Refereeing: The Impossible Job

[ExiledAjax]

Listened to this Guardian podcast on the train this morning. It's all about how refereeing works, how they think, how they balance subjectivity and objectivity, how fair it is to expect perfection, and is perfection even possible in a game like football?

It includes quite a bit of honesty around crowd and player influence, and of course a big old chat about VAR and it's use and application.

I found it thought provoking, and even surprising at times, and have come away with some thoughts on what I'd reform.

My main change would be to stop referring to games featuring Man Utd, Man City, Tottenham, Arsenal, Chelsea or Liverpool as "Golden Games", and to stop using a job officiating these games as a reward to encourage refs to perform well. To my mind that embeds a bias towards these teams by confirming that PGMOL think they are special. Find another incentive for the refs, don't further entrench the advantages those teams have already.

Thought others might find it interesting. Suspect it's available on all podcast platforms.

https://pca.st/episode/3bad739a-f83f-493b-bfe6-2124b649bc68

[italian dave]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Listened to this Guardian podcast on the train this morning. It's all about how refereeing works, how they think, how they balance subjectivity and objectivity, how fair it is to expect perfection, and is perfection even possible in a game like football?

It includes quite a bit of honesty around crowd and player influence, and of course a big old chat about VAR and it's use and application.

I found it thought provoking, and even surprising at times, and have come away with some thoughts on what I'd reform.

My main change would be to stop referring to games featuring Man Utd, Man City, Tottenham, Arsenal, Chelsea or Liverpool as "Golden Games", and to stop using a job officiating these games as a reward to encourage refs to perform well. To my mind that embeds a bias towards these teams by confirming that PGMOL think they are special. Find another incentive for the refs, don't further entrench the advantages those teams have already.

Thought others might find it interesting. Suspect it's available on all podcast platforms.

https://pca.st/episode/3bad739a-f83f-493b-bfe6-2124b649bc68

Any mention of Bristol City and penalties?!!

[ExiledAjax]

20 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Any mention of Bristol City and penalties?!!

They'd need a whole podcast series to do that subject justice!

[ExiledAjax]

43 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

I personally think one of the main problems is referees seem to be encouraged to ref to their own style and personality. The game isn't about them or their influence on a game. I remember people defending Webb for not sending De Jong off in the World Cup final because it would have "ruined the game as a spectacle". Utter nonsense. The sole responsibility of a referee should be to rigidly and strictly apply the rules of the game to match being played. They owe the spectators nothing, the players nothing and the clubs nothing.

The PGMOL and the FA need to make the rulebook black and white. The only way you get consistency is to remove the grey. And it's consistency people want, not perfection. 

What is more, if they managed to obtain a reasonable level of consistency the players and coaches and fans would quickly learn what meant what and the atmosphere of attacking, abusing and gesticulating with referees would be greatly reduced. 

Urge you to listen as it's all covered in the podcast. 

The general view of PGMOL is that referees are human, and have personality, and that should be accounted for rather than eradicated. Webb "doesn't want robots".

As for consistency - that's what they've gone toward with the current handball law - and it's throwing up what people perceive to be I incredibly soft or unjust penalties that go against the "spirit" of football.

Personally I hear people asking for consistency of subjectivity - which I think is like asking for tartan paint.

[ExiledAjax]

14 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

Its where the problem of unconscious bias stems from.

PGMOL are well aware of bias. It's far from unconscious. Referees talk quite openly about it in this podcast. Give the thing a listen if you get the chance, then we can discuss.

You're correct that if we want a rigid, purely objective and robotic application of the Laws then there would need to be a complete redraft. However, there's a strong feeling that football doesn't suit that approach and that doing so would kill some sort of spirit or vibe that the game has. Again, this is directly addressed in the podcast with some interesting perspective.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Percy Pig said:

The sole responsibility of a referee should be to rigidly and strictly apply the rules of the game to match being played in whatever minute it happens. They owe the spectators nothing, the players nothing and the clubs nothing.

