This. I have little doubt this will be similar to that "foul the FA was clamping down on" back when Xhaka first joined us that resulted in a very soft sending off and then was never called again all season. We'll see "bigger teams" ring around the ref in the next set of Prem fixtures and similar fines won't be levied.
I'm all for handing out cards the moment a 2nd player approaches a ref. For that matter I wouldn't object to having such mobs being maced, I hate them that much. I cannot fathom why this hasn't been addressed more aggressively.
Because football is such a magical unicorn sport that players can't display any discipline compared to other sports
That last phrase inspired me to look up their stats. Here are our discipline stats compared to theirs. Pretty similar... So can we appeal to the league for Martinelli getting screened from a clear scoring attempt by Attwell?
The circling of the ref is a bad look, but most of this stuff doesn’t get to me because I don’t expect purity in the sport. When you try to inject some type of standard - be it consistency in calls among multiple refs over dozens of games or LOTL application of a rule book that allows for interpretation and, if upheld, would litter the game with tedious infractions or consistency in behavioral norms among players and coaches - you always will end up butthurt and complaining like you’re a victim all of the time. I just hate that mentality in people. Why is it wrong for players to approach the ref when a bad call is made, but it is okay for players to tell the refs to “piss off”, to “f*** off” or generally to verbally abuse the ref every game? That would offend me more. Where is the line between gamesmanship (bending rules) and cheating (breaking rules), and how objective can one expect that call to be? Is professional fouling gamesmanship or cheating? Is putting pressure on the ref to view the game in your favor gamesmanship or cheating? Should I expect every ref to react similarly to different styles of dissent or gamesmanship? They are different people with different temperaments. I suspect that if all of the virtuous, well-meaning and well-studied people on this board became the refs, we still would see the same number of discrepancies and inconsistencies. We are made up differently. Even the idea of reffing without subconscious bias is weird. It sounds good, but it is very tough to do because we all are full of subconscious bias. We are humans. I feel like people are chasing rainbows looking for gold, but the standard people expect is not realistic.
Yup. All we really desire from officiating might be boiled down to 2 words: Quality & Consistency. Sounds simple!
I agree with you... just not the mace part LOL. I also think it's pretty ridiculous that the 2 most common words that players say to a ref are "fvck off"... with basically no consequence FWIK.
Or maybe more like the other kind of unicorn, as the way it's defined in the VC world. IOW, the golden goose? At least when talking about the EPL
Somewhat interesting (if limited) stats. Thanks for looking those up. Identical cards issued to both teams. Citeh just have a slightly lower cards per foul ratio. But not really enough to exemplify true tilt. But what about the stats that don't show up here? I.e. the number of incidents that are in the ballpark of "foul" but which don't get called. Hard to imagine that being easily representable in data.
Nice post. But I would counter that a bit with on of my mantras... Generally speaking we can't achieve perfection, but we can certainly strive for it. (and get closer which is good) Others would bring up the old "enemy of good" rebuttal.
I should have mentioned, those are EPL stats for 2021-2022 season only. And you're correct that only shows "recorded" discipline issues. It absolutely doesn't account for no-calls, or fouls that should have resulted in cards being issued.
To each his own. A few years back, I was a judge for a creativity competition (Destination Imagination) for the county schools in my area, and I was asked to grade the aspects of every school’s project from 1-10 (or something like that). They knew that everyone would grade differently because we perceive things differently, and some things are subjective. To expect consistency among a panel of judges is unreasonable. Instead, they set the standard to the individual and just asked to try to judge each project the same based on our own bias and perceptions. So, if I naturally score low (give few 8, 9 or 10s), then I should do that for all projects. It was a little more convoluted than that, but that was the gist. That’s kinda how I see refereeing. I can’t expect that a host of refs all are going to react to similar situations similarly. They are different people who view situations differently. What I can expect is that the ref acts consistently throughout the game. If you are lenient with tackling, then stay lenient throughout the game. If you put up with dissent in the beginning, don’t start carding for it at the end of the game. Stay consistent in the behavior. It helps people understand the environment in which they are operating. This makes more sense to me with respect to fairness. Otherwise, there is too much grey. For example, I saw the penalty call against Xhaka as very soft. To me, the player was falling, looking for a penalty, and while was a little contact and shirt pulling, there wasn’t enough to make him flop to the ground. Another reasonable person rightly could say, how could you expect a referee to look at the video replay see Xhaka obviously pulling the players shirt and not call a penalty? That would be a blatant disregard of the rules of the game when everyone is seeing the same thing on video. It becomes subjective. But, I would say that the ref hadn’t called shirt pulling in the box the whole game, so the expectation is that this alone is not enough for a call then. That would be the consistency that I would expect. But it’s hard. There is a reason why we added a fourth a official, and people still feel cheated. We have added VAR, and things haven’t improved. It’s the expectation that is the problem because any type of macro-standard is going to fall short.
The point is other sports achieve better standards easily. It isn't a rainbow or magic unicorn. e.g in Rugby, only the captain can talk to the ref, and the players don't swear at the ref. This means that the ref is mic-ed up which means superior viewer experience, because the ref explains his decisions as he goes along, and shouts instructions to the players. of course there is some general griping, but in general the players accept they cannot argue with the ref. Only the captain can get a hearing. In football, IMO, a big part of the problem is players see the opportunity to intimidate the referee and that is in part because the ref has no meaningful punishment in football. In rugby a penalty against you for dissent means loss of valuable field position, or giving up points. In football a free kick against you is usually meaningless. For football i'd add a 10min sin bin, and a direct freekick outside the box for professional fouls, dissent etc
I agree that this type of low hanging fruit would help. It would take some pressure off the ref and would give some level of transparency. But, it seems like it’s a nominal gain. It’s the decisions made and the lack of consistency in the decisions made that often are criticized. These changes do not address this issue, which ai think it the main criticism, but I agree that they do represent some level of improvement.
Which led to Wenger's ill fated "British Core" he may have failed but he wasn't stupid. It's why Pep likely wanted Kane, and Grealish. Are they great? Sure but them being British helps in all departments, commercially, media and in the minds of referees.
Rugby players don’t mob the referee, but I’ve been told that Rugby is a hooligans sport played by gentlemen, while football is a gentlemen’s sport played by hooligans.. Seriously, if you want to stop it, card the coach/manager anytime a player other than the captain approaches the referee to complain about a call. Initially we might have a lot of coaches sent to the stands, but if you also enforce it at the youth level it will eventually eliminate the problem.
Yes there absolutely should be consistency within one ref and one match. Everyone will agree to that. But it's also true that they should strive for consistency across all refs and all matches. Otherwise, as a player, you go from [playing a few games that were called "leniently" and then in the next game the HR is applying the letter of the law right from KO and boom you find yourself ejected from the game within 10-15 mins. Why was a 4th official? I thought that was just to give the coaches someone nearby to yell at so they aren't screaming to the HR 50 meters away. But seriously I thought the reason for the 4R was to have a backup, as came in handy during the last match CHE-LIV IIRC. Why hasn't VAR improved the situation as much as we expected? Because it hasn't been implemented optimally, at least not in the EPL. But at my core I still have hope that it will deliver on it's promise, learn from other leagues whose implementation of video review is more mature. This might just be a good example of what I was talking about before, about constantly striving for perfection, or shall I say improvement, which is a less hot-button word?
1. This thread is from the last game played, 4 days ago. 2. There were quite a few controversial refereeing moments in this match which is what led to this broader convo, so it's actually not even that far off-topic
oh, i am absolutely ALL for cracking down on this type of action. how is it that we're the only one being cracked down upon when you see it constantly with both the manchester teams?