Ref Watch Modern Referees... I've Had It!!

[m]

Isn't this essentially, and dare I say it... corruption...?

Bloody Hell.

 

[OUFCwaffle]

Could the answer be for every referee in a professional match to issue a publicly accessible decision report after each game. Where they go through every decision they make in a match and match it up with the applied rule clause, there could be a short clip with it too for evidence. This way it would show up any errors and go directly into their record. Would be a great tool for assessing performance.

 

[MustardYellow]

You'll be pleased to know that Mr Purkiss is the referee for tomorrow's game

Uh oh...

 

[m]

Could the answer be for every referee in a professional match to issue a publicly accessible decision report after each game. Where they go through every decision they make in a match and match it up with the applied rule clause, there could be a short clip with it too for evidence. This way it would show up any errors and go directly into their record. Would be a great tool for assessing performance.

At the risk of repeating myself...

Bloody Hell.

 

[Ewes]

Cheers @Ewes - gives a bit of an insight
Can you throw a bit of light on the situation regarding the blatant shirtpulling that largely goes unpunished
and also the role of assistant referees ( formerly linesmen) , as in are they there to assist or does the referee have the right to tell them 'only throw ins and offsides0, in which case why arent assistants allowed to actually assist?

Thanks.

So ‘pulling, pushing, tripping etc an opponent’ is not only a direct free-kick but it’s also a yellow card offence. For every shirt pull in every game a caution should be given. Those are the rules.

But as others have said and as an official I fully agree, there is no consistency. Even at my level as a Step 4 assistant/Step 5 referee, I see my own tolerance levels questioned by other referees who say they won’t punish shirt-pulling unless a player is heavily impeded or goes down.

I personally have a very low tolerance of this - 2 handed pushes in an opponent’s back or grabbing a handful of shirt is always a direct free-kick when I’m referee. As a linesman I need to know before a game starts whether the referee has the same view as we work as a team and very rarely undermine each other.

Linesmen have a specific area in which all offences are down to the Lino because they have the best view - it’s from the touch line they’re stood on, up to the edge of the penalty area and the halfway line. So in that rectangular part of the pitch all decisions are down to me as linesman unless the referee is close by and has a better view. This is always agreed between officials pre-match.

Observers and assessors only ever assess the 4 officials individually and never how well they work as a team. So if I’m linesman and I flag for an offence but the referee waves ‘play on’, and the assessor agrees with my decision then the referee gets marked down, not me.

But it’s fair to say we do whatever we can to never undermine the referee so that’s why we often see late flags particularly at a throw-in. Comms at NL South and above help - we use buzzer flags and microphones so it’s common for a lino to tell the referee we’ve seen a shirt pull but the referee says ‘no foul don’t flag’. This helps ensure we’re giving consistent decisions but it can infuriate the lino and fans with a better view.

 

[Sarge]

Thanks.

So ‘pulling, pushing, tripping etc an opponent’ is not only a direct free-kick but it’s also a yellow card offence. For every shirt pull in every game a caution should be given. Those are the rules.

But as others have said and as an official I fully agree, there is no consistency. Even at my level as a Step 4 assistant/Step 5 referee, I see my own tolerance levels questioned by other referees who say they won’t punish shirt-pulling unless a player is heavily impeded or goes down.

I personally have a very low tolerance of this - 2 handed pushes in an opponent’s back or grabbing a handful of shirt is always a direct free-kick when I’m referee. As a linesman I need to know before a game starts whether the referee has the same view as we work as a team and very rarely undermine each other.

Linesmen gave a specific area in which all offences are down to the Lino because they have the best view - it’s from the touch line they’re stood on, up to the edge of the penalty area and the halfway line. So in that rectangular part of the pitch all decisions are down to me as linesman unless the referee is close by and has a better view. This is always agreed between officials pre-match.

Observers and assessors only ever assess the 4 officials individually and never how well they work as a team. So if I’m linesman and I fkag for an offence but the referee waves ‘play on’, and the assessor agrees with my decision then the referee gets marked down, not me.

