Do referees really want help?

[Clutton Caveman]

Over the last few years, referees have been given the power to stamp our bad behaviour.

Years ago they were allowed to advance a free kick 10 yards for decent. They did it for a couple of weeks and then it disappeared.

Recently we see players booked when more than 2 players approach the ref. This also seems to have died out. Seems to me they cannot complain if they don't maximise rule changes that help them. With recent form they certainly seem to need help.

I think that in any other job you do not have to put up with somebody having a foul mouthed rant at you. Why should refs have to put up with this? Foul and abusive language used to be a sending off offence.

Kicking the ball away was a yellow card. Now when any decision such as a throw in or free kick is given against a player he automatically kicks it away. The only way you get a yellow now is to punt it into the stand.

All of these small things in my opinion detract from the quality of the product and the entertainment level.

As I am venting, can anyone understand why the obstruction rule was phased out? In its day this rule prevented the time wasting around the corner flag made defenders play the ball as it approached the goal line. Again increased entertainment

Finally grappling in the box at corners and free kicks. This is only negative in my opinion. For me any holding using the arms on an player in the box should be a free kick or penalty. This is a fairly recent phenomenon as usual creeping in from from the continent. If this simple rule was applied , entertainment would improve.

Really finally. If Sykes can be retrospectively banned for violent conduct, why can't divers or players who fake facial contact suffer the same fate.

End of rant. 

[Davefevs]

Add “play a proper advantage” too.

[Guest]

23 minutes ago, Clutton Caveman said:

Over the last few years, referees have been given the power to stamp our bad behaviour.

Years ago they were allowed to advance a free kick 10 yards for decent. They did it for a couple of weeks and then it disappeared.

Recently we see players booked when more than 2 players approach the ref. This also seems to have died out. Seems to me they cannot complain if they don't maximise rule changes that help them. With recent form they certainly seem to need help.

I think that in any other job you do not have to put up with somebody having a foul mouthed rant at you. Why should refs have to put up with this? Foul and abusive language used to be a sending off offence.

Kicking the ball away was a yellow card. Now when any decision such as a throw in or free kick is given against a player he automatically kicks it away. The only way you get a yellow now is to punt it into the stand.

All of these small things in my opinion detract from the quality of the product and the entertainment level.

As I am venting, can anyone understand why the obstruction rule was phased out? In its day this rule prevented the time wasting around the corner flag made defenders play the ball as it approached the goal line. Again increased entertainment

Finally grappling in the box at corners and free kicks. This is only negative in my opinion. For me any holding using the arms on an player in the box should be a free kick or penalty. This is a fairly recent phenomenon as usual creeping in from from the continent. If this simple rule was applied , entertainment would improve.

Really finally. If Sykes can be retrospectively banned for violent conduct, why can't divers or players who fake facial contact suffer the same fate.

End of rant. 

Thanks for this, absolutely winds me up when refs don't apply the laws readily available to them for the benefit of the game.

Players will also run a number of yards to purposefully stand Infront of the ball at a free kick to stop it being taken quickly which is literally a booking:

"However, an opponent who deliberately prevents a free kick being taken quickly must be cautioned for delaying the restart of play."

Whilst I'm not a fan of all the law changes, I'd love to see it as an offence for any of the defending team to touch the ball when the whistle has blown for a foul or if the ball goes out of play (throw in/corner/goal kick) stop all the picking it up and walking away with it etc... This is of course is a rant about the ref's inability to punish anyone so would pretty much be a useless change however 

[Midred]

And if they do use their "powers" then use them consistantly to both teams. I used to think that the other team could get away with anything before the ref had booked one of our players and that would be after a first offence!

[Clevedon Red]

I thought they were trialling sin bins at lower leagues that seems to have died a death as well.

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

1 hour ago, Clutton Caveman said:

Over the last few years, referees have been given the power to stamp our bad behaviour.

Years ago they were allowed to advance a free kick 10 yards for decent. They did it for a couple of weeks and then it disappeared.

Recently we see players booked when more than 2 players approach the ref. This also seems to have died out. Seems to me they cannot complain if they don't maximise rule changes that help them. With recent form they certainly seem to need help.

