The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
People talk-about bringing in video-replays to the game, and other hi-tech forms of technology to help "assist" the referees in doing their jobs WELL... But is that really gonna help?
We all know that none of the governing-bodies seems to think it's such a good idea, as it will "disrupt the fluency of the game" (or something... - which basically means they cannot be bothered to spend the time, effort and money), but should we really be "helping" the ref's...?
If you ask me, they need to be replaced!
Being a referee isn't just about making the right descisions.
They need to be in full-control of a game; no matter how-big or how-small.
And, looking at the big talking-point from the end of yesterday's Premiership clash at Old Trafford, I just didn't see either the referee or his officials working together to do their job.
By all means, some good descisions were made (for once!).
Patrick Vieira was rightfully sent-off for the clear intent within his retaliation, and Martin Keown, rightfully, had nothing to complain about, as he KNEW it was a penalty, as soon as Diego Forlan went down.
But just look at how long those "brawls" went on for.
When Vieira was finally red-carded, we lost a good 3-or-4 minutes of the game that could've proved vital in a potential 3-points for either side - and he didn't even seem to add them on again to the initial 90 minutes (3 minutes of stoppage-time... what a joke - especially when we were already well-into the first-one as the board went up!)
The referee had no control over the 22 players on the pitch, and so the match - a fixture which 'always' lives-up to its expectations - was ruined and cut-short by a lack of control and responsibillity.
He's got the authority to remove any "troublemakers" from the field-of-play; so what was stopping him from doing it??
That's right - absolutely nothing, except himself!
Perhaps we could've seen a better end to the game, had players like Ashley Cole and Lauren been sent beyond the sidelines earlier (if only in a 5-minute "sin-bin" action, even)?
And then there was that penalty...
Like I said earlier, the referee got the descision spot-on.
It was a penalty, but again, we saw a lack of "consistency" in the way they 'control' these situations, with regards to the new "crack-down" of goalkeepers sticking to their lines when the kick is taken.
It was the Michael Owen one in Chelsea's opening-game of the season that started it all. Carlo Cudicini was judged to have come too-far-forward from his line as Owen fired wide, and so they decided to give him a second-try. And he scored.
Look at Jens Lehmann's positioning as van Nistelrooy strikes the ball, and you can clearly see he comes off his line - twice-as-far as Cudicini did against Liverpool, infact - yet the Dutchman's miss stood, and, for some reason, it was decided that they would take a break for this game; one of the biggest fixtures of the entire season-long calender, infact...
What I don't understand though, is WHY.
What makes that Michael Owen penalty any different to this one?
If anything, this one warranted more of a retake for the fact that Lehmann clearly came much further-forward than Chelsea's Italian 'keeper, and even Paul Robinson for Leeds, only a day before it.
No, van Nistelrooy didn't score it, and Lehmann was still quite some way away from getting the ball... But the exact same thing can be said for that similar incident, back on Day 1.
Inconcistency. No balls. Not good enough for the job.
That just about sums-up the standard of top-level refereeing for me, today.
Something needs to be done - and it needs to be done NOW.
I just don't know if referees are really the answer, when they cannot even do the job now... Perhaps we should find some kind of 'replacement' - and fast?
We all know that none of the governing-bodies seems to think it's such a good idea, as it will "disrupt the fluency of the game" (or something... - which basically means they cannot be bothered to spend the time, effort and money), but should we really be "helping" the ref's...?
If you ask me, they need to be replaced!
Being a referee isn't just about making the right descisions.
They need to be in full-control of a game; no matter how-big or how-small.
And, looking at the big talking-point from the end of yesterday's Premiership clash at Old Trafford, I just didn't see either the referee or his officials working together to do their job.
By all means, some good descisions were made (for once!).
Patrick Vieira was rightfully sent-off for the clear intent within his retaliation, and Martin Keown, rightfully, had nothing to complain about, as he KNEW it was a penalty, as soon as Diego Forlan went down.
But just look at how long those "brawls" went on for.
When Vieira was finally red-carded, we lost a good 3-or-4 minutes of the game that could've proved vital in a potential 3-points for either side - and he didn't even seem to add them on again to the initial 90 minutes (3 minutes of stoppage-time... what a joke - especially when we were already well-into the first-one as the board went up!)
The referee had no control over the 22 players on the pitch, and so the match - a fixture which 'always' lives-up to its expectations - was ruined and cut-short by a lack of control and responsibillity.
He's got the authority to remove any "troublemakers" from the field-of-play; so what was stopping him from doing it??
That's right - absolutely nothing, except himself!
Perhaps we could've seen a better end to the game, had players like Ashley Cole and Lauren been sent beyond the sidelines earlier (if only in a 5-minute "sin-bin" action, even)?
And then there was that penalty...
Like I said earlier, the referee got the descision spot-on.
It was a penalty, but again, we saw a lack of "consistency" in the way they 'control' these situations, with regards to the new "crack-down" of goalkeepers sticking to their lines when the kick is taken.
