Regular refs
The Only 8 Men To Have Refereed At Three World Cup Finals
1. Jean Langenus (Belgium, 1930–1938)
2. Ivan Eklind (Sweden, 1934–1950)
3. Benjamin Griffiths (Wales, 1950–1958)
4. Arthur Ellis (England, 1950–1958)
5. Juan Gardeazábal (Spain, 1958–1966)
6. Jamal Al Sharif (Syria, 1986–1994)
7. Joël Quiniou (France, 1986–1994)
8. Ali Mohamed Bujsaim (United Arab Emirates, 1994–2002)
Showing posts with label referee. Show all posts
Showing posts with label referee. Show all posts
Friday, 28 May 2010
Tuesday, 25 September 2007
Give the referees a penalty
I dunno. Why is it every weekend the whole of the civilised world shakes its head as one at the good, bad or indifferent refereeing decisions witnessed in the Premier League? I'm not one to moan - really I'm not. I realise better than anyone that refereeing is a difficult job and that the errors of judgement they make are merely the actions of an ordinary human being, but things have now reached a critical point.
Last weekend I started to lose count of the many and varied instances of what I thought was bad refereeing. In the Midlesbrough v Sunderland game, there were three handballs that could have resulted in free kicks in dangerous areas of the pitch which went undetected. All of them were more than just 'ball to hand' situations and all would have seen a free kick given at a different ground on a different day.
The Man. United v Chelsea game was liberally littered with questionable refereeing anomalies. For a start, official Mike Dean decided to give Mikkel Jon Obi a red card for a tackle which, though crude, was worthy of at most a yellow card. He then decided that two minutes of stoppage time would be played at the end of the first half, but having allowed the injury time period to inexplicably last to a third minute, Carlos Tevez was able to score to put the home team ahead 1-0.
It's one thing for a referee or his assistants to make isolated misjudgements, but when several occur in one match to say nothing of several other matches, you have to start believing that something's wrong somewhere.
So here's what I think. In order to root out the bad referees, we should create a rating system that gives penalty points for poor performances. At the end of the month, the three referees with the most penalty points drop down a level (i.e. Premier League to Championship) and someone from the level below with the least number of penalty points comes up to replace them.
And how would points be awarded? Well here's what I've come up with so far using a scale of 1 for insignificant decisions to 10 for hideous ones...
Incorrect awarding of a red/yellow card: 7 points
Too many/too few red/yellow cards awarded: 6 points
Bad offside decision: 7 points
Poor handball decision: 7 points
Poor timekeeping: 5 points
Failing to realise a player has been booked three times: 10 points
I'm sure there are more we can think of prior to sending such a suggestion off to Sepp Blatter. What would you add to the list and how many points would you allocate for each item?
Last weekend I started to lose count of the many and varied instances of what I thought was bad refereeing. In the Midlesbrough v Sunderland game, there were three handballs that could have resulted in free kicks in dangerous areas of the pitch which went undetected. All of them were more than just 'ball to hand' situations and all would have seen a free kick given at a different ground on a different day.
The Man. United v Chelsea game was liberally littered with questionable refereeing anomalies. For a start, official Mike Dean decided to give Mikkel Jon Obi a red card for a tackle which, though crude, was worthy of at most a yellow card. He then decided that two minutes of stoppage time would be played at the end of the first half, but having allowed the injury time period to inexplicably last to a third minute, Carlos Tevez was able to score to put the home team ahead 1-0.
It's one thing for a referee or his assistants to make isolated misjudgements, but when several occur in one match to say nothing of several other matches, you have to start believing that something's wrong somewhere.
So here's what I think. In order to root out the bad referees, we should create a rating system that gives penalty points for poor performances. At the end of the month, the three referees with the most penalty points drop down a level (i.e. Premier League to Championship) and someone from the level below with the least number of penalty points comes up to replace them.
And how would points be awarded? Well here's what I've come up with so far using a scale of 1 for insignificant decisions to 10 for hideous ones...
Incorrect awarding of a red/yellow card: 7 points
Too many/too few red/yellow cards awarded: 6 points
Bad offside decision: 7 points
Poor handball decision: 7 points
Poor timekeeping: 5 points
Failing to realise a player has been booked three times: 10 points
I'm sure there are more we can think of prior to sending such a suggestion off to Sepp Blatter. What would you add to the list and how many points would you allocate for each item?
Monday, 5 February 2007
Video Nasty
A postscript to the article of November 22nd 2006. Back then, we spoke of the unending criticism of referees and the dissatisfaction that club managers have of their performances. One of the sub-topics that emanated from that discussion was the use of video replays and how they could be used to assist or even (dare we say it) replace the officials.
It's been used in Rugby and Cricket matches the world over for some time and appears to work well in a number of situations, so why not Football?
