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)

 

[holdsteady]

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

He turned up and he was on time, the only two things that really matter he excelled at.

 

[Yellow River]

As others have said the two handballs were so similar it then makes the decision to give a penalty for one and then not the other completely inconsistent and baffling. Either give a penalty for both or neither.

The failure to play advantage and give Harris a clear goal scoring opportunity is rubbish refereeing.

Those two incidents above clearly impact the game in a negative way for OUFC, 2-0 at that stage of the match is a much bigger hill for Wycombe to climb.


For me the Beadle penalty is 50/50, if it was clear in the referee‘s mind, why didn’t he caution our young goalkeeper ?

Our penalty given for a foul on Harris was extremely soft, I really do believe the referee was ‘evening up‘ by giving that decision.

Interesting to note that Liam Manning will be in the dug-out tonight at Lincoln despite being shown a red card by Stockbridge.

 

[bazzer9461]

Don’t know if This has been mentioned but Mcguanes handball came from behind him which meant he would r have seen the ball whereas the Wycombe player had the ball hit his arm whilst the ball was coming to him so could have had a chance to move his arm as he would have seen it

 

[Orkney Islands Yellow]

 

[Foley]

That gives the referee a decision to make - did he mean it? You don't get that leniency on, say, a tackle - you trip your opponent, it doesn't matter if you meant to or not, it's a foul.

If the ball hits a hand and stops or changes direction, give it as handball - no ifs or buts, free kick or penalty. Sure there will be some harsh one's but at least everyone knows the rule and consistency is all but guaranteed.

The trouble is that for an accidental handball, the 90% chance of a goal is not the right punishment.
Maybe change to a free kick rather than a penalty ( and reserve penalties when a player is deliberately trying to stop a shot on goal?)

 

[Foley]

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.

I said something similar and have just read your post.
Totally agree. At the moment there is no way that some of these ridiculous handball decisions deserve a penalty ( and in all likelihood, a goal)

 

[windmill]

That’s a big call, yesterday comfortably makes the top 10 in my 52 years but there’s been some truly horrific refereeing performances. Hard to say where this one ranks as in all time, other than to say it’s right up there.

Nothing new here. It has been going on for decades. For those of you who were watching in the seventies.....remember John Hunting. Such arrogance. The clown Roger Kirkpatrick. Gave a goal when the ball hit the side netting. And as for Clive Thomas.....well, words fail me.

 

[Sarge]

Nothing new here. It has been going on for decades. For those of you who were watching in the seventies.....remember John Hunting. Such arrogance. The clown Roger Kirkpatrick. Gave a goal when the ball hit the side netting. And as for Clive Thomas.....well, words fail me.

Thomas the book ,as he was known , it was always, always about him - if memory serves he refereed An Oxford v Newcastle cup game, with Keegan playing for them, the permed n brut smelling one didn't get a sniff all game, until Thomas sent off Garry Briggs late on...... also if memory serves, Thomas was refereeing a match in the World cup finals, Brazil 'scored' the winner late late on, except they didn't, Thomas blew his whistle before the ball crossed the line, therefore it didn't count- he didn't get another World Cup finals game to referee/ take centre stage in after that.

 

[ttg17]

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.

I’m actually quite firmly against this. Two main reasons:

1) We know what the referee would say anyway. Someone did a really good post higher up this thread rationalising Saturday’s decisions, and I imagine it’s basically verbatim what a referee would say. ‘I felt that Maguane moved his arm towards the ball, with the deliberate action meaning I had to give a penalty, while I felt the Wycombe player slid into it, meaning no penalty needed to be awarded.’ Similarly, taking the Port Vale game, for the Leigh first yellow, he would say, I felt the oxford player used excessive force, meaning a yellow card was appropriate. As much as it’s fun/cathartic to imagine that certain referees ‘have it in’ for OUFC, in reality they really don’t - they’re just using their judgment to assess subjective decisions. We all know this, so instigating the pantomime of making them say it just seems a waste of everyone’s time to me.

2) What would it actually help? The absolute best you’d get would be a hands up, ‘sorry - I wasn’t up with play and missed that - it was an error and I apologise.’ What good would that do? If you lost a game to a dodgy pen, you’d still have lost the game. The contrition of the referee wouldn’t be any consolation at all. Look at the premier league - whenever you get an apology from PGMOL (or whatever the relevant body is) to a team for a VAR mistake, the reaction from fans, players and coaches is literally never ‘oh well - we all make mistakes and it’s a tough job - thanks though!’ It just winds people up even more.

