Ref Watch Oxford United V Wycombe Wanders L1 28/10/2023 Sebastian Stockbridge

[Sarge]

Todays incompetant was in my opinion right up there in terms of a shockingly poor officiating as Purkiss and Mather ( Port Vale & Bristol Rovers)
He was unbelievably inconsistent ( hence in terms of consistency the poll has to be 1-10- sorry, I know he warrants a 0), first few mins foul on McGuane , not given, thankfully Beadle pulled off decent save or his missing/ignoring of that could've had worse consequences. Catalogue of incidents missed, not given or ignore. A wycombe player goes over in the first half in their pen area, handles the ball nothing given, McGuane goes over 2nd half same place same thing pen awarded! Beadle made NO contact with their player, WW typical dark arts employed ( which Stockbridge fell for every time) 2nd pen awarded. Yet neither McGuane nor Beadle were yellow carded? - which they should have been for their (alleged) offences, applying the rules/laws of the game One of our players RR ,I think ,was pushed in the face, WW player then goes down in a heap without any contact. NO card?

His far side ( in front of WW away support) assistant referee was farcical - at least twice wasn't keeping up with play 2nd half - clear offside not flagged for, also ball went over the touch line ( goalkick) yey play allowed to continue.

As for our late pen, talk about soft, the earlier shout of a pen on Harris looked more convincing. On the subject of Harris, clear through on goal yet Stockbridge pulled play back for a FK (and yellow card) , that was a clear advantage denied

Its about time FA/EFL clamped down on the likes of Purkiss, Mather and Stockbridge, (NOT that they ever will) people go to football to watch a game of football, not the amateur dramatics of the match referee, despite what those jokers may think it is not all about them

A 1 from me ( purely because YF ref watch IS consistent, so there is no option for zero or less)

 

[Sarge]

@Northstandboy , @SteMerritt , @Carpy - Ive had a notification that this particular Ref Watch ( poll closes Tomorrow btw) has been moved to 'a different forum' - cant find which though? , and can I ask, why if not in matches, where Ref Watch post match goes?


And finally - for consistency Ref watch scores should be the same through the season ( IMO), why has a zero been added to the 1-10 scores - yes, he Sebastatian Stockbridge probably and fully deserved 0 option , as did Purkiss ( Port Vale at Home) and Mather ( Bristol Rovers at Home), however should score options really be changed part way into the season?

 

[Northstandboy]

@Northstandboy , @SteMerritt , @Carpy - Ive had a notification that this particular Ref Watch ( poll closes Tomorrow btw) has been moved to 'a different forum' - cant find which though? , and can I ask, why if not in matches, where Ref Watch post match goes?


And finally - for consistency Ref watch scores should be the same through the season ( IMO), why has a zero been added to the 1-10 scores - yes, he Sebastatian Stockbridge probably and fully deserved 0 option , as did Purkiss ( Port Vale at Home) and Mather ( Bristol Rovers at Home), however should score options really be changed part way into the season?

They go here

Ref Watch 2023-24

yellowsforum.co.uk

I’m not sure why a 0 was added, maybe one of the others can confirm?

 

[Carpy]

I’m not sure why a 0 was added, maybe one of the others can confirm?

Guilty, I think you can start adding zeros @Sarge, no doubt we will get another ref who deserves it

 

[Sarge]

Guilty, I think you can start adding zeros @Sarge, no doubt we will get another ref who deserves it

consistency through? IMO both Purkiss and Mather maybe warranted 0 , but its been 1-10 marksfor all the matches this season so far

I can add a 0 to the future ref watch polls,- but pointing out match officials lack of consistency seems a bit odd with YF not being consistent with ref watch mark options ?

 

[Wandering Yellow]

consistency through? IMO both Purkiss and Mather maybe warranted 0 , but its been 1-10 marksfor all the matches this season so far

I can add a 0 to the future ref watch polls,- but pointing out match officials lack of consistency seems a bit odd with YF not being consistent with ref watch mark options ?

I think this is the only time we needed a 0 option. He wasn't worthy of a 1.

 

[Eric Blair]

Right, a lot to discuss on the ref watch. As I officiate at a relatively high level in another sport I can (usually) see what the ref is trying to do and can also see (usually) things that others might not in terms of game management and body language (as that what gets rated at a same level as decisions themselves). I can understand completely the calls for the ref's head after today, but will call it as I see it with my "assessor hat" on (also part of my mentoring role for junior colleagues). It's worth saying I watched all of these on slo-mo too...no such luxury in real life of course.

