Right. But I think the deeper cultural/philosophical issues start earlier than that. It's not like Webb is going to give Kavanagh or Coote or Pawson a different personality. The referees who have made it to the top level--save Oliver and maybe Taylor--are just cut from a completely different cloth than those who rose to the top level 10-15 years ago (and even Oliver and Taylor, I would say, lack animation even if they have personality). And that has nothing to do with Webb, Riley, Hackett or anyone else managing the Select Group. Something at the lower levels in England is causing expressionless robots to be churned out at the top.
Well, Oliver was wrong. We excuse referees too much now. There's a hold there, but given the standards in England you can't really fault a VAR for not sending that down as clearly wrong (particularly since it would be a red card). You may want a VAR intervention there, which is fine. But then you should want the referee to simply call it, too. Oliver was well positioned and looking right at it. Sorry, but that's on him. I suspect, however, that he (and others EPL officiating) just don't see that as an expected call, as you suggest.
Thanks. It's strange as the match announcers calling the game both thought it was a clear penalty. Certainly, it's always called in the Dutch league which is what I mainly watch.
It is the selection process, almost like Darwinism. To a certain extent they will match the personality of the man at the top. We saw this with Hackett's era, and then sadly with RIley's. People who are ambitious see what is being selected for and so adjust their refereeing to meet those criteria. Others who do not do this are not promoted up. Once the new administration starts having an effect, and changing the way they expect referees to operate, those trying to break through will do what it takes. Who did the recent crop of wannabes have to emulate? Moss, Mason, and the others of a similar ilk? I agree it is not likely that the personalities of the current group will suddenly change, so it will be a slow process. PH
I think it’s also worth noting that the game has changed as well. The Premier League isn’t always a bunch of good ol’ English boys playing a gentlemen’s game anymore. Historically, England’s footballing culture has been among the most “gentlemanly” in the world, but that culture is eroding before our eyes as the league (and the top level of the sport, more generally) becomes more international and less culturally isolated. The problem is that their refereeing culture up and down the pyramid is so hell-bent on tradition (and, if I may add, a certain arrogance about the English way of doing things) that it hasn’t been able to adapt to the changing game. Rather than compare today’s EPL refs to grassroots referees, I think a more apt comparison is to the top-level referees of decades gone by, maybe the 80s or 90s.
You had me until the very last line. Nostalgia can be a hell of a drug. Five minutes spent on YouTube looking at old Vinnie Jones clips or, indeed, any of the big clashes from the last 25 years of the 20th century would disabuse anyone of the notion that English referees had some magical heyday where they were on top of the world. The stuff that players got away with back then was shocking by today's standards. You could fill an entire match with highlight reels of David Elleray ignoring SFP/VC. So we can't have it both ways, even if the referees were more respected or more, generally speaking, authorative in those days. The accuracy rate of KMI decisions has gone way up, not to mention fitness and tactical awareness. On those key measurements, referees today are unequivocally better than generations past. The problems are that player management techniques have waned (while the culture of the league has evolved), referees have shed individual personalities, and, well, every game is beamed worldwide with 20+ camera angles and hundreds of millions of dollars changing hands in some capacity, so we hear a lot more about every potential error in a match that you simply did not have occur 20 years ago.
Yes, the much earlier days prior to the Premier League era were a totally different environment for all concerned and so comparing them to today is not appropriate. We can however compare the last 10 years to the prior decade. When the PGMOL started up in 2001, the referees became full-time professionals, not just weekenders with a real job as before. As a result they were able to have more frequent advanced instruction together with with sports scientists, sports psychologists, physiotherapists, sprint coaches, podiatrists and vision scientists more intense evaluation and everything improved, fitness, accuracy etc., and we saw the emergence of the group of very good referees mentioned earlier. But matters deteriorated after Riley took over, and got progressively worse, while more scrutiny occurred and VAR was poorly implemented. Now that RIley has been replaced we can see if this results in an overall improvement. Webb has had several years of professional referee management which gives him a distinct advantage over Riley, not to mention his far more successful refereeing career. PH
I think this corresponds with a vision of the role of the referee. ITOOTR and managing the game was the hallmark of a ref. Refs earned respect and could bend the Laws because the idea of the ref as arbiter who made the game fair was the primary vision. Now, the focus is more on getting each decision robotically correct. And that parallels the evolution of the Laws from a rough framework upon which the R brings judgement and discretion, to set of formulas to nudge each event. We have chosen consistency over fairness as the hallmark of what makes a good refereee,
Oh, I’m not saying they were good back then, I can’t speak to that. I didn’t even mean to specify English refs of the 80s and 90s. My point is just that, stylistically, it feels like English referees are a a couple decades behind the rest of the world. And in today’s game, the stylistic inflexibility is exposed more than ever. Is Webb the guy to fix that, who knows. Like you mentioned earlier, I think the problem runs deeper in English refereeing culture than just the top level, but you’re right that circa 2013 things were alright in the (B!)PL, so this isn’t as simple as having a single cause.
Have to believe Rashford was involved in the play there. EDIT: That decision kinda shocks me. Rashford ran directly to the ball and it was below his feet.
Well. Did he make an obvious action that had an impact on a defender? That’s really the only question. And it’s such a grey area. Need to see it again. Probably a few more times.
There needs to ha an obvious action other than just running at the ball. Not saying there wasn’t. But the action must be identified.
Explanation is crap, not touching the ball is nothing to do with interfering with an opponent (which is the question here). After post-game replays I'm definitely team offside. His action interferes with defender(s) in that they move in response.
If you take the position that any movement towards the ball affects the defense and the player therefore interfered with an opponent, you literally make it a foul any time a player is in an offside position. I’ve been team good goal from the beginning.
That's not interference. Past IFAB examples have outright stated this. He doesn't impact an opponent by MAKING him run in a difference direction to avoid him, he doesn't block out an opponent. He runs along with the ball, never touching it.
Not saying any movement, but am saying this one. Which may be a wrong statement. I'm glad I wasn't on this game.
But he makes a pump fake on the ball. That is a deliberate action taken with the design to affect the defender. Offside.