Cowshed

People have suggested that the number of penalties BCFC receive is an indication of refereeing poor performance. This poor performance anomaly is peculiar to BCFC. That was the measure other used. I would suggest that this is a peculiar outlier. Its not a measurement of refereeing poor performance. One, twice, can be errors (performance) but not for the measured period. Poor performance cannot only be peculiar to only one team using penalties as the metric. Refs are not turning in poor performances for only one team. If a ref turns in multiple poor performances they are demoted, they lose their employment, and there is list of refs waiting to join the pro ref ranks. Stats are collated by various bodies. IFAB are the overseeing body. As pointed out when a league standard drops they do intervene. The standard of refereeing is not poor across the board. It cannot be. Refs can go up and down levels based upon performance. The interpretation of laws is down to IFAB, FA's and the PGMOL adhere to the guidance IFAB provide. I don't understand what you mean by the promotion of personality. Laws are consistently applied to a game that isn't consistent. You are referring to metrics. What metrics are you using to demonstrate that laws are not being applied fairly to each match? What illogical and inconsistent application of rules are you referring to? Do you have the stats for your assertion? You are going to realms of we, I don't know who your we is. Incompetence is not encouraged. Could you explain how the refereeing structure encourages incompetence? Incompetent refs swill be fired. Competency is a pre requisite of being a ref. What Leadership are you referring to? The FA? The PGMOL? IFAB that utilises EUFA/FIFA? Regarding abuse. If people think there is an us and them, they should reflect on their behaviour.

There are people on this thread who would disagree. Including those who have been corrected over their understanding of the game. You disagree, ok. Do you know what the evaluation process is? The process rewards the attainment of standards. Its linear, to progress individuals have to improve. That is a process of evaluation that raises standards at each refereeing level.

So anecdotal. PMGOL refs are judged on the decisions they make. For every game over the season. There is a merit league. Appointments are linked to merit. Its evaluation based on stats. Not enough merit, out they go. And in come those who are progressing. Its a high performance culture. A level that is equivalent to European peers and monitored by the PMGOL, the FA, and IFAB. The bar isn't low. PGMOL refs display a elite national standard. If they did not IFAB intervene to raise the standard to expectation. The last part regarding the PGOML x IFAB is not an opinion. IFAB do intervene and have, when they feel refs here are not consistently interpreting the rules consistently to their national standard.

Yes. The majority of refs the game is recruiting (4/5) are under 18. The majority of those refs give up in two years. Here is a why. The FA put children refs in purple tops, and yellow socks to identify they are children. It does not stop what is child abuse. Regarding small pool. Yes there is. There are also waiting lists to progress up the ladder. Refs have to display continuous personal development to go through the tiers. At elite level for what are six figure salaries there is a lot of competition. Its very difficult to reach that elite level. The evaluation process drives standards up.

If refs do not improve they do not progress through the process to get to what are elite levels. So how does the process create this collective bad bunch? How are you measuring that?

Refs are demoted if the fall below appropriate levels. Refereeing as a profession is only attainable by improvement. Refs need to acquire assessed and marked standards x physical tests. Refs at level 3/2a/2b/1 are assessed at evert match. To reach the elite level of referee has to display elite levels of refereeing ability.

Do you think that is an example of referees displaying incompetence towards solely one football team? In regards to your question. No I do not think it is. Football is a culture to its itself. Psychologically we experience things from football we do not in wider life. What we see in football is an accepted culture. It is accepted that we can criticise and intimidate officials. That we would not behave similarly in our local corner shop. Football the game here is not a parallel to normal life. Football has a culture of not respecting referees hence the respect campaign and those banners displayed around kids football matches. You get the impression that NP has lost all respect for refs. All of them? He should be reflecting on what he can control and his non negotiables. The laws of the game state refs do not have to explain decisions. Their decisions are final. If he does not like this he can lobby the FA, who then can if they see fit to contact IFAB to see if they can accommodate whatever it is Nigel Pearson wants. He may also want to provide his dossier on how Bristol City are being, and only Bristol City are being treated inconsistently consistently. Referee performances are scrutinised, data is cross referenced and these refs who are treating only Bristol City will stick out as statistical anomalies. If its taking its toll, he should be self reflecting, get Bill Beswick in, one of Mr Beswick's approaches is to use evidence bases to provide clarity, those stats. Evidence combats bias, bias that can cloud judgement and have a negative affect on emotions and decision making. You have used mass and a lot, then objectively bad, Being objective how are you measuring this? A mass of bad decisions cannot attach themselves to just one club over differing data. One measurement, or two yes as outliers, but all the games decisions versus a league? No. There there has to be explanation. Rank bad luck wont be it .. Leaving? Conspiracy, their all out to get BCFC? No again. PMGOL Professional refs who go through a arduous process to become elite referees according to Mr Pearson do not know what they are doing. Mr Pearson critique and antipathy towards refs is not objective, its clearly based on opinion and feelings.

Abuse is bad effect. The bad effect at the games zenith's permeates through football's pyramid. Mr Pearson legitimate criticisms are opinions. PMGOL ref efficiency favourably with any league in Europe. Ref efficiency is scrutinised and fed back to IFAB, who on occasions will direct FA's etc to intervene in how rules are applied consistently. Mr Pearson threw in the good old don't know football. Refs cannot progress up the ladder without knowing football. Managers and coaches frequently don't know the rules, and frequently don't know reffing. The consistency argument is used again and again, and by Nigel Pearson. Mr Pearson would loathe refs being consistent over a game that is not. Each scenario is not the same. Game temperature requires differing intervention, and at times differing sanction, the last ten minutes of a game will not be the same as the first, player behaviour and that match temperature ebbs and flows. Masses of decisions .. There is no conspiracy.