I think that in any other job you do not have to put up with somebody having a foul mouthed rant at you. Why should refs have to put up with this? Foul and abusive language used to be a sending off offence.

Kicking the ball away was a yellow card. Now when any decision such as a throw in or free kick is given against a player he automatically kicks it away. The only way you get a yellow now is to punt it into the stand.

All of these small things in my opinion detract from the quality of the product and the entertainment level.

As I am venting, can anyone understand why the obstruction rule was phased out? In its day this rule prevented the time wasting around the corner flag made defenders play the ball as it approached the goal line. Again increased entertainment

Finally grappling in the box at corners and free kicks. This is only negative in my opinion. For me any holding using the arms on an player in the box should be a free kick or penalty. This is a fairly recent phenomenon as usual creeping in from from the continent. If this simple rule was applied , entertainment would improve.

Really finally. If Sykes can be retrospectively banned for violent conduct, why can't divers or players who fake facial contact suffer the same fate.

End of rant. 

Totally agree with this. But I sometimes wonder if the problem is that referees are not allowed to referee without interference. The only rules they should need to abide by are the laws of the game. Have I missed obstruction and indirect free kicks for that matter being taken out of the laws. It seems to me that they're only not applied due to outside interference by the football authorities and PMGOL. Give referees the power back to be their own man, to make decisions based on the laws, and in the Premier league be able to tell the VAR official to go forth and multiply. 

[Davefevs]

13 minutes ago, Clevedon Red said:

I thought they were trialling sin bins at lower leagues that seems to have died a death as well.

Still happening.  From a report of City’s Gloucester Cup match a week or so ago, City had a player sin-binned.

[Clevedon Red]

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Still happening.  From a report of City’s Gloucester Cup match a week or so ago, City had a player sin-binned.

Ah good, I hope they bring it in.

[bcfc01]

There was a thread recently about an article about referees and the thing that stuck with me was how they can "even up" a game by giving a penalty after they've made a mistake that allowed the other team to score. That was the super star (in his own mind) Mark Clattenburg that admitted he had done that in a Champions League game.

That is just wrong, its like running the game according to the referees determination, it is cheating. Two wrongs don't make a right.

I thought they were supposed to be professional, they deserve all the flak they get as far as I'm concerned.

 

 

 

 

[shelts]

Interesting comments . I think refs would ultimately like to get it right as much as they can . They do need help but the way VAR is it’s doing the game more damage than good . Different interpretations of the rules in different country’s doesn’t help . 

[southside]

4 hours ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

Totally agree with this. But I sometimes wonder if the problem is that referees are not allowed to referee without interference. The only rules they should need to abide by are the laws of the game. Have I missed obstruction and indirect free kicks for that matter being taken out of the laws. It seems to me that they're only not applied due to outside interference by the football authorities and PMGOL. Give referees the power back to be their own man, to make decisions based on the laws, and in the Premier league be able to tell the VAR official to go forth and multiply. 

Talking of indirect free kicks, only yesterday I was watching a YouTube video of us playing Everton at AG from 78, we were given one in the penalty area from which Norman Hunter absolutely  smashed it in

 

[Portland Bill]

4 hours ago, Clevedon Red said:

I thought they were trialling sin bins at lower leagues that seems to have died a death as well.

Sun bins are being used in the lower leagues, this has been going on for the last 3-4 seasons. 

[Portland Bill]

5 hours ago, Clutton Caveman said:

Over the last few years, referees have been given the power to stamp our bad behaviour.

Years ago they were allowed to advance a free kick 10 yards for decent. They did it for a couple of weeks and then it disappeared.

Recently we see players booked when more than 2 players approach the ref. This also seems to have died out. Seems to me they cannot complain if they don't maximise rule changes that help them. With recent form they certainly seem to need help.

I think that in any other job you do not have to put up with somebody having a foul mouthed rant at you. Why should refs have to put up with this? Foul and abusive language used to be a sending off offence.

Kicking the ball away was a yellow card. Now when any decision such as a throw in or free kick is given against a player he automatically kicks it away. The only way you get a yellow now is to punt it into the stand.

All of these small things in my opinion detract from the quality of the product and the entertainment level.