The only people to whom they actually need to justify their decisions, and who have the power to subsequently reward or demote referees based on their performance, are their bosses. And they do that anyway with match reports after every game. So while it’s frustrating, I’m not sure more communication from refs after the fact would actually do anything positive.

 

[bazzer9461]

I’m actually quite firmly against this. Two main reasons:

1) We know what the referee would say anyway. Someone did a really good post higher up this thread rationalising Saturday’s decisions, and I imagine it’s basically verbatim what a referee would say. ‘I felt that Maguane moved his arm towards the ball, with the deliberate action meaning I had to give a penalty, while I felt the Wycombe player slid into it, meaning no penalty needed to be awarded.’ Similarly, taking the Port Vale game, for the Leigh first yellow, he would say, I felt the oxford player used excessive force, meaning a yellow card was appropriate. As much as it’s fun/cathartic to imagine that certain referees ‘have it in’ for OUFC, in reality they really don’t - they’re just using their judgment to assess subjective decisions. We all know this, so instigating the pantomime of making them say it just seems a waste of everyone’s time to me.

2) What would it actually help? The absolute best you’d get would be a hands up, ‘sorry - I wasn’t up with play and missed that - it was an error and I apologise.’ What good would that do? If you lost a game to a dodgy pen, you’d still have lost the game. The contrition of the referee wouldn’t be any consolation at all. Look at the premier league - whenever you get an apology from PGMOL (or whatever the relevant body is) to a team for a VAR mistake, the reaction from fans, players and coaches is literally never ‘oh well - we all make mistakes and it’s a tough job - thanks though!’ It just winds people up even more.

The only people to whom they actually need to justify their decisions, and who have the power to subsequently reward or demote referees based on their performance, are their bosses. And they do that anyway with match reports after every game. So while it’s frustrating, I’m not sure more communication from refs after the fact would actually do anything positive.

It would be nice if there could be a ref for each league analysing the decisions for us to get their prospective maybe if a team requests the analysis like Mark Halsey does in one of the papers.

 

[Madox80]

I’m actually quite firmly against this. Two main reasons:

1) We know what the referee would say anyway. Someone did a really good post higher up this thread rationalising Saturday’s decisions, and I imagine it’s basically verbatim what a referee would say. ‘I felt that Maguane moved his arm towards the ball, with the deliberate action meaning I had to give a penalty, while I felt the Wycombe player slid into it, meaning no penalty needed to be awarded.’ Similarly, taking the Port Vale game, for the Leigh first yellow, he would say, I felt the oxford player used excessive force, meaning a yellow card was appropriate. As much as it’s fun/cathartic to imagine that certain referees ‘have it in’ for OUFC, in reality they really don’t - they’re just using their judgment to assess subjective decisions. We all know this, so instigating the pantomime of making them say it just seems a waste of everyone’s time to me.

2) What would it actually help? The absolute best you’d get would be a hands up, ‘sorry - I wasn’t up with play and missed that - it was an error and I apologise.’ What good would that do? If you lost a game to a dodgy pen, you’d still have lost the game. The contrition of the referee wouldn’t be any consolation at all. Look at the premier league - whenever you get an apology from PGMOL (or whatever the relevant body is) to a team for a VAR mistake, the reaction from fans, players and coaches is literally never ‘oh well - we all make mistakes and it’s a tough job - thanks though!’ It just winds people up even more.

The only people to whom they actually need to justify their decisions, and who have the power to subsequently reward or demote referees based on their performance, are their bosses. And they do that anyway with match reports after every game. So while it’s frustrating, I’m not sure more communication from refs after the fact would actually do anything positive.

The only reason I say that refs should come out and explain things after a game is because something needs to change, refs are poor not just in Oxford games. Actually thinking about it, it's not just the ref is it, it's the other 3 officials as well.

My point being is if the standard is going to improve then how are you going to it? If a referee has to come out and talk to the media after a game then it might just make them think a bit more about what decisions they do or don't make.

It just really frustrates me the amount of times we come away from a game that should have been a good game to watch, but we come away talking about the ref making decisions.

I get the mistakes will be made during a game, but when a ref makes 3 or 4 mistakes in 1 match that directly impact the outcome of the match then something needs to happen.... certainly with this ref it's not the first time he has made a decision that was wrong, and a big one at that, in a game involving Oxford.