, so using technology would only put the decision in someone else's hands...

Mike Selig.
I think you don't have much of a sense of humour. I would have had a lot more respect for you if you had swore back at him.