But it’s fair to say we do whatever we can to never undermine the referee so that’s why we often see late flags particularly at a throw-in. Comms at NL South and above help - we use buzzer flags and microphones so it’s common for a lino to tell the referee we’ve seen a shirt pull but the referee says ‘no foul don’t flag’. This helps ensure we’re giving consistent decisions but it can infuriate the lino and fans with a better view.

thanks for that too @Ewes , appreciated and more than a bit enlightening

 

[MustardYellow]

Could the answer be for every referee in a professional match to issue a publicly accessible decision report after each game. Where they go through every decision they make in a match and match it up with the applied rule clause, there could be a short clip with it too for evidence. This way it would show up any errors and go directly into their record. Would be a great tool for assessing performance.

Going through every decision may be excessive, but I certainly think the 'main' decisions should be addressed and explained.

Both players and fans have a right to understand how and why decisions are being made.

 

[Sarge]

You'll be pleased to know that Mr Purkiss is the referee for tomorrow's game.

Yes I know - never mind its 1st V 3rd in L1, its almost a given its going be all about him

 

[Ewes]

But isn't it a referees job to understand the rules and apply them fairly and consistently? Players and fans feel aggrieved because refs seem to apply rules differently each week - there's no consistency and a lack of transparency.

I personally think the offside rule should be that as long as part of a players body is onside, they're onside. It will make games more exciting and is easier to apply. Let's face it, a player isn't gaining much of an advantage by being a shoulder or a knee ahead of the defender.

I also actually agree with bookings for kicking the ball away. We've seen so many teams use it to slow down play and prevent quick set pieces (Wycombe used to do it all the time!!).

As an official yourself, do you think refs being more open and transparent about the decisions they make would aid player/fan relations? To me it never seems like officials explain their decisions to players, and fans are just left in the dark which does nothing but breed more annoyance.

I've always believed officials should have a 'post-match interview' style thing like managers do. It would give referees a more 'human feel' and help fans and players alike understand *why* decisions are being made, which for me is one of the main contentious issues.

Yep fully agree with referees needing to be more transparent and explaining their decisions. I also feel professional referees should be forced to attend post-match press conferences and explain their decisions.

Without boasting, I usually receive pretty good marks from teams I referee (we’re marked out of 100, anything less than 70/100 and we get called before the FA to explain ourselves).

I feel I’m marked highly because I’m humble and honest during a game - I apologise immediately if I’ve got a decision wrong or my view was impeded so I couldn’t possibly see the handball etc. I communicate constantly with both captains (e.g. warning them when a team-mate has committed 2+ fouls, questioned my decisions etc) and then I expect the skippers to manage that player.

The downside of referees getting a decision wrong is that we invariably try to compensate for a bad decision by giving the aggrieved team the next ‘soft free kick, penalty appeal’ etc. This isn’t the right way to officiate a game but it’s called being a human. It helps us to better manage a game and both teams if when we let a probable offside decision go because we or the lino couldn’t be 90% certain, then the next similar decision down the other ends goes the same way.

Of course this adds to the players’ and fans’ view that officials aren’t consistent because one week a decision is given and the next week it’s not. But I have to be honest, as an official I don’t care about consistency* and what happened in a team’s match the previous week.

* The only consistency I care about is (a) are my own performances from one week to the next OK with good marks awarded to me, plus (b) whether I and my assistants are giving consistent team decisions within that 90mins match.

 

[Sarge]

Yep fully agree with referees needing to be more transparent and explaining their decisions. I also feel professional referees should be forced to attend post-match press conferences and explain their decisions.

Without boasting, I usually receive pretty good marks from teams I referee (we’re marked out of 100, anything less than 70/100 and we get called before the FA to explain ourselves).

I feel I’m marked highly because I’m humble and honest during a game - I apologise immediately if I’ve got a decision wrong or my view was impeded so I couldn’t possibly see the handball etc. I communicate constantly with both captains (e.g. warning them when a team-mate has committed 2+ fouls, questioned my decisions etc) and then I expect the skippers to manage that player.

The downside of referees getting a decision wrong is that we invariably try to compensate for a bad decision by giving the aggrieved team the next ‘soft free kick, penalty appeal’ etc. This isn’t the right way to officiate a game but it’s called being a human. It helps us to better manage a game and both teams if when we let a probable offside decision go because we or the lino couldn’t be 90% certain, then the next similar decision down the other ends goes the same way.

