That may possibly be a short term consequence @wingnut but eminently tolerable assuming (as I do) that refs at our level becoming professional would raise the quality of their performances, especially to stop game changing errors such as we saw Tuesday.
Those who underperform will be weeded out and replaced by aspiring professionals looking to seamlessly officiate EFL contests and higher. There is a reason why refs are pro in the EPL and Championship. It is better for everyone that way. Except the cheats, who should be pulled up and punished far more for acting, baiting and diving than they are now. There are so many ways to make refs better starting with psychology 101 and how not to get conned.
FWIW I see ideal refs as mediators, there to help the contest along by keeping players honest and plying their trade within the parameters of the laws of the game. To make a decision that changes the course of a match on the back of one debatable call is ... unprofessional. Which by definition refs at our level are. In all honesty we should be more thankful for the times the refs manage to stay out of the limelight.
I am sure rule changes as seen in other sports could help with less extreme punishments as the double whammy we saw Tuesday but that is a wider debate. Yet again it comes down to having professionals in such positions of influence to protect the officiating of the game from coming into disrepute in the lower leagues.
@Malone said:
Out of interest, what is the advantage people see in the professional element to being a ref?
The fitness? The accountability?
Would refs almost be like they're at school, and sit there watching videos, and do exams on decisions? Have conferences with other refs and suchlike?
Not sure about the exams bit but most of the last paragraph and accountability in he form of regular reviews with peers and overseers would be upsides to professionalism if one wanted to go that route. The rugby refs in the Premiership are clearly well-prepared and arbitrate to clearly-defined interpretations of the laws. Further, the clubs and players are also, at least to some extent, clearly au fait with the way in which certain aspects of the game will be refereed and thus are able to play accordingly. I don't mean to suggest that the average L1 referee is wholly unpredictable in their work - clearly, players have some idea what to expect and regulate their conduct accordingly. But, if one wished to have greater consistency, I can see the advantage of the professional referee route.
Alternatively, there could be a voluntary paradigm shift whereby all those involved in the playing of the game determined that they would not do everything they could to derive undeserved advantage by exaggerating or inventing consequences of opposing players' actions. But yeah, let's have professional referees. That will solve the problem.
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
I really don't see being full time as the answer unless it makes them fitter and able to get out of the centre circle more often.
Anyone know if this is standard ref instructions to stay there or are all referees just really immobile?
I mix with a lot of people who are supremely fit who have full time jobs.
You'd think being pretty fit should be a minimum requirement anyway.
Bit of an odd post @HCblue. I found myself agreeing or going along with most of it before you suddenly veered off hoping for a quantum leap in moral fiber fro footballers before (sarcaasticly?) suggesting that pro refs would cure all ills in football. Have I missed something?
As for your many questions @Malone, I never expected The Spanish Inquisition! Having not been on a refereeing course it is difficult to know exactly what they could spend the extra time doing. However my experience as a spectator tells me that they should focus on being facilitators/mediators as opposed to the centre of attention and how the modern game encourages shithousery needing to be at least tempered by admonisment leading to warnings and hopefully stopping before removal. Removal always being the last resort for dangerous or continued rule breaking after warnings.
Having pro refs will lead to more consistent decisions and more unobtrusive performances from the men (and women of the future) charged with overseeing lower league football contests. And scenes like Tuesday could all be a thing of the past.
"Always look on the bright side of life, do doot, do doot do doot do doot"
@NorsQuarters said:
Bit of an odd post @HCblue. I found myself agreeing or going along with most of it before you suddenly veered off hoping for a quantum leap in moral fiber fro footballers before (sarcaasticly?) suggesting that pro refs would cure all ills in football. Have I missed something?
As for your many questions @Malone, I never expected The Spanish Inquisition! Having not been on a refereeing course it is difficult to know exactly what they could spend the extra time doing. However my experience as a spectator tells me that they should focus on being facilitators/mediators as opposed to the centre of attention and how the modern game encourages shithousery needing to be at least tempered by admonisment leading to warnings and hopefully stopping before removal. Removal always being the last resort for dangerous or continued rule breaking after warnings.
Having pro refs will lead to more consistent decisions and more unobtrusive performances from the men (and women of the future) charged with overseeing lower league football contests. And scenes like Tuesday could all be a thing of the past.
"Always look on the bright side of life, do doot, do doot do doot do doot"
I addressed it to you, but was more musing as to what the difference would be.
Why for instance would being pro lead to more consistent decisions?
Because they're fresher from their day job?
Because they spent hours watching videos and doing "best practice" workshops?
Because they can chat more?