As I am venting, can anyone understand why the obstruction rule was phased out? In its day this rule prevented the time wasting around the corner flag made defenders play the ball as it approached the goal line. Again increased entertainment

Finally grappling in the box at corners and free kicks. This is only negative in my opinion. For me any holding using the arms on an player in the box should be a free kick or penalty. This is a fairly recent phenomenon as usual creeping in from from the continent. If this simple rule was applied , entertainment would improve.

Really finally. If Sykes can be retrospectively banned for violent conduct, why can't divers or players who fake facial contact suffer the same fate.

End of rant. 

You make some good points. 
But…. Some of the things you complain aren’t being done… we’re being done… but fans complained about them!.

For instance, kicking the ball away, this was clamped down on, but, fans complained that players were getting booked for “petty” taps of the ball, so referees were told to only book players when the ball is kicked away a distance. 
Foul and abusive language has been allowed to get out of control in the top leagues, referees further down the pyramid ( especially non league referees ) are fuming that the top referees seem to be ignoring it. Because, these non league referees then get the same tirade of abuse thrown at them, but will use the red card. Then you get players and managers complaining that the top leagues players do the same but get away with it !!.  
 

I don’t follow your “obstruction” point. Obstruction is always penalised, but shielding the ball is not an offence in the laws of the game.

Re grappling at corners etc, this seems to have become an acceptable part of the game nowadays, so much is going on that a referee needs ten pairs of eyes. If at the top level a referee does give a penalty for holding, the tv pundits will  then scrutinise every corner and ask why “this, this, and this” wasn’t given as well. 
 

Re the moving the ball forward 10 yards for dissent. This was simply a trial and only happened in the Prem,it lasted 4 years and was scrapped. Some teams took advantage of it and deliberately took a yellow card, this so the referee had to move the ball 10 yards closer to goal, making it harder for some of the free kick experts to get the ball up and down over the wall.

At the end of the day referees cannot win, if they clamp down hard on certain things the fans complain. When they don’t, the same fans complain!. Who would be a referee, no wonder they are quitting in their droves. Some local leagues are struggling to get refs, the abuse and the violence against them just isn’t worth the £25, so they are just walking away. 
It’s funny, because there are so many “experts” out there, but not many who will go out and put their expertise into practise!!. 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Portland Bill said:

At the end of the day referees cannot win,

They can win….they can communicate / educate better, even little changes in their tolerance to things like kicking the ball away.

Will wait to see how Webb transforms refereeing.

[Portland Bill]

8 hours ago, Davefevs said:

They can win….they can communicate / educate better, even little changes in their tolerance to things like kicking the ball away.

Will wait to see how Webb transforms refereeing.

They communicate for 90 minutes believe me. I’ve pointed out before about  the kicking the ball away matter. Managers and players ( and fans!)  moaned about the amount of bookings for small misdemeanours ( in their eyes) which often led to a player getting a red for two minor offences.

So, the FA told referees not to give yellows for these ‘minor’ offences. 
So don’t blame referees for following instructions given to them from the powers that be. 
 

Let’s imagine, 30 minutes to play, Alex Scott already on a yellow card, proceeds to kick the ball 5 yards away after giving away a free kick. Do you want him sent off?. Or do you want the ref to just have a word?. 

[1960maaan]

16 hours ago, Clutton Caveman said:

As I am venting, can anyone understand why the obstruction rule was phased out?

I remember reading that 'Obstruction' was being dropped, but it looks like it was (pointlessly) renamed. Below from the Irish examiner ;
"In a longwindedness drive, the offence ‘obstruction’ was removed from Fifa’s Laws of the Game in 1997 and was replaced with “impeding the progress of an opponent.”
‘Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.’

The penalty for impeding remains an indirect free-kick"

10 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

I don’t follow your “obstruction” point. Obstruction is always penalised, but shielding the ball is not an offence in the laws of the game.

I do get why @Clutton Caveman said it was dropped, as I said it was announced at the time. Just in real terms it meant nothing.
As for 'Shielding the ball" . I was always told , to shield the ball legally, you had to be within playing distance of the ball. In todays game I have seen players yards away from the ball, basically shoulder charging an opponent to stop him getting the ball, and nothing given. As always, inconsistency and lack of clarity are a main fault. 