The answer, perhaps, lies in an incident that occurred during the England v Scotland Six Nations match at Twickenham a couple of days ago. Jonny Wilkinson, back in the side for the first time since his heroics helped win the 2003 Rugby World Cup Final, was having a wonderful game, kicking point after point to put Scotland under early pressure.
To top off a wonderful performance, Wilkinson received the ball and began a long speedy run down the wing towards the corner of the pitch. His moment of glory looked secure as he dived near to the corner flag to plant the ball over the line for a try when a member of the Scottish team dived across to bundle him out of play.
The ball had certainly been put down over the touchline, but had Wilkinson strayed over the sideline first? There was nothing else for it - the video judge had to be called into action to look at the replay and make a decision on the referee's behalf.
The verdict? Try to England. Major celebrations and hysterics ensued in the English section of the crowd, not to mention a healthy slapping of Jonny Wilkinson's back by his team-mates to acknowledge such a fine try.
The thing is, it wasn't a try at all. Despite having clear video footage showing Wilkinson with one foot in contact with the ground on the wrong side of the line when the ball was put down, the Irish video judge still managed to make the wrong decision. It should never have been given, and frankly there was no excuse for making such a bad error of judgement.
All of which goes to show that even the use of video replays to help referees isn't perfect. Perhaps in a game where the human being is imperative to its very existence, surely we can allow for a little human error once in a while?
It's been used in Rugby and Cricket matches the world over for some time and appears to work well in a number of situations, so why not Football?
The answer, perhaps, lies in an incident that occurred during the England v Scotland Six Nations match at Twickenham a couple of days ago. Jonny Wilkinson, back in the side for the first time since his heroics helped win the 2003 Rugby World Cup Final, was having a wonderful game, kicking point after point to put Scotland under early pressure.
To top off a wonderful performance, Wilkinson received the ball and began a long speedy run down the wing towards the corner of the pitch. His moment of glory looked secure as he dived near to the corner flag to plant the ball over the line for a try when a member of the Scottish team dived across to bundle him out of play.
The ball had certainly been put down over the touchline, but had Wilkinson strayed over the sideline first? There was nothing else for it - the video judge had to be called into action to look at the replay and make a decision on the referee's behalf.
The verdict? Try to England. Major celebrations and hysterics ensued in the English section of the crowd, not to mention a healthy slapping of Jonny Wilkinson's back by his team-mates to acknowledge such a fine try.
The thing is, it wasn't a try at all. Despite having clear video footage showing Wilkinson with one foot in contact with the ground on the wrong side of the line when the ball was put down, the Irish video judge still managed to make the wrong decision. It should never have been given, and frankly there was no excuse for making such a bad error of judgement.
All of which goes to show that even the use of video replays to help referees isn't perfect. Perhaps in a game where the human being is imperative to its very existence, surely we can allow for a little human error once in a while?
Tuesday, 21 November 2006
Criticism of Referees: Form an orderly queue...
We seem to be stuck in a perpetual loop where British football's concerned. Every single week we hear from any number of club managers moaning about the quality of refereeing in this country, yet nothing ever seems to get done about it.
Just the other day we had Mark Hughes, manager of Blackburn Rovers, criticising referee Phil Dowd for not giving two penalties that he felt his side deserved against Tottenham. Before that, Watford boss Andy Bothroyd took exception to referee Chris Foy who awarded Portsmouth a last-minute penalty that lead to Harry Redknapp's side taking all three points, and before that Jose Mourinho was questioning Graham Poll's impartiality in matches that involved his Chelsea side. These are just the most recent examples. There are plenty more if you look for them.
The newspaper back pages are regularly littered with stories of coaches and managers outraged at how their team has been wronged by the actions of the referee, but where is all this leading to and what's really going on?
Well for a start, many of the penalty flashpoints are coming about because of players diving in the area - getting an unfair advantage by deception, as it were. One has to ask whether managers are asking their teams to play fairly by not diving? If they were, perhaps we'd see fewer problems of this kind occurring. Football is, after all, a game of skill and has no place for cheating, despite what Diego Maradona would have us believe.
A lot of the time, referees are accused of misjudging offside decisions and handball incidents. These are the sort of things that happen in a game which referees and linesmen can only judge correctly so often. Sometimes they get it wrong and it's always been that way, so why are there now calls for technology to be used to ratify their decisions? It seems that the term 'referees are only human' doesn't cut the mustard these days, but then the media are partially to blame for attitudes changing so dramatically.
Many years ago, a controversial refereeing decision would have brought about, at most, a grumble by the manager affected and possibly a square inch of comment in the sports pages of the Sunday newspapers. Nowadays, managers have a microphone thrust in their face the minute they step off the field at the end of a game and are asked to tell the world what they felt about the preceding ninety minutes at the one time when their emotions are running at their highest. It's therefore hardly surprising that they sometimes come across as being a tad upset.