Calling a official a cheat is dissent. The sanction will be a yellow, or red card. That is not harsh.

Mr Pearson has his perception. You like a stat, how would you measure turmoil? How would you measure the whole thing needs a shake up? What is the it Mr Pearson refers to? He is criticising refs as irritating, inconsistent, not good enough. All of them? Nigel Pearson is sick to the back teeth ... Refs are sick to the back teeth in this Country of the treatment they are receiving. The game is losing by wide margins more refs than it is recruiting. Refs are being attacked, verbally abused consistently across the Country and there is a connection between the disrespect refs receive at the top of the game and the real evidence based turmoil at its grass roots. A grass roots that feeds refs up the pyramid. So, no he is not spot on. Mr Pearson may want to think about his words and their consequences. Refs are human, they deserve respect, when you deligitimise and dehumanise refs its become easier to abuse them, including the child refs who are also on the receiving end of abuse .. Mr Pearson is part of that.

Again you may want to consider variables. Playing a right footed player on the left could increase crease opportunity. Techy speak inversion frequently means if the player cuts in on his stronger right foot he will be attacking defenders weaker defending left foot, which can increase crossing opportunity. Inversion also alters passing patterns, patterns that can become more effective as the speed and efficiency increases. I used could and can, the players skills will obviously effect the efficiency.

A player could cross a ball adeptly and be consistently unsuccessful. What is the player aiming at? What are their skills? What are the skills of the opponent and what areas are they skilled at defending? Teams dropping off deny crossing opportunities. Teams playing CDM's/holding midfielders double up in wide positions forcing crosses from deeper less effective positions. There are a lot of variables to consider. Teams can suddenly outperform their open play crossing norms at set pieces if they have an outlier, or two to drop the ball on. Bristol City - Aden Flint!

There is no major problem with consistency. Football is not consistent. You don't see that it given x amount of times because the it is not consistent. In this situation the ref has variables to consider, in any situation there are variables = It is inconsistent. Two scenarios: Multiple players challenging for the ball, players jumping and jostling and the ball unintentionally strikes an arm of one of the competing players in the penalty area. Player jumps for the ball unchallenged with his arms in an unnatural position and the ball strikes an arm in the penalty area. The consequences of the ball hitting the arm will be different in these two scenarios because refs generally will apply rules consistently.

A player cannot touch an official. A should not attempt to grab an official, a standard players, and Liverpool clearly break. Your question does not make sense. There is no same. Officials do not behave as players do, as the Liverpool players do, and as Robertson in particular does. There is no law in the game for a sanction for a official coming into contact with a player because its wholly unnecessary, it does not happen. If you are referring to player on player? Would a player be punished? There was no violent conduct, so no red. Excessive force? No. This leaves a caution. The scenario is wholly different.

These are Liverpool players in the same game. The officials do not behave in this manner. In reply to your question you removed the context. Nobody is going to challenge you and attempt to grab you in the street in a kit and shin pads. It is not a parallel.

It is not a double standard. You will not find a standard where officials get into players personal space, grab them, insult them etc. This is a standard of the players.

I answered the part I felt was interesting. Thank you. No. Bristol City football fan culture is apolitical. Left and right support this club and that is what will be in the seats next to us, or in the coaches, vans and trains we travel to away games to. Our fandom doesn't care. Your little bubble, your little our may differ, mine does not. I do not know. I recollect on my last trip to Luton some edgy chants as a response to locals poor knowledge of geography, Bristol is not a small town in Wales. So, politics? Nah.

How was and is Bristol City's terrace culture political? The opposite is true. City fans have kept the politics out.

You can be answering your own question. Football represents differing things to differing people. If it was about the quest for joy, why watch BCFC? These are season ticket holders who display a deep emotional investment of being regulars. We don't shout, vent, criticise, behave in our wider life, or invest ourselves in the same behaviours away from football. Football = An escape.

Ian is knowledgeable. Defending tasks should alter when a team is outnumbered and out of shape. Cornick could have done more. Getting closer to the first defenders to provide balance, cover and support versus would have been an improvement.

Restarts, free kicks. The whistle can be used when the appropriate distance is required. This is included in IFAB's advice on body language, communication and whistle. The advice of when to blow the whistle is as sound as it gets - IFAB are responsible for the laws of the game.

In that position, and with that delay etc a free kick to the whistle (ceremonial free kick) would not be ignoring the laws. It would be normal. Its surprising that the ref in this instance does not show the whistle, state on my whistle, place the ball, then move to allowing the opponents opportunity to form the wall, ensure the wall is in the correct position and move on to blowing the whistle to restart the match. This is a rule at free kicks.

Its an example that fits the scenario in your initial post. Its not ignoring the laws.

Given the timescale the non quick free kick was taken going to ceremonial does make sense. Free kicks around the box taking that long post ten seconds will go on the whistle. This free kick is unusual (controversial), it did not follow norms.

Because that is what the ref wants. The ref if moving players away from the ball to ten metres uses the whistle - He will state play to my whistle, he will state what he wants. That manages the game, its control, its management.