You can throw the ball away and not get punished, but kick it the same distance and you possibly would.
Kick a player running through chasing after a ball , when you are yards away from the ball , with no chance of playing the it, and it's a booking. If the same player was stood still not trying to play the ball ? Sending off. 

Little inconsistencies that need clearing and cleaning up. Personally I think that Assistant Referees should be used as such. The days of Offsides and throw ins should be binned and more trust and power given to them. It seems some Refs (not all) still believe that they are the only eyes on the pitch worth a say. 

[Portland Bill]

17 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I remember reading that 'Obstruction' was being dropped, but it looks like it was (pointlessly) renamed. Below from the Irish examiner ;
"In a longwindedness drive, the offence ‘obstruction’ was removed from Fifa’s Laws of the Game in 1997 and was replaced with “impeding the progress of an opponent.”
‘Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.’

The penalty for impeding remains an indirect free-kick"

I do get why @Clutton Caveman said it was dropped, as I said it was announced at the time. Just in real terms it meant nothing.
As for 'Shielding the ball" . I was always told , to shield the ball legally, you had to be within playing distance of the ball. In todays game I have seen players yards away from the ball, basically shoulder charging an opponent to stop him getting the ball, and nothing given. As always, inconsistency and lack of clarity are a main fault. 

You can throw the ball away and not get punished, but kick it the same distance and you possibly would.
Kick a player running through chasing after a ball , when you are yards away from the ball , with no chance of playing the it, and it's a booking. If the same player was stood still not trying to play the ball ? Sending off. 

Little inconsistencies that need clearing and cleaning up. Personally I think that Assistant Referees should be used as such. The days of Offsides and throw ins should be binned and more trust and power given to them. It seems some Refs (not all) still believe that they are the only eyes on the pitch worth a say. 

Shielding/protecting the ball has become part of the modern game, every player does it, none of them complain, it’s now accepted, the officials rarely get involved, simply not worth making a meal out of something which players accept is the norm.

 With regard to the ‘taking one for the team foul’ and as you described it, I totally agree, a lot of those fouls should be a red. It’s exactly the same as a professional foul when a player is through on goal. 
Assistant referees are heavily involved in decision making, they are in constant 90 minute communication with the referee on microphone but you just don’t see it. 
Re kicking/throwing the ball away, I explained in a previous post how things have changed re this. 

[italian dave]

1 hour ago, Portland Bill said:

Shielding/protecting the ball has become part of the modern game, every player does it, none of them complain, it’s now accepted, the officials rarely get involved, simply not worth making a meal out of something which players accept is the norm.

 With regard to the ‘taking one for the team foul’ and as you described it, I totally agree, a lot of those fouls should be a red. It’s exactly the same as a professional foul when a player is through on goal. 
Assistant referees are heavily involved in decision making, they are in constant 90 minute communication with the referee on microphone but you just don’t see it. 
Re kicking/throwing the ball away, I explained in a previous post how things have changed re this. 

I get what you’re saying about shielding/protecting the ball. And nowadays there’s much more emphasis on body strength and being able to use provided you’ve gained control of the ball.

But is there not still a requirement that you have to be making some effort to play the ball, and not simply to get in the way of an opponent who is trying to play the ball. I’m thinking of those scenarios where players shield it out for a goal kick, for example, but do so for 10 yards, and deliberately moving their body to stop their opponent getting round them.

And the other ‘obstruction’ that never seems to get given is when, nowhere near the ball, one player deliberately moves in front of another to stop them making a run for the ball, for example to chase it down before it reaches the keeper. 

[Cowshed]

17 hours ago, Clutton Caveman said:

Over the last few years, referees have been given the power to stamp our bad behaviour.

Years ago they were allowed to advance a free kick 10 yards for decent. They did it for a couple of weeks and then it disappeared.

Recently we see players booked when more than 2 players approach the ref. This also seems to have died out. Seems to me they cannot complain if they don't maximise rule changes that help them. With recent form they certainly seem to need help.

I think that in any other job you do not have to put up with somebody having a foul mouthed rant at you. Why should refs have to put up with this? Foul and abusive language used to be a sending off offence.

Kicking the ball away was a yellow card. Now when any decision such as a throw in or free kick is given against a player he automatically kicks it away. The only way you get a yellow now is to punt it into the stand.