Of course this adds to the players’ and fans’ view that officials aren’t consistent because one week a decision is given and the next week it’s not. But I have to be honest, as an official I don’t care about consistency* and what happened in a team’s match the previous week.

* The only consistency I care about is (a) are my own performances from one week to the next OK with good marks awarded to me, plus whether I and my assistants are giving consistent team decisions within that 90mins match.

Have the likes of Stockbridge and Purkiss, ( and until he retired Kettle) got reserved parking spaces at FA HQ?

seriously though , it would be informative if assesors scores were made public post match - supporters are partisan by nature, and often view things through a certain perspective., so a bit more transparency regarding match officials would maybe help?

 

[Andy Stroud]

As a relatively experienced and qualified referee, I feel the problem at the top end of refereeing is that officials just aren’t being allowed to apply ‘common sense’ any more and due to the spotlight on them (assessors, observers, cameras and fans all looking closely at their decisions) we tend to play it safe and stick to the rules.

Some of the current rules are just plain stupid. The offside rule is far too complicated. I favour adding a blue line to each half, 35m from goal. If the attacker is past this line and beyond the second last defender they’re offside. Simple.

The compulsory caution to players kicking the ball away even as little as 2M as they retreat for a free-kick is also not helping the referee/players relationships.

Finally, regional FAs have been using the sin bin for dissent successfully for several seasons. Just introduce it in the PL & EFL also and on-field respect will improve quickly and referees will be more relaxed about making other important decisions.

How does the timing of a sin-bin work in football? In rugby union, the clock stops at regular intervals under the referee’s control. Would football need to introduce a game time clock visible to everyone? If so, no thank you.

 

[Andy Stroud]

You'll be pleased to know that Mr Purkiss is the referee for tomorrow's game.

Please tell me you’re joking!

 

[LeftSideLarry]

Please tell me you’re joking!

If only I could.

 

[MustardYellow]

Good thread. A few other factors to throw in the ring when comparing modern refs with the past...

Number of laws, and therefore decisions per game. Refs in the pro leagues are now averaging 200+ decisions per match, rising to 250+ at PL level, with those numbers still rising year on year. Don't know what the figure would have been in the 80s/90s but certainly a lot less. The more laws any game has the more decisions are made and the number of mistakes rises accordingly. Fans *always* notice and remember the mistakes.

New rules are nuanced and subjective
Handball is a classic example. Was never 100% cut and dried but the general rule was a] deliberate (stuck his paw out, whistle) or b] accidental (thumped close range, balancing while jumping, play on). Now? OMG, even at junior level it's a nightmare. If you look at rule changes (or the endless changes to 'interpretation' of rules) over the last couple of decades they nearly all involve more subjective judgements in realtime. A lot of the most obvious inconsistencies we see (ie. the handballs in Wycombe game) are 55/45 level decisions where even a tiny difference in body shape or circumstances can tip the balance based on the hundreds of pages of guidance refs now have to consume. I wonder if tiredness plays a role here too, its fairly well evidenced that tired people remain fairly consistent at simple binary tasks but performance on complex tasks diminishes. Certainly feels like refereeing howlers are more common after the 60/70 minutes mark.

Pace and athleticism
Everything is quicker these days. Not just marginally either. Mainly due to increased fitness but also the impact of rule changes. The distances covered by players and officials with minimal respite are off the scale versus football I grew up with in the 80s. Even at amateur level teams are pressing for 90 minutes, playing from the back and 'transitioning' through midfield rather than lumping it. As anyone who has reffed or even run the line will know the speed of a game is pretty much *the* main challenge.

Which all sounds like a get of jail card for refs. Which it is in some ways. But... I agree there are still far too many who make themselves centre of attention, abuse their positions to interupt rather than enable the game etc. At the higher levels the ridiculous layers of bureaucracy, politics and peacockery are laughable. When Rugby Union professionalised there was an accompanying process to support and help refs adapt to the massively increased levels of physicality, fitness and expectation. Football is a harder game to officiate but has never really had that moment.