[ExiledAjax]

Just now, Percy Pig said:

Will try listen in full when the little'un has his nap, EA. 

Ah the always longed-for peace of a sleeping child. I hope you get the two hours we always pray for!

[Davefevs]

51 minutes ago, Percy Pig said:

 

I agreed on some of the VAR stuff, but found the "7 pens and 3 red cards" comment baffling. If true, they all should have been given.

I haven’t listened, but…

…that is naive thinking by refs.

If you start applying the rules, the maybe after the first penalty, or second one, players / managers start to learn…ie, stay on your feet, don’t dangle a leg, don’t put your arms all over him in the box…this ref is gonna give a penalty.  Hopefully the same applies to the next game / ref too, and players stop “pushing” the boundaries.

I honestly can’t remember ever giving away a penalty!!!

Ditto with the red cards, after the first, as a player, you’ve got to be a bit irresponsible (was gonna say stupid) to think the same offence might not end up with another red being given.  We all hear stuff like “don’t give the ref an excuse to make it 10v10”…players adapt and comply more.

I never got sent off.  If I got a yellow, I adapted.

Failure to issue that red, allows players to adapt the other way, ie thinking they can get away with it.  Might George Tanner have thought it was ok to go through a player because Oliver Norwood got away with it?

Too often I see weak refs allow a game to transcend out of control, because they didn’t have the balls to make the first call correctly.

If a player gets booked in the first minute in a Manchester Derby, and does it again 5 minutes later, and gets a second yellow (dismissed), that’s not spoiling the game.  The sooner refs get out of this mentality, the quicker the game / player compliance will improve.  None of this “it’s my first one, ref”.  There us nothing in the rules that say they get “one for free”.

We don’t need to change the rules, we need to apply them.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Davefevs

[View from the Dolman]

34 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I haven’t listened, but…

…that is naive thinking by refs.

If you start applying the rules, the maybe after the first penalty, or second one, players / managers start to learn…ie, stay on your feet, don’t dangle a leg, don’t put your arms all over him in the box…this ref is gonna give a penalty.  Hopefully the same applies to the next game / ref too, and players stop “pushing” the boundaries.

I honestly can’t remember ever giving away a penalty!!!

Ditto with the red cards, after the first, as a player, you’ve got to be a bit irresponsible (was gonna say stupid) to think the same offence might not end up with another red being given.  We all hear stuff like “don’t give the ref an excuse to make it 10v10”…players adapt and comply more.

I never got sent off.  If I got a yellow, I adapted.

Failure to issue that red, allows players to adapt the other way, ie thinking they can get away with it.  Might George Tanner have thought it was ok to go through a player because Oliver Norwood got away with it?

Too often I see weak refs allow a game to transcend out of control, because they didn’t have the balls to make the first call correctly.

If a player gets booked in the first minute in a Manchester Derby, and does it again 5 minutes later, and gets a second yellow (dismissed), that’s not spoiling the game.  The sooner refs get out of this mentality, the quicker the game / player compliance will improve.  None of this “it’s my first one, ref”.  There us nothing in the rules that say they get “one for free”.

We don’t need to change the rules, we need to apply them.

Ask the EFL/PGMOL why the 6 second rule is never applied to goalkeepers and they'll tell you it would ruin the game. But as you say, if you penalise infringements it'd change how goalkeepers behave.

[ScottishRed]

7 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said:

Ask the EFL/PGMOL why the 6 second rule is never applied to goalkeepers and they'll tell you it would ruin the game. But as you say, if you penalise infringements it'd change how goalkeepers behave.

That is a good example of an issue that happens in every game but is rarely penalized. My personal grip is shirt pulling in the box by defenders which is rarely punished but is often picked up if the attacking player is guilty.

The only time I have refereed a game is when I managed in U 18 football and no proper ref was available.

Hated it frankly. It is much harder than I imagined.

