Standard of Referees (Sponsored by Steven Reid)

[Louth Red]

It’s a lottery on the day

Does anyone really know what a penalty is given for?

Handball or foul play it’s often judgemental

No clarity no consistency.

Which referees will be promoted to fill the vacancies?

Eight fewer league games but more added time for VAR

A lot has changed in twenty three years

COYR



Interesting next season with VAR

 

[adam09]

The first one looked a dive from my view at Wembley. Having seen the replays since, it looks a drive in real time, a penalty on the first replay angle, and on the second one from the reverse angle looks like what Colback said about him initiating the contact so I can see why it wasn't overturned.

I said straight away the 2nd wasn't a pen and I stand by that having seen it again.

Agree with that. I think if Toffolo didn't overegg it, it would have been given. Colback is a lucky boy. You know the bloke is going to kick the ball and go over, no need to dangle the leg out.

 

[Statto]

Agree with that. I think if Toffolo didn't overegg it, it would have been given. Colback is a lucky boy. You know the bloke is going to kick the ball and go over, no need to dangle the leg out.

Don't forget the VAR officials looked at it too and agreed with Moss.

Toffolo's reaction shouldn't come into it. Whether he fell to the floor like Jack Laugher or stayed on his feet, if the contact from Colback was against the rules, it's a foul and a penalty.

Sadly, you see few fouls given where the fouled player stays on their feet these days.

 

[adam09]

Yes very true. However, Toffolo's theatrics possibly influenced the original decision by Moss. If Moss had given a penalty, VAR would have looked at it and I presume they wouldn't have overturned it for the same reasons.

Toffolo surely could have just gone down normally? I'm sure when you're tripped up you fall forward and down, like Max Lowe did when O'Brien tripped him, rather than flying through the air like superman.

Something for players to think about.

 

[Rzar]

Both the ref & the VAR got the decisions right according to the rulebook and PGMOL guidance.

Somebody tweeted about the guidance they have given on what consitutes the right contact, and both weren't enough according to guidance.

So the issue should be about the rules, not the decision. It's another reason why refs should actually come out and explain their decisions or have be mic'd up and even release it after the match if they have too, to explain the reason. On paper both were right calls.

The rules in their current state are overcomplicated, but that's what you get when you introduce technology because everything has to be analysed now. There is no black or white.

 

[Statto]

Yes very true. However, Toffolo's theatrics possibly influenced the original decision by Moss. If Moss had given a penalty, VAR would have looked at it and I presume they wouldn't have overturned it for the same reasons.

Toffolo surely could have just gone down normally? I'm sure when you're tripped up you fall forward and down, like Max Lowe did when O'Brien tripped him, rather than flying through the air like superman.

Something for players to think about.

And officials.

Even though what you have said has contradicted itself, it makes sense. For me it's either a penalty or it isn't, and if VAR is going to overturn it, then if a pen is given and shouldn't be, VAR looks at it and overturns, if a pen isn't given and should be, VAR overturns it, or agrees the officials got it right.

I'm pretty sure the review would look at the contact between Colback and Toffolo entirely and not the 10m springboard move after it. If Moss had given a pen, they would have looked at the same. I don't see why they wouldn't reach the same conclusion because they aren't really deciding if the ref was right or not, they're deciding if it was a pen or not.

Diving is difficult to do well which is why players get a reputation for it before there's plenty of stuff showing they are. You basically have to be able to mimic going down like you were touched when you weren't. It's also cheating but dare say any attacker has done it on a fair few occasions...

It's like when a player goes down like they're injured, when they're not. You can tell they're not because they're rolling around and bouncing all over the place which you don't do if you're hurt. You stay still and bang the ground because it hurts to roll around!

I suppose on that one the real unsporting one would be to feign a head injury because then the ref has to stop it to check it over...

 

[adam09]

That’s the thing though, VAR is deciding if the ref made a clear and obvious error or completely missed something. Not whether it’s a penalty or not.

For the first one, he didn’t miss the incident. He made a decision and VAR decided there wasn’t evidence to definitely say it was wrong.

The second one, Moss is blocked by 2 Forest players. I presume the VAR will have seen it and decided it wasn’t something obvious enough to be a penalty and didn’t need Moss to look at it.

In the opinions of two refs, neither were penalties. We wanted some luck with decisions and we got it.

 

[Rzar]

John Moss' record shop has been damaged and police were called. Why is it John Moss that gets the shit and not the VAR guy? (Even though by the law, they were both still correct decisions)

Personally I'm gonna go to John Moss' record shop and spend a fortune. I don't have a record player mind, I just love records and like to support local businesses.

 

[Winnits]

Re: Standard of Referees "Numpty-Hood-Watch"

I bet he’ll refer that incident to VAR (well, CCTV)

 

[Rich]

Re: Standard of Referees "Numpty-Hood-Watch"

I bet he’ll refer that incident to VAR (well, CCTV)

His record shop is the greatest named shop I’ve heard for a long time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Winnits]

Re: Standard of Referees "Numpty-Hood-Watch"

I do like a good shop name pun!

