Is the standard of referees declining?

[Frankie 8,136]

Calscot discusses exactly why recent attention placed on our referees is unfair and unhelpful.

 

Is the standard of referees declining?

 

With the latest string of refereeing controversies being analysed to death, the main countering argument to one club�s paranoia that the establishment is out to get them, is that any decisions against them later shown to be wrong or "soft", are just a result of refereeing standards lowering over the years.

 

This theory is supported by the evidence referees make just as many mistakes favouring Celtic as well as against their rivals who they allege are given too many favourable decisions.

 

While this shows Celticââ?¬â?¢s delusions of persecution are obviously ludicrous, and putting aside any ââ?¬Å?white liesââ?¬Â for another discussion, I doubt there is actually much evidence that referees are any less able today than they were in the past.

 

However, today there IS far more scrutiny with multiple cameras, slow motion, freeze frame and other modern technology, combined with the media changing from respectful reporting to a position of obsessing with highlighting and sensationalising every key decision as a new form of entertainment to increase ratings or circulation and so engage a bigger audience.

 

There is plenty of evidence that refereeing is now a far more difficult job than it used to be with a myriad of new rules and edicts; a much faster game with fitter, faster players; no pass backs and multiple balls to get the play going immediately; combined with a far more cynical attitude by an increasing number of players with absolutely no sportsmanship or integrity. Referees are given far more education and training and have tougher qualification standards. They have to be fitter, more knowledgeable and give more consistent results while having their performance judged in every game.

 

It's incredible that the club with the least integrity from fan to player to manager to chairman has the gall to question the honesty of the humble referee who is trying his best to do what is now approaching an impossible job.

 

It's easy to focus on single decisions with a myriad of slow motion replays from a multitude of angles but that is not even close to how a referee views a game - literally or figuratively. He has one pair of eyes and has to see the game at full speed, from one angle and in full flow, without knowing when or what the incidents will be. He also has to use psychology in his decisions to control a game with 22 competitive men who usually cannot control themselves or their emotions and who often cheat or attempt to hurt the opposition given the opportunity.

 

Sometimes a decision for a booking, sending off or abstaining from a card at all can be based on the game as a whole, and what reaction it will bring from the players to calm the match down and make them play more like the professional sportsmen they purport to be. Looking at such a decision in isolation is like analysing a line from a speech without any context.

 

If referees are just "sh!te" then aren�t we all? Who has not been convinced about an incident when watching live and then changed your mind when you see the replay or stop motion? Who has missed an incident in the game completely because you were watching the ball? The foul on Papac by Stokes for example? The main cameraman missed it...

 

The referee has to see everything that is happening - including right after he has to duck to avoid being hit by the ball. Sometimes things look different at full speed or from different angles and the referee has to make a decision instantly, first time. It's an incredibly difficult thing to do and I very much doubt the likes of Neil Lennon, Charlie Nicolas or anyone in the studio or press box could do a job which stands up to a similar technological scrutiny by a top referee.

 

Even with the technology, opinions are divided and many of these "wrong" decisions are not clear cut. I still think it was technically a penalty for Broadfoot (even if not the most cut and dried) and see them given all the time - and softer ones have been given to Celtic. Seen at full speed and only once, there is no reason why a ref wouldn't give it, and to say he was incompetent is completely disingenuous. You can only give a penalty or wave play on, there is no in between, so when is a ââ?¬Å?softââ?¬Â decision correct or not?

 

At worst a soft penalty is when there is enough of an infringement to suggest foul play but also some doubt as to whether it was enough for a penalty to be given. On these occasions, the referee has to make an instant call and use his interpretation of the rules and what he saw. By definition there is no real right and wrong for these decisions and we have to play the game with respect for referee or we have no game.

 

What has happened now is that Celtic and their lackeys in the press have asserted adamantly and often enough that the referee was wrong and the decision�s reputation as an injustice is now being taken for granted and stated as fact.

 

The contrast for the past is that the referees� decisions were considered final and controversial decisions just stimulated debate.

 

I feel it is a crime to create a witch-hunt of a referee by using technology he has no access to during the game - it's like lambasting someone for not seeing things perfectly from a distance when you are using a camera with a massive zoom lens.

 

The only way to balance this up is to give the referees the same tools that are being used to judge their competence.

 

As that will take a while to come to pass due to those prevaricating at FIFA and UEFA, at home it's imperative we resurrect the proper respect towards referees and protect them from undue and unfair pressure on them before, during and after the game, by heavily punishing clubs systematically involved in this practice, before all our top whistlers resign.

 

We have to avert a situation which is currently threatening the integrity of our league.

[ascender 352]

Great post Calscot. I think the problem is exacerbated by the fact we play in Scotland which from a footballing perspective is a very small-minded and parochial place. The dominance of a league by a couple of teams is nothing unique, but those two teams do carry a massive amount of baggage with them form both a football and social perspective. Hence its very difficult to have anything approaching a reasoned and sensible debate with the majority.

 

There needs to be some sort of transparent and consistent review of matches within 24/48 hours of them finishing, by an "independent" review panel, plus some sort of feedback from referees. That's the only way the situation will improve and all teams will be seen to be getting treated equally.

 

The SFA and SPL must do something to reign Celtic in though. They're behaving irresponsibly and recklessly imo. Also, they appear to be free to question decisions very publicly and suggest there's some sort of conspiracy or corruption going on without any organisation reminding them of their responsibilities as a large club. Its incredulous that they can do this without any hint of irony at the decisions they have had in their favour in recent times.

 

Of course some fans will still believe that the big teams get the big decisions, but that really is a belief among fans of so-called smaller clubs in every country around the world. The issue we have is that some clubs are now using this to hint at something much more sinister and in fact use it to deflect attention from their own inefficiencies on the pitch while playing up to their deluded fans who appear to be lapping it up.

 

 

Regarding the standard of refs, its ridiculous that they're judged on decisions which they've made in real time without the benefit of a single replay when you have pundits analysing replays from all angles at all speeds. FWIW I think the standard of refs in Scotland does appear to be low at the moment, but their job really isn't being helped by clubs and players at all.

Edited November 4, 2010 by ascender

[ian1964 10,389]

The managers can do lot more IMO,they can insist that the players stay out of the faces of refs or they will be fined,I don't mean claiming for decisions but not growling in their faces,unfortunately the WLB wants his players to be in the faces of the refs at every opportunity and this,again IMO,is contributing to some mistakes by the refs