The tabloid press are also keen to fan the flames of outrage, citing the latest tirades from the merry band of Premiership bosses. Sensationalism, it seems, is what people want to see when they pick up their daily paper. Balanced, well-written journalism that gives an account of events in their true proportions apparently isn't.
The only aspect of the game remaining where technology could be put to good use is where the ball may or may not have crossed the goal line, and that only ever happens once in a blue moon. Even so, it's at least an instance critical enough to warrant an exact scientific judgement, rather than a flawed human one.
The good news is that things might be about to change. Keith Hackett, head of the Premier Game Match Officials Board, is about to put forward a document detailing how the game could benefit from the use of technology to the Premier League. The bad news is that it will only focus on the 'ball crossing the goal-line' scenario, although it's hoped that the report will provide the necessary impetus to look at other aspects of the game in future.
But do we really want the intrusion caused by all this hi-tech proficiency? Former referee David Elleray has voiced his own concerns: "One of the greatest attractions of football over almost any other sport is that it's almost non-stop action. I went to Twickenham the other day to watch quite an exciting rugby game, but it was constantly stopping, not least for video referee decisions."
He may have a point, but will it stop the constant stream of furious criticism from managers week in, week out? For now, perhaps not as changes to the game are unlikely to be applied in the near future, but in the meantime it's the managers themselves that need to address the way they and their team behave and to acknowledge the fact that errors of judgement by match officials are a part of the game. It's always been thus and they know this to be the case before every match their team plays, so a change in attitude could go a long way to ensuring we don't get to read the same vitriolic outpourings for any longer than we have to.
Just the other day we had Mark Hughes, manager of Blackburn Rovers, criticising referee Phil Dowd for not giving two penalties that he felt his side deserved against Tottenham. Before that, Watford boss Andy Bothroyd took exception to referee Chris Foy who awarded Portsmouth a last-minute penalty that lead to Harry Redknapp's side taking all three points, and before that Jose Mourinho was questioning Graham Poll's impartiality in matches that involved his Chelsea side. These are just the most recent examples. There are plenty more if you look for them.
The newspaper back pages are regularly littered with stories of coaches and managers outraged at how their team has been wronged by the actions of the referee, but where is all this leading to and what's really going on?
Well for a start, many of the penalty flashpoints are coming about because of players diving in the area - getting an unfair advantage by deception, as it were. One has to ask whether managers are asking their teams to play fairly by not diving? If they were, perhaps we'd see fewer problems of this kind occurring. Football is, after all, a game of skill and has no place for cheating, despite what Diego Maradona would have us believe.
A lot of the time, referees are accused of misjudging offside decisions and handball incidents. These are the sort of things that happen in a game which referees and linesmen can only judge correctly so often. Sometimes they get it wrong and it's always been that way, so why are there now calls for technology to be used to ratify their decisions? It seems that the term 'referees are only human' doesn't cut the mustard these days, but then the media are partially to blame for attitudes changing so dramatically.
Many years ago, a controversial refereeing decision would have brought about, at most, a grumble by the manager affected and possibly a square inch of comment in the sports pages of the Sunday newspapers. Nowadays, managers have a microphone thrust in their face the minute they step off the field at the end of a game and are asked to tell the world what they felt about the preceding ninety minutes at the one time when their emotions are running at their highest. It's therefore hardly surprising that they sometimes come across as being a tad upset.
The tabloid press are also keen to fan the flames of outrage, citing the latest tirades from the merry band of Premiership bosses. Sensationalism, it seems, is what people want to see when they pick up their daily paper. Balanced, well-written journalism that gives an account of events in their true proportions apparently isn't.
The only aspect of the game remaining where technology could be put to good use is where the ball may or may not have crossed the goal line, and that only ever happens once in a blue moon. Even so, it's at least an instance critical enough to warrant an exact scientific judgement, rather than a flawed human one.
The good news is that things might be about to change. Keith Hackett, head of the Premier Game Match Officials Board, is about to put forward a document detailing how the game could benefit from the use of technology to the Premier League. The bad news is that it will only focus on the 'ball crossing the goal-line' scenario, although it's hoped that the report will provide the necessary impetus to look at other aspects of the game in future.
But do we really want the intrusion caused by all this hi-tech proficiency? Former referee David Elleray has voiced his own concerns: "One of the greatest attractions of football over almost any other sport is that it's almost non-stop action. I went to Twickenham the other day to watch quite an exciting rugby game, but it was constantly stopping, not least for video referee decisions."
He may have a point, but will it stop the constant stream of furious criticism from managers week in, week out? For now, perhaps not as changes to the game are unlikely to be applied in the near future, but in the meantime it's the managers themselves that need to address the way they and their team behave and to acknowledge the fact that errors of judgement by match officials are a part of the game. It's always been thus and they know this to be the case before every match their team plays, so a change in attitude could go a long way to ensuring we don't get to read the same vitriolic outpourings for any longer than we have to.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)