Edited April 21, 2023 by ScottishRed

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, Percy Pig said:

All in all a good and thought provoking listen.

Good, I'm glad you found it so. Hope you can catch the last 15 at some point.

1 hour ago, Percy Pig said:

"The law book is just a framework" & "consistency across a single game". Think these two are linked pretty closely and I refer back to some of my points above. This mindset is where so many of the problems as I see them come from.

I broadly agree, especially on the single game point. I didn't like that either as I think it is too accepting of individuality. A parallel I can draw is courtroom judges. In court it's well accepted that each judge has their own personality, their own quirks, tolerances and opinions. It's also accepted that this means they will apply laws in slightly different ways. 

However, the huge difference between court and football is in court you can (normally) appeal against a decision or judgment before you suffer the consequences. Ultimately your appeal will go before a 9 person panel in the Supreme Court, and there you will get a majority judgment. In football of course you don't get this. You get a a split second decision and suffer the consequences moments later, your only court of appeal is to shout at the ref.

So I agree with you that due to the instant and unappealable nature of decisions, subjectivity and the influence of personality should be fettered.

Laws are a framework - yes they are, they always are - but (and this touched your other points) I agree with you that in a modern age we should remove some of the subjectivity from the laws.

My opinion of VAR is that it's unfair and absurd to ask a subjective human to apply subjective laws using an objective tool. To do that consistently across hundreds of games is impossible. The tool is ill suited for the task. The podcast have the example of Hawkeye in tennis working because a ball being in/out is a binary fact. A tackle being "reckless" is not.

1 hour ago, Percy Pig said:

"3rd team on the pitch"

Seemed more to do with building confidence and camaraderie in the officials. To do the job properly they do need to think of themselves as equal, if not superior, to the players. I had little issue with that.

I took more issue with the glamourisation of the role. "Golden Games" and Mariner reminiscing about being on the pitch for big moments with big players. That's ego. That's doing the job for the dinner partie stories. That's where favouritism comes from.

In all I think we agree on a lot of things. I possibly accept a higher level of subjectivity than you, and I'm fine on that. Ultimately I found the piece to be a really valuable contribution to the conversation around refereeing.

@Davefevs listen if you can, there's some lengthy discussion on psychology and professionalism, and it touches on how differently games can be treated as the clock ticks along. I see the point @Percy Pig makes about it letting them off the hook, but I also think expectations of perfection need to be tempered.

Edited April 21, 2023 by ExiledAjax

[Midred]

There used to be a "myth"? that sir Alex gradually narrowed the selection of referees that he would tolerate at Old Trafford?

Also referees should move away from this familiarity with players, they're not mates or going for a drink with them afterwards? In Sunak's words professionalism and integrity should play a part and take away any stigma of favouritism.

 

[REDOXO]

8 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Listened to this Guardian podcast on the train this morning. It's all about how refereeing works, how they think, how they balance subjectivity and objectivity, how fair it is to expect perfection, and is perfection even possible in a game like football?

It includes quite a bit of honesty around crowd and player influence, and of course a big old chat about VAR and it's use and application.

I found it thought provoking, and even surprising at times, and have come away with some thoughts on what I'd reform.

My main change would be to stop referring to games featuring Man Utd, Man City, Tottenham, Arsenal, Chelsea or Liverpool as "Golden Games", and to stop using a job officiating these games as a reward to encourage refs to perform well. To my mind that embeds a bias towards these teams by confirming that PGMOL think they are special. Find another incentive for the refs, don't further entrench the advantages those teams have already.

Thought others might find it interesting. Suspect it's available on all podcast platforms.

https://pca.st/episode/3bad739a-f83f-493b-bfe6-2124b649bc68

I think you may have a point there. An inbuilt biased exists whether some are aware of it or not! By making the holy grail to referee Manchester Utd for example the bias intrinsically will exist 

That In My Opinion plays out throughout all the leagues, the perceived bigger clubs seem to get the rub of decisions. The foul on Bell as he out sprints the defender who then mysteriously falls on to his heels is a great example. Peno or not it was a red card, away at promotion chasing team you are battling the inbuilt prejudices and short of being shot the referee will lean on the side of doing nothing. 
 