All of these small things in my opinion detract from the quality of the product and the entertainment level.

As I am venting, can anyone understand why the obstruction rule was phased out? In its day this rule prevented the time wasting around the corner flag made defenders play the ball as it approached the goal line. Again increased entertainment

Finally grappling in the box at corners and free kicks. This is only negative in my opinion. For me any holding using the arms on an player in the box should be a free kick or penalty. This is a fairly recent phenomenon as usual creeping in from from the continent. If this simple rule was applied , entertainment would improve.

Really finally. If Sykes can be retrospectively banned for violent conduct, why can't divers or players who fake facial contact suffer the same fate.

End of rant. 

You use the word entertainment frequently, but not game. 

You are using examples there that are not new phenomenons. Players and coaches will always look to create advantages to achieve their objective - their success. 

Referees are generally objective. They have to decide what to let go and what to penalise, and what to sanction. Referees do not view what is a game as product and entertainment. Neither do players. Its a game were the object is to win. Referees attempt to keep the game going. If referees intervene for every transgression your product and your entertainment will suffer, and the game will not flow.

 

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Portland Bill said:

They communicate for 90 minutes believe me. I’ve pointed out before about  the kicking the ball away matter. Managers and players ( and fans!)  moaned about the amount of bookings for small misdemeanours ( in their eyes) which often led to a player getting a red for two minor offences.

So, the FA told referees not to give yellows for these ‘minor’ offences. 
So don’t blame referees for following instructions given to them from the powers that be. 
 

Let’s imagine, 30 minutes to play, Alex Scott already on a yellow card, proceeds to kick the ball 5 yards away after giving away a free kick. Do you want him sent off?. Or do you want the ref to just have a word?. 

I’m talking about communicating / education to fans, to the media, etc.

re small misdemeanours, well for me they’ve made a rod for their own backs, and it’s a downward spiral of weakening the rules / laws (whatever they’re called).  Why not tell managers / players to “suck it up” rather than bend the rules for them l because they had a little whine.  And are decisions made with a view to how they they impact refereeing at lower levels.  It only takes a strong ref (and their bosses) to start tackling things like swearing, crowding, etc by sending players off, and it will start helping refs at lower levels.  Pro refs have a huge role to play in setting the standards of what is acceptable or not.

Mark my words, a few weeks of managers seeing refs enforce rules and sending a few off might make them think differently.  But today they moan and get their way as the rules are changed.

You’re passionate about refereeing.  I get that.  But I also think you’re in the camp of refs can’t come under any criticism too.

I’m passionate about the rules being followed consistently, I’m not blaming refs at all.  But, when does Alex Scott’s 5 yard kick the ball away become a distance where he does get a yellow for example.  6 yards, 7 yards…???  Isn’t an offence and offence, does “minor” come into it?  If kicking the ball away is a yellow card offence, and he’s on a yellow, then send him off.  It doesn’t matter whether he’s Alex Scott, nor what minute of the game it is, nor whether he’s on a yellow or not.  That’s what winds me up, I don’t believe there’s anything in the rules that say the ref should take those factors into their decision.

Rugby, usually very good about their rules, got it wrong a few years back with lifting at lineouts.  They changed the rules to allow lifting and it’s now a bloody farce.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, 1960maaan said:

I remember reading that 'Obstruction' was being dropped, but it looks like it was (pointlessly) renamed. Below from the Irish examiner ;
"In a longwindedness drive, the offence ‘obstruction’ was removed from Fifa’s Laws of the Game in 1997 and was replaced with “impeding the progress of an opponent.”
‘Impeding the progress of an opponent means moving into the path of the opponent to obstruct, block, slow down or force a change of direction by an opponent when the ball is not within playing distance of either player.’

…and why isn’t it enforced when an attacker trying to close down a keeper is impeded by a defender blocking his route?

That winds me up too.  It’s pretty easy to spot.

