Football 2013-2014

[DomDom1984]

The ideal result would be a red card for Carroll and a yellow for Chico's simulation, but you never see that.

[mrtourette]

As far as I'm concerned that's bol#ocks he didn't touch him. Football is ridiculous these days how can you get sent off when you haven't touched somebody (handball aside).

[adam1234]

Quite easily and rightfully so. If you swing a punch at someone and miss, do you think that's

OK?

Edited February 6, 2014 by adam1234

[mrtourette]

I agree in general, but I honestly think there was an attempt by Carroll to follow through with his swinging arm and hit Flores. It didn't really work, Flores made the most of it and Carroll had a 'shit, what have I just done' look flash across his face straight afterwards, but there was an initial attempt to violently strike an opponent, which is what the referee saw. I agree that maybe some common sense should be applied (after all, what he did was not the same as openly punching or headbutting an opponent) but at the end of the day they know the rules.

Edited February 6, 2014 by mrtourette

[DomDom1984]

How do you suggest addressing the standard of referees? Do you plan on addressing them having to do their jobs in front of thousands of idiots who think they know the job better than the referees do? Do you plan on addressing the fact that in any EPL game, every decision they make is put under the microscope? Do you plan on doing something about the dog's abuse that they get from players every minute of every game?

Unless you're willing to address the things that put immense pressure on referees, how do you go about changing the standards of them? We all know that referees make wrong decisions, and it happens too many times, but is there really a way to combat it from happening?

[adam1234]

How do you suggest addressing the standard of referees? Do you plan on addressing them having to do their jobs in front of thousands of idiots who think they know the job better than

the referees do? Do you plan on addressing the

fact that in any EPL game, every decision they make is put under the microscope? Do you plan on doing something about the dog's abuse that they get from players every minute of every

game?

Unless you're willing to address the things that put immense pressure on referees, how do you go about changing the standards of them? We all know that referees make wrong decisions, and it happens too many times, but is there

really a way to combat it from happening?

Edited February 6, 2014 by adam1234

[adam1234]

Brown's got rescinded though, didn't it. (I think it did). Agree on the diving part of what you say. And in theory about yellow card for exaggeration like Chico. But that's a hard one to prove. All a

player has to say is it really hurt and you can't prove otherwise.

[kaosmark2]

Ways to help referees:

Diving/simulation/feigning injury/trying to get an opponent sent off/hassling the referee/etc. all automatically get 1-match bans, in review after the game.

For a ref to book or send off a player for harassing them, or diving, or feigning injury they have to be very very sure of that decision, because if it's wrong they'll get far more criticism than for not doing it. If it's done as retrospective action by a panel for every game, all of that bollocks will cut out, without putting the referees under pressure to make these massive decisions.

Make the law that ONLY the player directly involved and the captain can speak to a referee about a decision. Emphasis on speak rather than harangue. Anyone else who approaches the referee gets an automatic booking for dissent.

Adjust the retrospective action and rescinding rules so that if a ref makes a mistake, it'll be punished less and induce less moaning. See the recent Remy/Johnson incident where I have complete sympathy with the referee's (wrong) decision, but no sympathy for the appeals panel.

Be stricter with punishments for managers passing the buck about a problem onto referees. Managers use this as a mind-games tactic to divert attention away from their failings or that of their players, more touchline bans/fines would help reduce that.

In combination with that, Post-match interviews with players and managers to only be allowed to be conducted 15 minutes after the full-time whistle, to give time for them to calm down and assess what they want to say about any incident rather than having a camera shoved in their face while the adrenaline is still pumping.

[DomDom1984]

I'd say a dive to get someone sent off should be a straight red and the length of ban should match the length of the ban the other guy would have gotten. IF the other player committed a red card offence, I'd bring that down to a yellow card for simulation.

You can't get a red card for dissent wrong surely. So yes, have that.

I don't actually understand why the captain thing hasn't been brought in before and of course it makes sense for the players involved in decisions to be able to speak to the referee. Not scream and swear. Speak.

Referee's have to be accountable for mistakes, so I can only agree so much. If a panel decides that a one off decision was understandable then sure, sweep it under the carpet. But if a ref has a howler of a game, they SHOULD be hammered for it. Players are accountable for mistakes. Referees should be no different.

Managers are already pretty much dealt with in the way they should be. They should be able to vent frustrations at referees so long as they don't question their integrity, or flat out call them rubbish and at the moment, that's the way it is.