As a former referee (who never had any bias :laugh:!) I know bias will exist, however not the way people think! I never went to a game and know no one that did with the overt intent of giving decisions leaning to a greater extent one way or another. Nevertheless you only have to have been in football for 60 years to know it is a thing. 
 

But what to do about it and can you alter the human condition is the issue. 

[ExiledAjax]

18 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

I think you may have a point there. An inbuilt biased exists whether some are aware of it or not! By making the holy grail to referee Manchester Utd for example the bias intrinsically will exist 

That In My Opinion plays out throughout all the leagues, the perceived bigger clubs seem to get the rub of decisions. The foul on Bell as he out sprints the defender who then mysteriously falls on to his heels is a great example. Peno or not it was a red card, away at promotion chasing team you are battling the inbuilt prejudices and short of being shot the referee will lean on the side of doing nothing. 
 

As a former referee (who never had any bias :laugh:!) I know bias will exist, however not the way people think! I never went to a game and know no one that did with the overt intent of giving decisions leaning to a greater extent one way or another. Nevertheless you only have to have been in football for 60 years to know it is a thing. 
 

But what to do about it and can you alter the human condition is the issue. 

The effect of the "Golden Game" ranking is deeper even than you describe.

Referees get chosen for "Golden Games" based on their evaluations received from refereeing "lower" ranked matches.

Prior to all games referees meet to discuss any particular issues. This may include singling out or noting certain players as, for example, tending to dive. The referees in the podcast then admit that this causes them to pay particular attention to decisions the make regarding that player. 

So, in an effort to put in a "good" performance and therefore earn a "Golden Game" a player (or players) in a different game get more focussed treatment from a referee.

So the "Golden Game" classification affects not that Man Utd v Liverpool match, but instead might mean that a Wolves defender gets penalised for a tackle on a Fulham forward when otherwise he would not be. All because the ref is worrying about making decisions in order to referee a "Golden Game".

[PHILINFRANCE]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I haven’t listened, but…

…that is naive thinking by refs.

If you start applying the rules, the maybe after the first penalty, or second one, players / managers start to learn…ie, stay on your feet, don’t dangle a leg, don’t put your arms all over him in the box…this ref is gonna give a penalty.  Hopefully the same applies to the next game / ref too, and players stop “pushing” the boundaries.

I honestly can’t remember ever giving away a penalty!!!

Hah, but did you ever make a tackle or challenge for a header in the box? 

[REDOXO]

30 minutes ago, ExiledAjax said:

The effect of the "Golden Game" ranking is deeper even than you describe.

Referees get chosen for "Golden Games" based on their evaluations received from refereeing "lower" ranked matches.

Prior to all games referees meet to discuss any particular issues. This may include singling out or noting certain players as, for example, tending to dive. The referees in the podcast then admit that this causes them to pay particular attention to decisions the make regarding that player. 

So, in an effort to put in a "good" performance and therefore earn a "Golden Game" a player (or players) in a different game get more focussed treatment from a referee.

So the "Golden Game" classification affects not that Man Utd v Liverpool match, but instead might mean that a Wolves defender gets penalised for a tackle on a Fulham forward when otherwise he would not be. All because the ref is worrying about making decisions in order to referee a "Golden Game".

Every game in the Premier League and the EFL (not completely sure about L1 and L2 but definitely the championship) will have a referee assessor at the match. Typically they will get a DVD of the game after and if there were controversial decisions take it home to analyze and report. 
 

The ones I have met, and there have been a few, typically are regional and Live within 100 miles or so of the home team ground. 
 