It's much easier to say why footballers are better when pro, as they get super fit, rest more, and spend ages on tactics etc.
But refs are a bit different to these.
Would refs almost be like they're at school, and sit there watching videos, and do exams on decisions? Have conferences with other refs and suchlike?
I believe that is what professional referees already do @Malone ?
But league one refs for eg aren't professional are they? They're part time. That's what is being debated.
Sorry, but you missed the point @Malone. You asked/suggested: "Would refs almost be like they're at school, and sit there watching videos, and do exams on decisions? Have conferences with other refs and suchlike?
I merely confirmed that is what "PROFESSIONAL" referees actually do. I never said or even suggested that L1 referees are full time?
Would refs almost be like they're at school, and sit there watching videos, and do exams on decisions? Have conferences with other refs and suchlike?
I believe that is what professional referees already do @Malone ?
But league one refs for eg aren't professional are they? They're part time. That's what is being debated.
Sorry, but you missed the point @Malone. You asked/suggested: "Would refs almost be like they're at school, and sit there watching videos, and do exams on decisions? Have conferences with other refs and suchlike?
I merely confirmed that is what "PROFESSIONAL" referees actually do. I never said or even suggested that L1 referees are full time?
Fair does chief.
On another note, our actual professional refs aren't being made to look great by var are they?
Pawson at anfield let van dyke jump into the keeper and let the goal stand. When anyone who has watched football for 20 years knows those are always blown up. Quickly ruled out by var.
Therein lies my point about VAR @Malone. As fans, VAR has taken away the "rage" of one set of supporters about the unfair decision. On the flipside, it has balanced the incident by overloading of the joy of the opposing fan base.
It was the linesman who gave that shocking call on Phillips v Peterboro though wasn't it?
Yes the ref could have overruled him, but when a linesman is adamant something's a pen, it's hard to overrule.
In the linked clip, I wonder if the ref was a bit unsighted, and his linesman chose to bottle that one.
Even if that was the case, it will be the same team of officials. All the more reason to come flying out of the traps and wrap it up before half-time! I think 3-0+ is perfectly doable against a team Gaz will respect as always but know we're much better than.
@chairboyscentral said:
Even if that was the case, it will be the same team of officials. All the more reason to come flying out of the traps and wrap it up before half-time! I think 3-0+ is perfectly doable against a team Gaz will respect as always but know we're much better than.
The first line made sense to what I'd written, but the other 2 lines almost seem to be related to something else? Or I'm misunderstanding?!
Brilliant spot @Chris.
I too wondered about the source of the shredding assessor reference. If Mr Breakspear’s been shredded, he’ll probably be all over the place with his judgement. I see that he’s not brandished a red since the Peterborough game.
Comments
That may possibly be a short term consequence @wingnut but eminently tolerable assuming (as I do) that refs at our level becoming professional would raise the quality of their performances, especially to stop game changing errors such as we saw Tuesday.
Those who underperform will be weeded out and replaced by aspiring professionals looking to seamlessly officiate EFL contests and higher. There is a reason why refs are pro in the EPL and Championship. It is better for everyone that way. Except the cheats, who should be pulled up and punished far more for acting, baiting and diving than they are now. There are so many ways to make refs better starting with psychology 101 and how not to get conned.
FWIW I see ideal refs as mediators, there to help the contest along by keeping players honest and plying their trade within the parameters of the laws of the game. To make a decision that changes the course of a match on the back of one debatable call is ... unprofessional. Which by definition refs at our level are. In all honesty we should be more thankful for the times the refs manage to stay out of the limelight.
I am sure rule changes as seen in other sports could help with less extreme punishments as the double whammy we saw Tuesday but that is a wider debate. Yet again it comes down to having professionals in such positions of influence to protect the officiating of the game from coming into disrepute in the lower leagues.
Out of interest, what is the advantage people see in the professional element to being a ref?
The fitness? The accountability?
Would refs almost be like they're at school, and sit there watching videos, and do exams on decisions? Have conferences with other refs and suchlike?
I believe that is what professional referees already do @Malone ?
Tutorials in the most effective whistle-blowing and card-waving techniques, I would imagine (unless you're Mike Dean and you just freestyle it).
Not sure about the exams bit but most of the last paragraph and accountability in he form of regular reviews with peers and overseers would be upsides to professionalism if one wanted to go that route. The rugby refs in the Premiership are clearly well-prepared and arbitrate to clearly-defined interpretations of the laws. Further, the clubs and players are also, at least to some extent, clearly au fait with the way in which certain aspects of the game will be refereed and thus are able to play accordingly. I don't mean to suggest that the average L1 referee is wholly unpredictable in their work - clearly, players have some idea what to expect and regulate their conduct accordingly. But, if one wished to have greater consistency, I can see the advantage of the professional referee route.