[kaosmark2]

I'd say a dive to get someone sent off should be a straight red and the length of ban should match the length of the ban the other guy would have gotten. IF the other player committed a red card offence, I'd bring that down to a yellow card for simulation.

You can't get a red card for dissent wrong surely. So yes, have that.

I don't actually understand why the captain thing hasn't been brought in before and of course it makes sense for the players involved in decisions to be able to speak to the referee. Not scream and swear. Speak.

Referee's have to be accountable for mistakes, so I can only agree so much. If a panel decides that a one off decision was understandable then sure, sweep it under the carpet. But if a ref has a howler of a game, they SHOULD be hammered for it. Players are accountable for mistakes. Referees should be no different.

Managers are already pretty much dealt with in the way they should be. They should be able to vent frustrations at referees so long as they don't question their integrity, or flat out call them rubbish and at the moment, that's the way it is.

[mrtourette]

I definitely think dissent needs to be handled a lot more strictly. I think it's got better since those terrible scenes of Roy Keane et al chasing that referree (Andre Marriner?) around the pitch but there seems to be this dreadfully pathetic culture in football of remonstrating with the referee or begging for consideration at every opportunity. There's nothing wrong with showing frustration, waving your hands, swearing and then tuning away, but to actively approach/chase a referee to either have a go about a decison od to plead to have someone punished should be dealt with. There should be no reason to touch a referee whether to 'bump' him to stop him moving away or putting a hand on his shoulder to 'turn' him towards a complaining player.

[LondonTom]

Quite easily and rightfully so. If you swing a punch at someone and miss, do you think that's OK?

[DomDom1984]

It's the same up here with managers. Jim McInally for Peterhead got absolutely humped by the SFA one time for making implications. Which I'm not against until you see other managers get fined for the same thing. Well, McInally might have been at East Stirling at the time, but hey, same thing really. Still a really small side. Kenny Shiels, our very own manager, used to get some proper bans as well. Although he really is a loud mouthed bastard.

[DomDom1984]

Carroll wasn't banned for having long arms. He blatantly swung the arm. Whether he was aiming for head or gut or whatever is up for debate, but he definitely looked to hit the target.

[lharris92]

the carroll red card was a joke, only reason it was upheld is because webb is our top referee supposedly and its world cup year, so they don't want him to look like an idiot.

failed on that one the fa have.

[mrtourette]

Punch?! (btw this is an argument against everyone else to, i cba quoting everyone )

Carroll was hardly lashing out at all, he looked a bit miffed after having Flores climbing all over his back and the headlock... Also his arms, just follow around as he come through and he didn't know where the actor was?

Even Neil Warnock is sticking up for us and Andy Carroll (Along with countless other players and pundits!).

I can see why the ref gave the red in the heat of the moment, but there is no way he deserves to be banned for 3 games having long arms otherwise he may as well stop playing.

Edited February 6, 2014 by mrtourette

[eFestivals]

Andy Carroll deliberately continued with his swing in order to connect with Flores due to the frustration he was feeling.

this ^^

Ok, that's just my opinion and only Andy knows for sure, but that's how I see it.

[adam1234]

the carroll red card was a joke, only reason it was upheld is because webb is our top referee supposedly and its world cup year, so they don't want him to look like an idiot.

failed on that one the fa have.

[mrtourette]

Going by the rules, it was a correct decision and a straight red. Your issue is with the rules, not the ref.

[lharris92]

the way i saw it for reference was:

chico had climbed all over him, and carroll was swinging his arm round to his side to protest to webb as if to ask how it wasn't a foul.

one skim of the ponytail later and chico possibly has a broken cheek bone. (this bit is more in jest but how he got away with conning the ref when he has history of cheating i do not know)

[DomDom1984]

The problem is, even if Carroll wasn't aiming to hit the man, the referee can't really be accused of getting it wrong. He seen a man deliberately swing his arm in the direction of the player behind him. He had every right to send the man off. There is no way you can look at this as a bad decision. Every way you look at it, he still deliberately swung the arm towards Chico.

[eFestivals]

the way i saw it for reference was: ....

And you could be right. The only person who knows for sure is Carroll.

The simple fact is that the ref has to make a judgement call on how he saw it. Having made that call in one direction, there's nothing about the incident that is likely to make a person think they called it wrong.

You jump one way, and you stick with it. That's what refs do.

[adam1234]

If it was Rooney and not Carroll he wouldn't have been sent off

[DomDom1984]

Take your whataboutery to the other side of the river.

[adam1234]

Take your whataboutery to the other side of the river.