Liverpool Message Board
I see some action was taken about the poor officiated this weekend
But does a linesman sitting out one game (he was actually scheduled to be at our match at Blackburn) really show officials are accountable?
First off let me be clear I don't expect refs or linesmen to get it right 100% of the time. They are human and are going to make mistakes. But they are now professionals, they are officiating at the very highest level of English Football, so I do expect them to get the decisions right most of the time, especially those decisions that are potential game changers (and this time of year potentially season defining).
I'm not going to bang on about decisions of late that have gone against us, I'm sure some will say I'm biased or looking through red tinted glasses, and we know which ones went against us. But how about other decisions this weekend?
Any sanction against the man in the middle (or his linesmen) at OT? Offside, and what looks very much like a dive may have cost QPR valuable points. You could maybe understand a ref falling for a dive, but that was a pretty blatant one imo, but for the linesman to not understand he was offside is really hard to take.
In the Wigan match the linesmen gets one night off it sounds like, but does that give Wigan any comfort as they are fighting for points? What do you think our resident Chelsea fan; did the officials have a decent day? Or maybe decent apart from the decisions they got wrong? Maybe you might think it makes up for the offside’s you complained about at OT earlier in the season, but not from a Wigan point of view.
Like I said I don't expect perfection, but if the officials are still expecting respect (which I do think they deserve) I think we should see a little bit of transparency and accountability. When they get is wrong, admit it rather than live behind a screen of silence and punish any manager who complains. Only by admitting mistakes can anyone have any chance of not repeating them.
Thats a good idea.. they use video refs in rugby and have been for sometime now.. it's not slowed the game down..if it slow down football.. is that a bad thing?
It gives players time to get some liquids in them.. but it only takes a few seconds until the replay comes through..
They should take all offside decisions away from the men in black. No whistle blowing, just let play go on. Then when goals are scored the video ref should decide if they should be allowed or ruled out for offside or other infringements. Much better.
I've done a bit of linesmanning in junior 7 a side and 9 a side. I can tell you the job is a lot harder than it looks from the comfort and camera angles of your armchair. This is why I tend to be less critical of the buggers in black in many situations than I used to be. Getting offsides wrong is very easy - in many ways it is remarkable they get so many right when at first sight it looks like they get it wrong. Not seeing every incident is also very easy - your eyes can only focus on one thing at a time. Video technology is the only answer to making a significant improvement in this area.
So I don't think we can expect officials to see everything. When they do see something and interpret it incorrectly, or simply fail to follow the rules of the game, that's a different matter.
Chelsea Wigan? Well, I'll tell you what I thought while resisting your bait. As Martinez has told us with some volume, the first Chelsea goal was some distance offside. The linesman must have been on his tea break here. The second Chelsea goal was also offside, I think. Certainly Mata is marginally ahead of the last defender and the ball when Torres has his shot that comes back off the post to him. However there is the slight complication that Torres's shot deflects off a defender and these days the offside rule and its second phase nonsense might cause refereeing lawyers to have an argument about it. And given everything going on at the time it was a lot easier for the linesman not to spot it. Indeed, the live Sky feed commentary also didn't spot it while the match was on.
But before Martinez gets too upset, and all his proxies on his behalf, there were two other decisions down that end that went Wigan's way. I notice MotD made a fuss about both goals but failed to show or mention these. One was that goal machine Torres was incorrectly flagged offside when he was past the last defender with the ball and just the keeper to beat. It was tight, like Mata's, but it was wrong, and it was probably a better goal-scoring opportunity than Mata's. The other was a pretty blatant handball. A Wigan defender had both his arms outstretched like the Corcovado in Rio (maybe appropriately on Easter Saturday) when the Chelsea cross hit his forearm. I wonder if Martinez would like to say why this shouldn't have been a penalty.
So it looks to me like there were four dodgy decisions by the linesman and ref. Two went Chelsea's way and Chelsea scored twice. Two went Wigan's way denying Chelsea equally good goalscoring opportunities. I think Wigan have less to complain about than many people seem to think.
- 1 Reply to Robert M
I've also done a bit of refereeing and being linesman. The linesman job I found pretty easy, certainly offsides anyway.. despite getting grief all the time from forwards who think they are much better at timing their runs than they think. Occasionally you can get caught on long balls, watching the action, and missing the specific position of the forward who is out of your peripheral vision, but I don't think on the whole, a paid official has ANY excuse for getting an offside wrong. Certainly both Chelsea ones were clear, (I only watch MOTD so didn't see the other incidents).
Refereeing on the other hand I have always found a nightmare. It is so subjective, and the players are so ill disciplined, that I gave it up. Referees are essential, but from the Premier League behaviour towards ref's (which is disgraceful), it all filters down. One game, I decided no more, told the players any swearing directly at me would be a red. Told them any swearing directly at a Lino would be a red. The game was abandoned with 4 players dismissed from the same side and 1 from the other. It's not like they'll learn, because the week after they'll have another ref, and I was reported to the Kent FA. Fouls are subjective too, and you genuinely can't see everything. Especially in some games, defenders wind up forwards by niggling while the ball is at the other end. It is horrendous. So I quit. I wouldn;t want to ref again, so feel some measure of sympathies with those that do, when they get decisions wrong or don't see the incidents. However the pressure the players are allowed to subject officials to is a big part of the problem.