[italian dave]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I’m talking about communicating / education to fans, to the media, etc.

re small misdemeanours, well for me they’ve made a rod for their own backs, and it’s a downward spiral of weakening the rules / laws (whatever they’re called).  Why not tell managers / players to “suck it up” rather than bend the rules for them l because they had a little whine.  And are decisions made with a view to how they they impact refereeing at lower levels.  It only takes a strong ref (and their bosses) to start tackling things like swearing, crowding, etc by sending players off, and it will start helping refs at lower levels.  Pro refs have a huge role to play in setting the standards of what is acceptable or not.

Mark my words, a few weeks of managers seeing refs enforce rules and sending a few off might make them think differently.  But today they moan and get their way as the rules are changed.

You’re passionate about refereeing.  I get that.  But I also think you’re in the camp of refs can’t come under any criticism too.

I’m passionate about the rules being followed consistently, I’m not blaming refs at all.  But, when does Alex Scott’s 5 yard kick the ball away become a distance where he does get a yellow for example.  6 yards, 7 yards…???  Isn’t an offence and offence, does “minor” come into it?  If kicking the ball away is a yellow card offence, and he’s on a yellow, then send him off.  It doesn’t matter whether he’s Alex Scott, nor what minute of the game it is, nor whether he’s on a yellow or not.  That’s what winds me up, I don’t believe there’s anything in the rules that say the ref should take those factors into their decision.

Rugby, usually very good about their rules, got it wrong a few years back with lifting at lineouts.  They changed the rules to allow lifting and it’s now a bloody farce.

I guess part of the up issue is that it’s also about intent, and that’s where it all gets much more difficult.

Alex Scott picking the ball up might be a much more deliberate (and effective) way of holding up play than just knocking it away. But it might also be him being sporting and returning the ball!

And players who get blown up for offside but still make that last kick to put the ball in the net? Is that not hearing the whistle? Is it just the instinct of a striker who can’t resist? Or is it a deliberate attempt to waste time. 

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, italian dave said:

I guess part of the up issue is that it’s also about intent, and that’s where it all gets much more difficult.

Alex Scott picking the ball up might be a much more deliberate (and effective) way of holding up play than just knocking it away. But it might also be him being sporting and returning the ball!

And players who get blown up for offside but still make that last kick to put the ball in the net? Is that not hearing the whistle? Is it just the instinct of a striker who can’t resist? Or is it a deliberate attempt to waste time. 

Quite simply, once the whistle goes, you shouldn’t be allowed to touch the ball and should move away as quickly as possible.  So that would cover off picking it up…which often leads to a melee of players trying to grab it.

Whatever the motives of the offside…see above rule, whistle goes, stop, move away.

[Steve Watts]

2 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

They communicate for 90 minutes believe me. I’ve pointed out before about  the kicking the ball away matter. Managers and players ( and fans!)  moaned about the amount of bookings for small misdemeanours ( in their eyes) which often led to a player getting a red for two minor offences.

So, the FA told referees not to give yellows for these ‘minor’ offences. 
So don’t blame referees for following instructions given to them from the powers that be. 
 

Let’s imagine, 30 minutes to play, Alex Scott already on a yellow card, proceeds to kick the ball 5 yards away after giving away a free kick. Do you want him sent off?. Or do you want the ref to just have a word?. 

Want? No

Who would I be angry with if he was sent off?  Alex Scott, not the ref.

Personally the change I would like to see made is that the ball may move to anywhere within the radius of the distance that the ball was kicked or carried away.  So if an opposition player kicks it 15 yards away the ball can be moved 15 yards in any direction the team choose.  That way if there's a foul on the touchline for example it can be brought into a much better position.  No limit on the possible distance either.

As for Managers and Players moaning about the number of bookings, the FA direction is ridiculous.  Don't change the bloody rules/guidance. Get the managers to change their players behaviour!

[italian dave]

17 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Quite simply, once the whistle goes, you shouldn’t be allowed to touch the ball and should move away as quickly as possible.  So that would cover off picking it up…which often leads to a melee of players trying to grab it.

Whatever the motives of the offside…see above rule, whistle goes, stop, move away.

Crikey…..there’d be no-one left on the pitch if you reffed some games!!!

In principle, yes. But I think refs are right to show some common sense, turn a blind eye sometimes.