Alternatively, there could be a voluntary paradigm shift whereby all those involved in the playing of the game determined that they would not do everything they could to derive undeserved advantage by exaggerating or inventing consequences of opposing players' actions. But yeah, let's have professional referees. That will solve the problem.
But league one refs for eg aren't professional are they? They're part time. That's what is being debated.
Part-timers who earn as much as many people do in a full-time job
I really don't see being full time as the answer unless it makes them fitter and able to get out of the centre circle more often.
Anyone know if this is standard ref instructions to stay there or are all referees just really immobile?
I mix with a lot of people who are supremely fit who have full time jobs.
You'd think being pretty fit should be a minimum requirement anyway.
Bit of an odd post @HCblue. I found myself agreeing or going along with most of it before you suddenly veered off hoping for a quantum leap in moral fiber fro footballers before (sarcaasticly?) suggesting that pro refs would cure all ills in football. Have I missed something?
As for your many questions @Malone, I never expected The Spanish Inquisition! Having not been on a refereeing course it is difficult to know exactly what they could spend the extra time doing. However my experience as a spectator tells me that they should focus on being facilitators/mediators as opposed to the centre of attention and how the modern game encourages shithousery needing to be at least tempered by admonisment leading to warnings and hopefully stopping before removal. Removal always being the last resort for dangerous or continued rule breaking after warnings.
Having pro refs will lead to more consistent decisions and more unobtrusive performances from the men (and women of the future) charged with overseeing lower league football contests. And scenes like Tuesday could all be a thing of the past.
"Always look on the bright side of life, do doot, do doot do doot do doot"
I addressed it to you, but was more musing as to what the difference would be.
Why for instance would being pro lead to more consistent decisions?
Because they're fresher from their day job?
Because they spent hours watching videos and doing "best practice" workshops?
Because they can chat more?
It's much easier to say why footballers are better when pro, as they get super fit, rest more, and spend ages on tactics etc.
But refs are a bit different to these.
Sorry, but you missed the point @Malone. You asked/suggested: "Would refs almost be like they're at school, and sit there watching videos, and do exams on decisions? Have conferences with other refs and suchlike?
I merely confirmed that is what "PROFESSIONAL" referees actually do. I never said or even suggested that L1 referees are full time?
Fair does chief.
On another note, our actual professional refs aren't being made to look great by var are they?
Pawson at anfield let van dyke jump into the keeper and let the goal stand. When anyone who has watched football for 20 years knows those are always blown up. Quickly ruled out by var.
Therein lies my point about VAR @Malone. As fans, VAR has taken away the "rage" of one set of supporters about the unfair decision. On the flipside, it has balanced the incident by overloading of the joy of the opposing fan base.
Maybe Phillips should have gone for the full two-handed shove instead:
Crikey!
On the other hand, here's some excellent refereeing from the 9th tier:
Oh
It was the linesman who gave that shocking call on Phillips v Peterboro though wasn't it?
Yes the ref could have overruled him, but when a linesman is adamant something's a pen, it's hard to overrule.
In the linked clip, I wonder if the ref was a bit unsighted, and his linesman chose to bottle that one.
Even if that was the case, it will be the same team of officials. All the more reason to come flying out of the traps and wrap it up before half-time! I think 3-0+ is perfectly doable against a team Gaz will respect as always but know we're much better than.
The first line made sense to what I'd written, but the other 2 lines almost seem to be related to something else? Or I'm misunderstanding?!
@Malone Yeah, he's the ref for our game on Saturday, so let's get out of sight before the soft red card.
Do referees always work with the same assistants over the course of a season? I didn’t know that. Interesting!
Ah, gotcha.
Yeah I thought they did in the Premier league, but didn't know that in the lower ones.
Apparently I'm wrong - different assistants for this one. Still, Mr Breakspear's record this season kind of speaks for itself: https://www.soccerbase.com/referees/referee.sd?referee_id=1318
It may be a little childish, but I was amused by the following line in the Wikipedia article about referees:
Anyone over the age of 14 who is reasonably fit and doesn't have eyesight can train to be a referee.
Do we have a source for this “shredded by the assessor” bit? [citation needed]
I can’t believe you’d doubt the word of a former Mail journalist.
Brilliant spot @Chris.
I too wondered about the source of the shredding assessor reference. If Mr Breakspear’s been shredded, he’ll probably be all over the place with his judgement. I see that he’s not brandished a red since the Peterborough game.