The rub is I am not sure what the remit is. Certainly the bloke who gave the Peno at Hull City was spoken to and the EFL went through the processes and procedures after an overtly wrong and game changing decision of which there were three in the game. 
 

BUT to what extent other moments in the game are analyzed that’s a mater of time and influence on the result.
 

Thus one side getting an inordinate amount of dead ball decisions in midfield is not looked at to a greater extent unless the club make a complaint.
 

As Mr Pearson points out on an almost weekly basis it’s to the point that is not worth taking issue with the EFL or PGMOL as the result is a letter that even if the assessment by the commission agrees has no baring on the result and very little on the referee. 
 

However big decisions are looked at retrospectively in games such as for example say Manchester Utd V Fulham and bias at key decisions should and could be addressed time permitting. Which is a problem. Tuesday/ Saturday games give little time to properly review and thus the cycle of bigger teams getting decisions that they shouldn’t have continues. 

[elhombrecito]

All I want to see is foul throws punished. I don't think it's too much to ask...

[BigAl&Toby]

2 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Every game in the Premier League and the EFL (not completely sure about L1 and L2 but definitely the championship) will have a referee assessor at the match. Typically they will get a DVD of the game after and if there were controversial decisions take it home to analyze and report. 
 

The ones I have met, and there have been a few, typically are regional and Live within 100 miles or so of the home team ground. 
 

The rub is I am not sure what the remit is. Certainly the bloke who gave the Peno at Hull City was spoken to and the EFL went through the processes and procedures after an overtly wrong and game changing decision of which there were three in the game. 
 

BUT to what extent other moments in the game are analyzed that’s a mater of time and influence on the result.
 

Thus one side getting an inordinate amount of dead ball decisions in midfield is not looked at to a greater extent unless the club make a complaint.
 

As Mr Pearson points out on an almost weekly basis it’s to the point that is not worth taking issue with the EFL or PGMOL as the result is a letter that even if the assessment by the commission agrees has no baring on the result and very little on the referee. 
 

However big decisions are looked at retrospectively in games such as for example say Manchester Utd V Fulham and bias at key decisions should and could be addressed time permitting. Which is a problem. Tuesday/ Saturday games give little time to properly review and thus the cycle of bigger teams getting decisions that they shouldn’t have continues. 

I don’t think that’s quite right - assessors at games. Used to be the case - I often remember The Milf breezing in at Ashton Gate and explaining how he’d have done it - but I’m not sure BS3 has assessors at each game.

Officials are assessed by an assessor, but now I believe it’s post match and by video.

Could be wrong.

And oh to go back to The Milf. Locks flowing behind him, designer raincoat on with the labels still on the cuffs. 

Those were the days….

[REDOXO]

30 minutes ago, BigAl&Toby said:

I don’t think that’s quite right - assessors at games. Used to be the case - I often remember The Milf breezing in at Ashton Gate and explaining how he’d have done it - but I’m not sure BS3 has assessors at each game.

Officials are assessed by an assessor, but now I believe it’s post match and by video.

Could be wrong.

And oh to go back to The Milf. Locks flowing behind him, designer raincoat on with the labels still on the cuffs. 

Those were the days….

Interesting. Things may have altered at some point recently I don’t know one way or another. However they are typically to be found in the hospitality areas at clubs, not drinking!!

Edit: however if rules have changed (and again I don’t know) it maybe a case of individual referees being assessed, at times for what ever reason, which makes sense as that is an awful lot of assessors. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by REDOXO

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, REDOXO said:

Interesting. Things may have altered at some point recently I don’t know one way or another. However they are typically to be found in the hospitality areas at clubs, not drinking!!

Edit: however if rules have changed (and again I don’t know) it maybe a case of individual referees being assessed, at times for what ever reason, which makes sense as that is an awful lot of assessors. 

The podcast I linked explains about half way through that it is broadly as @BigAl&Toby describes, post match evaluation by impartial analysis. In the case of the premier league they even watch the game on mute in order to remove crowd influence (a measure that some referees disagree with).