There was a story I heard a long time back from a league ref (can’t recall the ref or a player) who made a decision that a player disagreed with. Said player made his feelings known with an angry “you must be f###ing blind ref”. The ref replied “I didn’t hear that”. To which the player responded “F###ing deaf as well”

[onlyotib]

18 hours ago, Loïs said:

Thanks for this, absolutely winds me up when refs don't apply the laws readily available to them for the benefit of the game.

Players will also run a number of yards to purposefully stand Infront of the ball at a free kick to stop it being taken quickly which is literally a booking:

"However, an opponent who deliberately prevents a free kick being taken quickly must be cautioned for delaying the restart of play."

Whilst I'm not a fan of all the law changes, I'd love to see it as an offence for any of the defending team to touch the ball when the whistle has blown for a foul or if the ball goes out of play (throw in/corner/goal kick) stop all the picking it up and walking away with it etc... This is of course is a rant about the ref's inability to punish anyone so would pretty much be a useless change however 

 

I agree. Why do we not see the free kick taker absolutely welly the ball against the player stopping the quickly taken free kick. Is there consequences against this for the team awarded the free kick? 

[Steve Watts]

29 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Quite simply, once the whistle goes, you shouldn’t be allowed to touch the ball and should move away as quickly as possible.  So that would cover off picking it up…which often leads to a melee of players trying to grab it.

Whatever the motives of the offside…see above rule, whistle goes, stop, move away.

Agreed.  The only caveat is that if you're in the process of making the kick you're not penalised.  I remember Tins getting sent off for kicking the ball away years ago.  IIRC he was swinging for the ball when the whistle went.  A 2 second grace period for the player to register the whistle and stop should be more than sufficient.

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

Sorry, but the issue for me is that referees’ jobs have been made completely impossible by a) the attitude of the players, who think they are above the game; b) the constant and intense scrutiny via media that many referees experience; and c) the intolerance of fans who fail to understand how difficult a referee’s job is.

If players took some responsibility, rather than protesting about every decision that goes against them, whether the decision is correct or not; if managers reinforced good behaviour and supported referees rather than bawling abuse from the touchline and failing to criticise their own players’ behaviour; and if everyone acknowledged how difficult it is to referee a football match and that mistakes are inevitable - then we might get somewhere.

It’s a wonder anyone wants to be a referee these days, and there is a real crisis at grassroots level with so few refs available.

[W-S-M Seagull]

What happened to the GK having 8 seconds to release the ball? 

[Clutton Caveman]

13 hours ago, Portland Bill said:

You make some good points. 
But…. Some of the things you complain aren’t being done… we’re being done… but fans complained about them!.

For instance, kicking the ball away, this was clamped down on, but, fans complained that players were getting booked for “petty” taps of the ball, so referees were told to only book players when the ball is kicked away a distance. 
Foul and abusive language has been allowed to get out of control in the top leagues, referees further down the pyramid ( especially non league referees ) are fuming that the top referees seem to be ignoring it. Because, these non league referees then get the same tirade of abuse thrown at them, but will use the red card. Then you get players and managers complaining that the top leagues players do the same but get away with it !!.  
 

I don’t follow your “obstruction” point. Obstruction is always penalised, but shielding the ball is not an offence in the laws of the game.

Re grappling at corners etc, this seems to have become an acceptable part of the game nowadays, so much is going on that a referee needs ten pairs of eyes. If at the top level a referee does give a penalty for holding, the tv pundits will  then scrutinise every corner and ask why “this, this, and this” wasn’t given as well. 
 

Re the moving the ball forward 10 yards for dissent. This was simply a trial and only happened in the Prem,it lasted 4 years and was scrapped. Some teams took advantage of it and deliberately took a yellow card, this so the referee had to move the ball 10 yards closer to goal, making it harder for some of the free kick experts to get the ball up and down over the wall.

At the end of the day referees cannot win, if they clamp down hard on certain things the fans complain. When they don’t, the same fans complain!. Who would be a referee, no wonder they are quitting in their droves. Some local leagues are struggling to get refs, the abuse and the violence against them just isn’t worth the £25, so they are just walking away. 
It’s funny, because there are so many “experts” out there, but not many who will go out and put their expertise into practise!!. 

The obstruction law said that any player making no attempt to play the ball and blocking an opponent was penalised. When it was in you could not "shepard the ball out"