Offsides though there is no excuse.
I think this is a perfect reason why a little more transparency is in order:
So the FA have upheld Derry's ban, but have they given us a reason why? I've not seen anyone think this was a penalty, other than a single manc who tried to argue that Cole was inactive so not offside but then became active all of a sudden in order to have a goal scoring opportunity denied hence a penalty and red card.. So why can't the FA explain why. I'm not asking that the ref face the firing line of a press conference but a simple statement of explanation from a spokesman would help.
Did they rule he was not offside?
Did they rule it was not a dive?
Did they feel it would undermine the ref, and all refs to overturn the decision?
Were they just trying to save themselves the blushes?
- 1 Reply to dsteer_lfc_68
i haven't seen the incident. but from what I have read I think I can partly answer your question.
The question is whether the alleged foul should have been given a red card. Part of the argument that it shouldn't is that the foul was on a player who was offside. I imagine the FA panel regard the question of offside as entirely irrelevant. If the referee had not blown for offside then the ball was in play and the foul or not was a foul or not on its own merits. FA panels do not rule on offside decisions, that is entirely for the ladies in black to determine, even if video footage shows they got it wrong.
Which brings me on to technology. These people are supposed to know the game and be unbiased. If thats so then how can they let obvious fouls go ignored? Thats grossly unprofessional isn't it?
Which indicates they're not up to the job. So lets have technology in the game which will make it unbiased. They'll be no argument then on fouls and whether a ball crossed the line..
- 1 Reply to LFC_Armchair_Supporter
I heard an argument at the weekend, that EVERY goal should be subject to a 30 second review by TV and a 5th official, as the players are trotting back/celebrating. That along with goal line technology (which is a must) is a minimum.
I don't agree that pens should be subject to technology. There is a line, and if the ball doesn't go out of play, there is no room to stop the game and review a penalty decision. Well obviously if it is given, the penalised team could review it, but there is no scope to review those not given. You can't do one without the other, otherwise Refs's would give everything and then wait for a review.So no technology on those for me.
On the decsions we've got recently (or not as Kenny says) none of those were stonewall for me. certainly not as bad as iother teams have had recently.
Wigan should sue that bloody official if they get relegated, it was awful. United's ref was atrocious, buying the dive from Ashley Young. It does seem that you are vbetter off diving, or being histrionic, than getting on with the game. Which isn;t a good thing.
On Suarez: He's made his bed and is having to lie in it. He's a diving, malicious, nasty piece of work. He plays for us, and he's a fine player, if used correctly (and Kenny doesn't) he'd be even better. I don't like him as a guy though. Very poor set of values.
Since time immemorial officials have been driving us all nuts! The thing is apparently 'it balances itself out over the season' which is one of the great myths of modern football.
How many times do you see officials not giving stonewall penalties, and then a couple of minutes later, giving a soft penalty for the same team? So they do think about their mistakes during games....
From an LFC point of view, I think Suarez, in particular is a marked man. And to be totally fair, he has not done himself many favours on that score earlier in the season. Arms flailing about and legs pointed ramrod straight. Refs are bound to think he is cheating most of the time, thus on Saturday, the ref giving him a yellow for diving when that shouldn't have been the case.
Apparently technology is going to be introduced in the next couple of seasons to stop the mistakes in the penalty box.
- 1 Reply to Loki
I agree with you that Suarez seems to be a marked man. On one hand I agree with you that he's not done himself any favors, and I personally hate the extra rolling around and fervent appealing decisions so common with Latin players that he engages in. However I also think the reputation has as much been put upon him that truly earned. I mentioned this a while back when I noticed I think it was in the Stoke or Sunderland game, their defenders constantly telling him to get up when he went over, when replays consistently showed they'd actually fouled him.
So I put it out there again is a player who dives or embellishes fouls more or less than a cheat that a defender who tried to con a ref to cover up his own deeds? To me the latter is the same, however it has build a reputation (and not just to Suarez) over time that makes refs less likely to give things unless it’s a dead cert. I’m sure someone can find evidence of Suarez going over when they feel he was not fouled, but that could be said of virtually every striker in the modern game. But imo the vast majority of the time when Suarez goes down its because he’s been fouled, even if he does embellish the afters.
Personally I'm luke warm on technology. In some instances I do think it would truly enhance the game, and with little or no negative impact on the game. Case in point goal like technology would have let us know instantly whether Kuyt and scored against Villa or not. But in other instances I'm not so sure because even with the help of replays honest people can still disagree. But anything that helps is not a bad step.
I notice Dalglish has come out with a similar thought I had about adding just a little transparency. I think we all understand refs will never be perfect, but understanding why they make certain decision, or just some plain honesty if the truth is they missed something would be refreshing.