The man in the middle - Referee Admiration/Angst/Appointments thread

He did very well in that Game last Sunday.

"Following the appointment of Chris Beath and Peter Green at the Asian Cup and the elevation of Kurt Ams and Jonathan Barreiro to the FIFA panel for 2019, this demonstrates the quality of our referee panel and the esteem in which it is held in world football.”

Hmmmm. A generous view, some would say.

Thanks for posting that, I just lost a mouthful of coffee.

Really good article about referees in England https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/ridiculous-refereeing-obsession-why-hell-would-you-bother

Never really understood this comparison. Missing an open goal isn't against the LOTG, but a catastrophic officiating error is. Nonetheless, good article. 

Really? Its not about the fact that its against the LOTG, its the unfair comparison that humans make mistakes, yet a player is more likely to be forgiven for that mistake than a referee is for their one. 

Premier League referees make 245 decisions per game on average, or one every 22 seconds. Sky Sports calculated in March 2018 that, again on average, five of those decisions were incorrect. Any player on the pitch is likely to make more: misplaced passes, failed dribble, missed chances, fouls committed, poor position or marking, the wrong decision taken.

Think how much a referee has to do and watch and its pretty impressive how few mistakes they do make but they make that one mistake and especially with VAR these days, and it gets viewed over and over again in super slow motion. That is really what the comparison is about, they get lambasted for their mistake more than a player would ever get. 

As you say, decisions get analysed so much these days - so I wonder how different things would be if there weren't pre and post match shows, or whether the pundits on these shows didn't talk about refereeing mistakes. Same thing with post match interviews - managers like complaining that they should have had a penalty, or the opposition should have had a man sent off. Again, if these interviews didn't happen there probably won't be such a focus on incorrect decisions, and the general perception of the decisions won't be (often incorrectly) influenced by these pundits and managers. 

Very true and it is mention in the article, if everything wasn't under a microscope (and weren't possible million dollar decisions) then there wouldn't be so analysed. So its a damn hard job that is for sure

Of the '245 decisions per match' how many are actually difficult?

For me, if a ref gets 99% of decisions correct, but then make one or a few shocker calls that change the match criticism is warranted. There's probably only a handful of 'pivotal' decisions per match. Better comparison with refs is probably a goalkeeper. Will get lambasted for a big mistake even if many times they did many decent rollouts of the ball to a defender or some reasonable goal kicks. As for refs getting a harder time than players do, tell that to Loris Karius!

Also should be appreciated that things can look quite different live depending on the angle ref is looking at etc. How many times have we all watched something at a match and seen afterwards it looks quite different on the replay. 

Not sure what is being said or proposed here about post-match interviews and shows, I certainly don't want them cancelled. I can't remember many times referees have been criticised in pre-match shows.

Criticism of bad refereeing isn't exactly new. Whether the level of criticism is more or about the same as 20 years ago I don't know. VAR is supposed to make things easier for refs, but if it's making things worse for them I'm happy to support them in scrapping it! 

More breakdown of the stats are here https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11096/1080...

But key point: referee make three times more decisions than an average player touches the ball over 90 minutes. Approximately 45 of these decisions are technical - whether goal-kicks, corners or throw-ins - leaving around 200 decisions to judging physical contact and disciplinary actions. Of those 200, around 35 are visible decisions where an action is taken (fouls, restarts), and 165 are non-visible, where play is allowed to continue. In total, refs make around five errors per game, meaning they are right 98 per cent of the time.

The assistant referee makes on average 50 decisions each game; 45 of these are pure offside judgements, with four of these resulting in offside flags. Their accuracy? Again, a staggering 98 per cent.

So referees and ARs make a lot of important calls and overall the get them right, the problem is also the criticism they get from some supporters, is that they get criticised even if they are correct because the call went against their team.

I do agree the probably closest player that compares is the goalkeeper but as above the ref is involved in so many more important or big decisions than anyone else on the field and is more open to criticism because there are two other sides on the field and their fans compared to the three refs.

I don't mind the pre and post match shows but wish that when discuss instances constructively, it is amazing how many on these shows don't know the LOTG and have a go at referees for stuff they got right. (See the Perth v City game on the weekend, they had a go at a referee for a correct handball penalty given).