Is it possible that the rule changes have become ambiguous intentionally? When you have a rule that's open to interpretation, it becomes a lot easier to defend a referees decision by explaining it away as 'how they saw it' or their own opinion, which can't be necessarily proven wrong due to the rule itself not having specific parameters.

Maybe it's time for referees to be expected to have fitness at at least a similar level to that of the players.

 

[werthersoriginal]

Is it possible that the rule changes have become ambiguous intentionally? When you have a rule that's open to interpretation, it becomes a lot easier to defend a referees decision by explaining it away as 'how they saw it' or their own opinion, which can't be necessarily proven wrong due to the rule itself not having specific parameters.

Maybe it's time for referees to be expected to have fitness at at least a similar level to that of the players.

Referees are older than the players and so won't be as fit, plus they don't train every day, they have jobs.

Decisions are always 'how they see it' and in real time. While you're still talking about it or watching a replay they've moved on to the next one.

 

[MustardYellow]

Referees are older than the players and so won't be as fit, plus they don't train every day, they have jobs.

Decisions are always 'how they see it' and in real time. While you're still talking about it or watching a replay they've moved on to the next one.

That should change imo. Refs need to keep up with the game, which requires a certain standard of fitness. I'd even go as far as saying they should be paid enough for it to be their full time job - if it'll increase the standard then I'm sure clubs wouldn't mind a small contribution each if necessary.

The rules should be clear - something is either right or wrong. As soon as you leave it open to interpretation, you open a can of worms.

 

[Ewes]

How does the timing of a sin-bin work in football? In rugby union, the clock stops at regular intervals under the referee’s control. Would football need to introduce a game time clock visible to everyone? If so, no thank you.

Hi. Sin bins are for dissent only and means the offending player goes off, can sit in the dugout and his team are down to 10 men for 10mins (8mins for junior academy games).

Referee or fourth official keeps a note of the 10mins and when the time is up the player only comes back on during a stop in play - a throw-in etc and only when the ref says so.

It can get a bit complicated if the player is already on a yellow for another offence or even if he’s sin binned twice in the game. But generally it works really well - ref gets the player off his back for a while, player goes off and calms down and realises he’s let his team down, and often comes back on determined to put things right.

I can’t praise it enough as a referee. If used in the PL & EFL it would sort out the disrespect which then filters down the leagues and into kids matches.

 

[Ewes]

Referees are older than the players and so won't be as fit, plus they don't train every day, they have jobs.

Decisions are always 'how they see it' and in real time. While you're still talking about it or watching a replay they've moved on to the next one.

Not always the case at grassroots level. I typically referee 5 x 90mins games every weekend and no players I know of can manage that many matches. My Fitbit tells me I typically run 9-15km per match. We get to do a tough fitness test if we want to progress.

 

[holdsteady]

Not always the case at grassroots level. I typically referee 5 x 90mins games every weekend and no players I know of can manage that many matches. My Fitbit tells me I typically run 9-15km per match. We get to do a tough fitness test if we want to progress.

Its not just the distance you run though its the intensity you do it at, an Olympic 400 hundred metre hurdler is in fantastic physical shape, doesn't run as far as people that do parkruns at the weekend but no comparison when it comes to who is fitter. All those shuttle runs that footballers do are far more intense than you mostly jogging about.

 

[Ewes]

Is it possible that the rule changes have become ambiguous intentionally? When you have a rule that's open to interpretation, it becomes a lot easier to defend a referees decision by explaining it away as 'how they saw it' or their own opinion, which can't be necessarily proven wrong due to the rule itself not having specific parameters.

Maybe it's time for referees to be expected to have fitness at at least a similar level to that of the players.

I don’t think so personally.

About once a month referees get together for a training session. Typically we get shown video clips of games with tight game-changing decisions or offsides. They show the clips slowed down from different angles.

We have 30-40 referees sat in the room watching the same clips and we are asked to decide if we’d personally give a free-kick, pen, yellow/red cards, award a goal, rule offside etc.

There is never a universally agreed outcome as we all see the same circumstances differently.

We regularly invite local managers and pro players to attend these meetings so we can have a good honest debate about key decisions but the clubs always refuse to attend.

The fitness test I had to endure as a referee going for promotion is far tougher than even pre-season training players go through - 2 hours of constant sprinting and longer distance running.