It was the Michael Owen one in Chelsea's opening-game of the season that started it all. Carlo Cudicini was judged to have come too-far-forward from his line as Owen fired wide, and so they decided to give him a second-try. And he scored.
Look at Jens Lehmann's positioning as van Nistelrooy strikes the ball, and you can clearly see he comes off his line - twice-as-far as Cudicini did against Liverpool, infact - yet the Dutchman's miss stood, and, for some reason, it was decided that they would take a break for this game; one of the biggest fixtures of the entire season-long calender, infact...
What I don't understand though, is WHY.
What makes that Michael Owen penalty any different to this one?
If anything, this one warranted more of a retake for the fact that Lehmann clearly came much further-forward than Chelsea's Italian 'keeper, and even Paul Robinson for Leeds, only a day before it.
No, van Nistelrooy didn't score it, and Lehmann was still quite some way away from getting the ball... But the exact same thing can be said for that similar incident, back on Day 1.
Inconcistency. No balls. Not good enough for the job.
That just about sums-up the standard of top-level refereeing for me, today.
Something needs to be done - and it needs to be done NOW.
I just don't know if referees are really the answer, when they cannot even do the job now... Perhaps we should find some kind of 'replacement' - and fast?
Weren't the Liverpool and Leeds penalty retakes down to the linesman initially and not the referees?
If we critisize the refs (and we do) we must also look at the men on the sidelines that are supposed to support them.
I don't believe that the video ref we have in Rugby League would work in the game of Football, sometimes the video ref takes an age to make a decision and because of the sky coverage every angle that the video ref looks at can also be seen on a big screen by all the fans. It wouldn't work well like this in Football at all.
They really cannot truely control the inconsistancies in the referees either unless a much harder line is taken from the first whistle by every referee in every match.
Sinbinning players to allow them a cooling off period is a good idea. Possibly another idea would be to have more than 1 official referee on the pitch at the same time. These ideas must have been discussed by the governing bodies and thrown out though as both ideas seem logical and work in other sports. There is no reason why they cannot work in Football.
If we critisize the refs (and we do) we must also look at the men on the sidelines that are supposed to support them.
I don't believe that the video ref we have in Rugby League would work in the game of Football, sometimes the video ref takes an age to make a decision and because of the sky coverage every angle that the video ref looks at can also be seen on a big screen by all the fans. It wouldn't work well like this in Football at all.
They really cannot truely control the inconsistancies in the referees either unless a much harder line is taken from the first whistle by every referee in every match.
Sinbinning players to allow them a cooling off period is a good idea. Possibly another idea would be to have more than 1 official referee on the pitch at the same time. These ideas must have been discussed by the governing bodies and thrown out though as both ideas seem logical and work in other sports. There is no reason why they cannot work in Football.
My neighbour is an international rugby ref who has done a few of the video replay ref work for some big international matches and in his view it works easily.
It could be easily included to quickly work out if it was a goal/bad foul/ dive etc.
It should be part of the game, not for every single decision of offside, fouls, goals etc but for only when it really is required.
Standard of refs is hard to decide on as it changes in every single game. Even the best refs have off days. I personally think that video help to aide refs during a game for the tricky decision would make the game better.
It could be easily included to quickly work out if it was a goal/bad foul/ dive etc.
It should be part of the game, not for every single decision of offside, fouls, goals etc but for only when it really is required.
Standard of refs is hard to decide on as it changes in every single game. Even the best refs have off days. I personally think that video help to aide refs during a game for the tricky decision would make the game better.
People talk-about bringing in video-replays to the game, and other hi-tech forms of technology to help "assist" the referees in doing their jobs WELL... But is that really gonna help?
We all know that none of the governing-bodies seems to think it's such a good idea, as it will "disrupt the fluency of the game" (or something... - which basically means they cannot be bothered to spend the time, effort and money), but should we really be "helping" the ref's...?
If you ask me, they need to be replaced!
Being a referee isn't just about making the right descisions.
They need to be in full-control of a game; no matter how-big or how-small.
And, looking at the big talking-point from the end of yesterday's Premiership clash at Old Trafford, I just didn't see either the referee or his officials working together to do their job.
By all means, some good descisions were made (for once!).
Patrick Vieira was rightfully sent-off for the clear intent within his retaliation, and Martin Keown, rightfully, had nothing to complain about, as he KNEW it was a penalty, as soon as Diego Forlan went down.
But just look at how long those "brawls" went on for.
When Vieira was finally red-carded, we lost a good 3-or-4 minutes of the game that could've proved vital in a potential 3-points for either side - and he didn't even seem to add them on again to the initial 90 minutes (3 minutes of stoppage-time... what a joke - especially when we were already well-into the first-one as the board went up!)
The referee had no control over the 22 players on the pitch, and so the match - a fixture which 'always' lives-up to its expectations - was ruined and cut-short by a lack of control and responsibillity.