I'm not a fan of VAR myself and as mention the referee has a lot of different views and VAR gives everyone else a view while not making a split second decision. They get multiple camera angles and slow-mo but I think that is here to stay as well.

I know referees aren't above criticism either, I know I get stuff wrong on the field, I just feel sometimes people forgot the person when it comes to having a go at a call they made.

Yea, fans in general are horrificly one eyed. Was watching my other team Dundee on their online channel the other week, with Dundee commentators. Dundee player slides in, no ball at all straight through the player, pretty shocking tackle. Commentator: "Fantastic tackle!!" Ref calls a foul and gives a yellow. "Not sure what the ref has seen there!!"

There are a bunch of grey areas, like what level of physical contact between bodies is a foul, and the threshold of what is a card or not. Can see this with how interpretations in these areas are quite different in different leagues. In Scotland there's all sorts of contact players get away with that would be called a foul in the A-League. Different refs within leagues may have a slightly different line. Of course it's often said that 'all that's asked for is consistency', but even then if a consistent line is drawn that players/fans don't quite agree with they are still going to complain, especially if losing. Also quite rare in matches that incidents are identical. An incident may be 'similar' but be crossing a new threshold in the refs eyes, then of course it's called into question 'if our player got a card why didn't that'? Often the answer is that they were different tackles and one was slightly worse!

I see a fair bit of not understanding as well that refs are giving yellow cards for professional fouls. Players are heavily coached to intentionally foul these days when the opposition have any sort of break on. The player usually knows they are getting a yellow and accept it fine (or walk away not looking at the ref knowing exactly what they've done and a card is coming but patting themselves on the back). But then of course a few minutes later the other team do a 'worse' tackle and it may not get a yellow because it wasn't a professional foul, but people start doing their nut over OMG that was a far worse tackle than what we got carded for! Well, yes it was, but both can be correct.

All I want from A League referees is consistancy. Be bad or good for both teams. Sadly, this isn't the story and the Nix have received more than their "fair share' of wrong and blatantly wrong calls whilst the Australian teams playing them have generally gotten off very lightly. Remember when Roly was here, hardly a yellow card given for the numerous fouls per game on him.

One could question whether or not match officials are either incompetant in the A League or just following unwritten instructions from further up the food chain but then, it happens in other sports where NZ teams play in Australia too.  So perhaps it is just another national pass time?? 

I don't want them cancelled either, and wasn't trying to suggest they should be. More just that they can change the perception of a referees performance with a focus on decisions. As Yakcall mentioned, "It is amazing how many on these shows don't know the LOTG and have a go at referees for stuff they got right. (See the Perth v City game on the weekend, they had a go at a referee for a correct handball penalty given)." So fantastic decisions can bring criticism because one of the pundits decides they don't like the decision.

I think you and others need to get over this persecution complex and they are out to get us. I can tell you (most) referees try not to go into games to purposely card a player or team. As mention above a lot of people that feel referees got the call wrong are because they don't know the LOTG, and as Colvinator there are grey areas and different management for professional fouls compared to everyday tackles. Fans can be very one eyed and I'm sure there are some supporters of other teams that feel the refs are against them. A lot of Australian fans that aren't Sydney FC or Victory feel there is an FFA conspiracy to make sure they win or get the rub of the green from referees.

So I had a look at cards given per season, so far for this season we sit fourth behind Roar, Mariners and City. Last season we sat 7th in total cards behind WSW, Victory, Roar, United, Jets, Glory, City and Mariners.

Currently for fouls in a game for this season, we have 15.35 earnt on average given by referees, siting in first place (so the referees are calling them for us) and yet we sit third for fouls committed with 14.90. (Behind Roar and WSW)

Last season we sat 7th for earnt with 14.44 average but we only committed 13.81 ourselves so was also 7th for fouls committed.

All this shows is there isn't a bias but it more comes down to the game and how it is played. The players committing the fouls and how the referee has to manage it.

Not with the impression I witnessed from 20 feet from the linesmen the other week in Sydney. Overall you might be right Matt but the line and ref certainly had something going on.

So.... it turns out that Keith Hackett is a complete arse.

https://twitter.com/toprefgeorge/status/1104840223... (read the thread).

https://www.foxsports.com.au/football/a-league/ref...

Fantastic discussion with KGJ about refs, respect for refs, VAR etc. Well worth a listen