Anyway, the "big" decisions:

Firstly, the "foul" on McGuane that led to Beadle's save. Could have given it, McGuane has done his "throw arms up and not bother" act that I thought he had stopped doing. You simply have to play to the whistle there. Not a clear and obvious mistake.

The failed advantage is the worst decision of the day for me, because it is a bloomer. You can see he is so focused on what has happened that everything else is zoned out. A common error (not just in advantages), maybe that's one of his weak spots, can't say. A top ref reins in the whistle and lets things play out.

Their handball in the box is a clear slip with the ball touched during the player's momentum. No penalty and no problem on that one.

McGuane's penalty was "more" of a penalty (someone said that in the match thread) in that he's slipped and is on the deck and also makes a different arm movement. It's a debatable one for me and I wouldn't have given it but the "sell" here is that the same thing happened in the first half. As an official, by all means call it if you see it, but be absolutely ready that managers and coaches will be spitting if you are not seen as being consistent.

The Beadle foul is a penalty. Clear contact on the leg in slow motion. The fact that the ball is past due to the striker's heavy touch is of no bearing, and don't let PRB's wittering of "Ball woz gone, Jerome" fool you (nor the RadOx team again having no clue of the laws). It would look better from a refereeing perspective if the ball wasn't going out at pace, but a foul is a foul. He then got caught up with Manning and giving a red, who knows what that was for. As a result he may have forgot to book Beadle, which would have been justified. My main issue with this one is he is miles behind play when the foul happens. Always give yourself the best possible chance of making the right decision.

First Harris coming together is foot on foot, no foul for me.

Penalty on Harris is soft, but a stupid tackle and easily bought by someone like Harris. Although the impression of "evening up" is of course unshakeable given the time of it. But it is a penalty.

I actually thought the other yellows were more or less OK, although I don't really like the pedantic look it gives the referee when he books the man for kicking the ball away. I imagine it's so ingrained that it'll take a while for it to take effect. The one where the Wycombe player jumps and "tries" to keep the ball in is a prime example. Is that timewasting or a genuine attempt? He also booked players for timewasting, which is a welcome change.

My main issue with him is he seems to be a very robotic referee. The tunnel vision of the missed advantage is a prime example here. He has a card out already when he's walking so he gives himself no scope for longer thought. Giving yourself enough time as possible is always key. And his body language was fairly average as well.

A very, very difficult game to referee and he will (I sincerely hope) be looking at his own performance critically as we are all told to do. It's never a nice one when both teams are criticising you!

Night all!

This is the sort of analysis I come here for.

I thought both the handballs were penalties - both times arms changed the direction of travel of the ball.

I actually thought the Harris one was probably a penalty but maybe a soft one. I was adamant that the Beadle one wasn't a penalty but I do defer to you on that one.

Does anyone know what Liam Manning said to get sent off?

 

[bazzer9461]

This is the sort of analysis I come here for.

I thought both the handballs were penalties - both times arms changed the direction of travel of the ball.

I actually thought the Harris one was probably a penalty but maybe a soft one. I was adamant that the Beadle one wasn't a penalty but I do defer to you on that one.

Does anyone know what Liam Manning said to get sent off?

Probably called him an effing dick which is I suppose being polite as he was called a lot worse during and after the game by the fans

 

[m]

Guilty, I think you can start adding zeros @Sarge, no doubt we will get another ref who deserves it

If we have a 0 option then it is only a matter of time before someone asks for a -1 option.

That way madness lies.

 

[NottsYellow]

........ and another time when Mr Stockbridge reffed one of our games was Lincoln away in 2021/22 when he sent off Herbie Kane. It was a 50:50 crunching tackle, I'm sure someone with better IT skills than me can dig up the video of it. If I remember rightly at the time it seemed a bit iffy.

 

[stokeu]

Does anyone know what Liam Manning said to get sent off?

complained about the choice of custard creams as full time biscuits….

 

[ttg17]

I’ll get on my soapbox about this all day long: I don’t think it’s the handball law exactly that needs to change, more the consequence of a handball in the box. With the advent of VAR in particular, the issue has really come to the fore: you see it less at our level, and to be fair at Premier League levels these days, but the forensicness with which handballs are now analysed stems from the problem that an accidental and inconsequential collision of ball with hand in the box currently leads to a disproportionately large opportunity to score a goal (a penalty). The objectivity with which it can now be assessed with VAR (ie did the ball hit the hand or not?) now leads to ridiculous consequences. I don’t think people hve a problem with ball hitting hand being a foul, more that something so minor can have such massive consequences on a game.