He's got the authority to remove any "troublemakers" from the field-of-play; so what was stopping him from doing it??
That's right - absolutely nothing, except himself!
Perhaps we could've seen a better end to the game, had players like Ashley Cole and Lauren been sent beyond the sidelines earlier (if only in a 5-minute "sin-bin" action, even)?
And then there was that penalty...
Like I said earlier, the referee got the descision spot-on.
It was a penalty, but again, we saw a lack of "consistency" in the way they 'control' these situations, with regards to the new "crack-down" of goalkeepers sticking to their lines when the kick is taken.
It was the Michael Owen one in Chelsea's opening-game of the season that started it all. Carlo Cudicini was judged to have come too-far-forward from his line as Owen fired wide, and so they decided to give him a second-try. And he scored.
Look at Jens Lehmann's positioning as van Nistelrooy strikes the ball, and you can clearly see he comes off his line - twice-as-far as Cudicini did against Liverpool, infact - yet the Dutchman's miss stood, and, for some reason, it was decided that they would take a break for this game; one of the biggest fixtures of the entire season-long calender, infact...
What I don't understand though, is WHY.
What makes that Michael Owen penalty any different to this one?
If anything, this one warranted more of a retake for the fact that Lehmann clearly came much further-forward than Chelsea's Italian 'keeper, and even Paul Robinson for Leeds, only a day before it.
No, van Nistelrooy didn't score it, and Lehmann was still quite some way away from getting the ball... But the exact same thing can be said for that similar incident, back on Day 1.
Inconcistency. No balls. Not good enough for the job.
That just about sums-up the standard of top-level refereeing for me, today.
Something needs to be done - and it needs to be done NOW.
I just don't know if referees are really the answer, when they cannot even do the job now... Perhaps we should find some kind of 'replacement' - and fast?
We all know that none of the governing-bodies seems to think it's such a good idea, as it will "disrupt the fluency of the game" (or something... - which basically means they cannot be bothered to spend the time, effort and money), but should we really be "helping" the ref's...?
If you ask me, they need to be replaced!
Being a referee isn't just about making the right descisions.
They need to be in full-control of a game; no matter how-big or how-small.
And, looking at the big talking-point from the end of yesterday's Premiership clash at Old Trafford, I just didn't see either the referee or his officials working together to do their job.
By all means, some good descisions were made (for once!).
Patrick Vieira was rightfully sent-off for the clear intent within his retaliation, and Martin Keown, rightfully, had nothing to complain about, as he KNEW it was a penalty, as soon as Diego Forlan went down.
But just look at how long those "brawls" went on for.
When Vieira was finally red-carded, we lost a good 3-or-4 minutes of the game that could've proved vital in a potential 3-points for either side - and he didn't even seem to add them on again to the initial 90 minutes (3 minutes of stoppage-time... what a joke - especially when we were already well-into the first-one as the board went up!)
The referee had no control over the 22 players on the pitch, and so the match - a fixture which 'always' lives-up to its expectations - was ruined and cut-short by a lack of control and responsibillity.
He's got the authority to remove any "troublemakers" from the field-of-play; so what was stopping him from doing it??
That's right - absolutely nothing, except himself!
Perhaps we could've seen a better end to the game, had players like Ashley Cole and Lauren been sent beyond the sidelines earlier (if only in a 5-minute "sin-bin" action, even)?
And then there was that penalty...
Like I said earlier, the referee got the descision spot-on.
It was a penalty, but again, we saw a lack of "consistency" in the way they 'control' these situations, with regards to the new "crack-down" of goalkeepers sticking to their lines when the kick is taken.
It was the Michael Owen one in Chelsea's opening-game of the season that started it all. Carlo Cudicini was judged to have come too-far-forward from his line as Owen fired wide, and so they decided to give him a second-try. And he scored.
Look at Jens Lehmann's positioning as van Nistelrooy strikes the ball, and you can clearly see he comes off his line - twice-as-far as Cudicini did against Liverpool, infact - yet the Dutchman's miss stood, and, for some reason, it was decided that they would take a break for this game; one of the biggest fixtures of the entire season-long calender, infact...
What I don't understand though, is WHY.
What makes that Michael Owen penalty any different to this one?
If anything, this one warranted more of a retake for the fact that Lehmann clearly came much further-forward than Chelsea's Italian 'keeper, and even Paul Robinson for Leeds, only a day before it.
No, van Nistelrooy didn't score it, and Lehmann was still quite some way away from getting the ball... But the exact same thing can be said for that similar incident, back on Day 1.
Inconcistency. No balls. Not good enough for the job.
That just about sums-up the standard of top-level refereeing for me, today.
Something needs to be done - and it needs to be done NOW.
I just don't know if referees are really the answer, when they cannot even do the job now... Perhaps we should find some kind of 'replacement' - and fast?