A linesman will usually run further and faster than any referee or player.

 

[ZeroTheHero]

Hi. Sin bins are for dissent only and means the offending player goes off, can sit in the dugout and his team are down to 10 men for 10mins (8mins for junior academy games).

Referee or fourth official keeps a note of the 10mins and when the time is up the player only comes back on during a stop in play - a throw-in etc and only when the ref says so.

It can get a bit complicated if the player is already on a yellow for another offence or even if he’s sin binned twice in the game. But generally it works really well - ref gets the player off his back for a while, player goes off and calms down and realises he’s let his team down, and often comes back on determined to put things right.

I can’t praise it enough as a referee. If used in the PL & EFL it would sort out the disrespect which then filters down the leagues and into kids matches.

I haven't seen sin bins used in football, but have thought they are a good idea for some time. With the increase in the number of yellow cards for non-violent/dangerous (or in some cases even unintentional!) offences, the refs sometimes are left with nowhere to go when a player who has tapped a ball away a couple of yards and been booked then says something in the heat of the moment half an hour later. That ends up in a red, which seems entirely disproportionate to someone being sent off for elbowing someone in the head!

 

[SteMerritt]

A linesman will usually run further and faster than any referee or player.

...and do it sideways as well.

 

[Sarge]

...and do it sideways as well.

will do them well officiating games where snake manning is managing one of the teams

 

[Marked Ox]

Not always the case at grassroots level. I typically referee 5 x 90mins games every weekend and no players I know of can manage that many matches. My Fitbit tells me I typically run 9-15km per match. We get to do a tough fitness test if we want to progress.

Well we can say with certainty you aren't Trevor Kettle.

 

[Oldman159]

O4Fs!

Taken from the Bolton page….


“Sam Purkiss will referee Tuesday's Sky Bet League One fixture between Oxford United and Bolton at the Kassam Stadium.

Wanderers go into the game on the back of a 7-0 victory over Exeter City this past Saturday, while United were beaten 2-0 at Cheltenham Town that same afternoon.

Purkiss, who will take charge of the game, has officiated 16 matches so far this season - issuing 77 yellow cards and eight red.

His most recent outing was on November 25, when he was the man in the middle for Leyton Orient's 1-1 draw with Wigan Athletic in League One. The London official brandished six yellow cards at Brisbane Road, five of which went to the home side.

Purkiss' last match in charge of Bolton was on March 17, when they played out a 1-1 draw with Sheffield Wednesday in a League One clash at Hillsborough. Two players were cautioned that evening, with Wanderers defender Ricardo Almeida Santos amongst the recipients.

The last time he refereed an Oxford fixture was on September 2, as they were beaten 2-1 by Port Vale in a League One encounter at the Kassam Stadium. Four players went into the book on that occasion, while U's duo Mark Harris and Greg Leigh were both dismissed as the hosts ended with nine men.”

So, I think I will have a little dabble in the betting market. 1. Most goals scored against a home side and 2 first Home side to have 3 reds against them this season….

 

[Oxymoron]

Well, we're complaining about referee's consistency. At least Mr Purkiss is consistent....

 

[Grumpy Git]

TV must be held to account, the microscopic reviews are ruining the game. VAR was brought in because of complaints from Managers watching replays and pointing out any refereeing error. TV pundits too, decrying every decision. They bring VAR in, then they all jump on the VAR officials.
As said earlier, sin bin players, for dissent, diving, time wasting etc. Managers will soon install some respect.

 

[MustardYellow]

Another game, another stinker from the officials...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67550696

 

[MustardYellow]

TV must be held to account, the microscopic reviews are ruining the game. VAR was brought in because of complaints from Managers watching replays and pointing out any refereeing error. TV pundits too, decrying every decision. They bring VAR in, then they all jump on the VAR officials.
As said earlier, sin bin players, for dissent, diving, time wasting etc. Managers will soon install some respect.

But isn't the crux of the issue that even with countless angles and replays on VAR, officials are still getting decisions wrong? They've been given what we have and STILL can't get it right - why should such incompetence be respected?

 

[MustardYellow]

Well, we're complaining about referee's consistency. At least Mr Purkiss is consistent....

Consistently