Change the rule to accidental handballs leading to indirect free kicks if they occur in the box. For me this completely solves the problem. Ideally, neither MacGuane’s nor Wycombe’s indiscretions in these two incidents should, realistically, lead to a penalty. I don’t think anyone would complain if both incidents were penalised with IFKs. This also takes pressure of referees having to gauge genuinely impossible subjective judgments in a split second and with likely imperfect view of the incident.

Deliberate handballs (Suarez v Ghana) should obviously still result in a penalty (and I suppose this is where an element of subjectivity still creeps in). But for incidents like Saturday, and Mullins v Northampton at home in 2016 (yes I’m still holding that grudge), you could still acknowledge the disruption of the other team’s attack without giving them such an unjust opportunity to score.

I genuinely cannot see any argument against this.

 

[Eric Blair]

complained about the choice of custard creams as full time biscuits….

That’s the hill I would die on

 

[Marked Ox]

complained about the choice of custard creams as full time biscuits….

If he'd lobbed a full packet then he'd have probably have got a standing ovation!

 

[bashamwonderland]

With the benefit of hindsight I think he did well.

 

[m]

He tried his best and that's all that matters.

 

[werthersoriginal]

I’ll get on my soapbox about this all day long: I don’t think it’s the handball law exactly that needs to change, more the consequence of a handball in the box. With the advent of VAR in particular, the issue has really come to the fore: you see it less at our level, and to be fair at Premier League levels these days, but the forensicness with which handballs are now analysed stems from the problem that an accidental and inconsequential collision of ball with hand in the box currently leads to a disproportionately large opportunity to score a goal (a penalty). The objectivity with which it can now be assessed with VAR (ie did the ball hit the hand or not?) now leads to ridiculous consequences. I don’t think people hve a problem with ball hitting hand being a foul, more that something so minor can have such massive consequences on a game.

Change the rule to accidental handballs leading to indirect free kicks if they occur in the box. For me this completely solves the problem. Ideally, neither MacGuane’s nor Wycombe’s indiscretions in these two incidents should, realistically, lead to a penalty. I don’t think anyone would complain if both incidents were penalised with IFKs. This also takes pressure of referees having to gauge genuinely impossible subjective judgments in a split second and with likely imperfect view of the incident.

Deliberate handballs (Suarez v Ghana) should obviously still result in a penalty (and I suppose this is where an element of subjectivity still creeps in). But for incidents like Saturday, and Mullins v Northampton at home in 2016 (yes I’m still holding that grudge), you could still acknowledge the disruption of the other team’s attack without giving them such an unjust opportunity to score.

I genuinely cannot see any argument against this.

Yes, I very much agree. Penalties are too much of a reward. I’d restrict them to obviously deliberate handballs and professional fouls. There will always be some subjectivity, it’s a sport and entertainment rather than a science.

 

[tonyw]

........ and another time when Mr Stockbridge reffed one of our games was Lincoln away in 2021/22 when he sent off Herbie Kane. It was a 50:50 crunching tackle, I'm sure someone with better IT skills than me can dig up the video of it. If I remember rightly at the time it seemed a bit iffy.

To be fair, I don't think this one (about 1:30 or so) was one of the worst of Stockbridge's abberrations. It was a bit of a horror tackle......

 

[Manorlounger]

complained about the choice of custard creams as full time biscuits….

That’s the hill I would die on

If he'd lobbed a full packet then he'd have probably have got a standing ovation!

I can only take so much when it comes to talk of biscuits.
Now you're telling me that the management and officials get biscuits!!!!!!

 

[tonto]

Of all the decisions the not playing the advantage was the worst. Scandalous was like he had to stop us from scoring a second goal by any means. No wonder even Liam lost it when he gifted them two goals afterwards.

 

[Madox80]

I think that refs need to come and and explain themselves after a match where in the situation on Saturday his decision making had a direct impact on the result of the game.

Play the advantage and he gives us the penalty in the first half and we go in 3 up at half time and the game changes.

The two handball penalty incidents don't happen often and for 2 identical incidents to happen in the same game is somewhat unique I'd say. From my point of view and I can't for the life of me see any reasoning as to why the Oxford one wasn't given. Clear handball, ref had as good a view as he could get. He either gives both or doesn't give them both.

I'm baffled by some of the referees we've had this season and something needs to change