 

[Lord Wazzock]

There's a Mark Clattenburg article in the mail - I won't post the link (I feel dirty for even reading it). He defends Moss saying the second incident was more of a penalty but difficult for the ref to see. As previously mentioned, the fact that everyone has a different opinion means they weren't clear cut. I'm happy that Moss decided to air on the side of caution - just like most of the refs have when not giving us pens this year.

 

[redanddeadly]

I wasn't impressed by how the pundits handled it making out both decisions were clear cut when in reality neither were.
The Toffolo dive was very exaggerated.
He's gone in clearly looking for the foul, lunging himself at Colback's outstretched leg to draw the foul.
The contact was so slight hence how could it be anything but a yellow with that OTT dive.
Players these days are trying their hardest to actually be fouled & it's got daft so f#ck Toffolo as you wouldn't get Brennan doing that.
The second was hardly clear cut either.
I still am in two minds as to who's at fault hence can't see how it can be given if the ref is being fair?
Moss' record shop has now been trashed because Scouse Sports & the rags have whipped up Huddersfield fans into thinking they've been robbed when they haven't actually had a single shot on target & an iffy peno claim

 

[Strummer]

Re: Standard of Referees "Numpty-Hood-Watch"

Toffolo went down like Tom Daley in a submarine.

The second one is less clear-cut as the Referee‘s view is blocked, and he gets no help from his Assistant on that side. If he can’t see it, he can’t give it, and again, there’s an argument that the Udders player himself tries to make the foul on Lowe.

The old adage that „I’ve seen them given“ applies here, but unless the Ref is absolutely certain, he is effectively correct in not awarding a penalty (and the laws of the game support him in that).

If the boot were on the other foot, we’d be complaining too, but let’s be honest, Forest have had a slew of shit decisions go against them this season as well.

 

[Morpeth]

Re: Standard of Referees "Numpty-Hood-Watch"

I do like a good shop name pun!

You should listen to the entire back catalogue of Dave Gorman on Absolute Radio then as there was a section called Pun Street. There were some belters there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[redforest]

Don’t fan the flames of this VAR bollocks, we won, were the better team and they didn’t even have one shot on target, end of story and we’re in the premier. VAR is a construct to add credence to all the post match waffle that so called expert pundits get paid far too much to spout.

 

[Any Time Now]

Re: Standard of Referees "Numpty-Hood-Watch"

Smashing up someones business and sending death threats all because of a game of football. Makes you wonder how these people function on a day to day basis

 

[Rzar]

Re: Standard of Referees "Numpty-Hood-Watch"

Smashing up someones business and sending death threats all because of a game of football. Makes you wonder how these people function on a day to day basis

And it wasn't even really Moss that made the decision, it was the VAR person.

 

[TrentEndDr]

Can we count this Euro Final's ref so far...

 

[Agent Penguin]

I thought the standard would have been better today.

They didn’t get either of the disallowed goals right in open play, and also missed the penalty.

The foul in the build up to their disallowed goal was blatant.

 

[Statto]

I thought the standard would have been better today.

They didn’t get either of the disallowed goals right in open play, and also missed the penalty.

The foul in the build up to their disallowed goal was blatant.

He was a bit gash but that is why we have VAR. And you just know when VAR is going to call the ref, to look at it, that the on-field decision is going to be overturned.

Though both disallowed goals were right to be disallowed, the penalty was a bit harsh really, I suppose it depends on where McKenna's arms were in relation to the ball and his body and if he made a deliberate attempt to handle it.

I don't know if it already happens but what i'd like to see is if VAR needs to overturn an on-field decision then they need to investigate post-match why the on-field team got it wrong and what could be done to get the decision right in future without needing VAR. We won't learn from refereeing errors if they use VAR as a safety net and not a tool to improve standards.

 

[adam09]

VAR decisions all correct. My issue so far is the consistency as we’ve had 7 players booked in 2 games, the opposition 1.

Newcastle, couple of Forest players booked for pulling back… Newcastle players did it to stop attacks, no bookings.

Today. West Ham taking f***ing ages on goal kicks and throw ins. Forest go 1-0 up, Henderson booked for time wasting, seemingly without warning. Yet West Ham keeper can put the ball down, pick it up to throw it to a defender to put it down and pass back to the keeper. Make it make sense.

Also, Surridge shoved over, clear free kick but no, gets booked for trying to grab the ball or something.

Dawson pulled Surridge back, no yellow for that.

Antonio two handed shove on Niakhate, no booking for that.

West Ham player went in recklessly on Neco Williams before their penalty, ref doesn’t even bat an eyelid at it.

The linesman were ok but the ref was terrible.

 

[MaxiRobriguez]

Thought the officiating was reasonably good. A massive upgrade on last year which was chocked full of horror show after a horror show.

 

[Rzar]

Let us be honest chaps, it is a world better than Keith Stroud so far.

We will have some shockers but overall the quality will be better.

 

[adam09]

Oh yeah there was the player who shoved O’Brien into Henderson. Clear yellow card offence that.

Really poor ref.