1 hour ago, elhombrecito said:

All I want to see is foul throws punished. I don't think it's too much to ask...

I entirely and utterly agree with you. I will join you in dying on that hill.

[REDOXO]

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

The podcast I linked explains about half way through that it is broadly as @BigAl&Toby describes, post match evaluation by impartial analysis. In the case of the premier league they even watch the game on mute in order to remove crowd influence (a measure that some referees disagree with).

I entirely and utterly agree with you. I will join you in dying on that hill.

Post match assessment is clear. By who and how many latterly will depend on what’s gone on 
 

The Premier League has a billion cameras.

The championship and EFL clubs all film (and are filmed) at a much higher standard then ever before and have hard copy CDs etc etc that are given over to actually assess those decisions incidents that require it to the match assessor on the day.

I have been handed more than one over the years as it was considered there wasn’t much to look at in the game! (I guess it’s pretty easy to just make another one or have it downloadable if there was something that subsequently came to light) 

I use hospitality a little bit, particularly away, and have been introduced to a few, as alluded, and on one notable occasion with a Premier League referee who was along for the ride
 

But assessors go to games I can assure you of that. It is to what extent they are always at every game itself (currently) Toby was referring too and I guess this may have changed as technology has altered as I said. 
 

I think MILF is Roger Milward who was always at city post his FA Cup final etc etc etc but that was a long time ago.  I have met assessors way way way way more recently than Rogers days at games, whom I must add are really knowledgeable and prepared to chat with the people at their table. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by REDOXO

[luke_bristol]

An enjoyable listen, but some points were concerning. Not for the first time they admit that they use crowd and okayed reactions to aid their decisions, but clearly it’s not every crowd or our penalty situation wouldn’t have played out in the outrageous way that it did. 

They also mention that they do research on players prior to games, yet I’m pretty sure Luis Suarez was never booked for diving in the PL. Can’t have done that much research then.

Finally the point near the start  on the yellow card issued in lieu of a red. The suggestion is that this is a “happy medium”, which I think shows an outrageous misunderstanding of the implications. The difference between a yellow and a red is night and day, to suggest this is a happy compromise is ridiculous. Retrospective action can’t be taken against the player, and a red completely changes the nature of the game.

That said, they do have a tough job. I did enjoy the show and it’s a great insight into the life of a ref and the assistants. 

 

 

[luke_bristol]

“Players” not “okayed”

[Port Said Red]

Although I agree with parts of @Percy Pig's lengthy posts, I think you have to allow referees more freedom than just "following the rules". To me, many of the most controversial moments come from referees not applying common sense or looking at the wider circumstances in an incident, whether that's the condition of the pitch, the weather, the pressure in the game. It's not as straightforward as "it's a bad tackle" or "the player shouldn't react to provocation". There has to be room for the referee to assess the game as a whole, even if that means it's inevitable that you will get inconsistent results from game to game and referee to referee.

Just following the letter of the law will always upset players and fans more in my opinion.

Edited April 22, 2023 by Port Said Red

[elhombrecito]

20 hours ago, elhombrecito said:

All I want to see is foul throws punished. I don't think it's too much to ask...

The rest of the referee's abysmal performance aside, I witnessed the most blatant foul throw I've ever seen today... And of course it wasn't punished 

[nickolas]

I guess refereeing is impossible when you are as clueless as that joker today!

 

[Red Army 75]

I thought the referee was awful today. 

[Davefevs]

22 minutes ago, nickolas said:

I guess refereeing is impossible when you are as clueless as that joker today!

 

Made a Rod for his own back by not giving a penalty and sending off Humphreys with second yellow.  What happens afterwards is irrelevant.

[nickolas]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Made a Rod for his own back by not giving a penalty and sending off Humphreys with second yellow.  What happens afterwards is irrelevant.

So often clubs get punished for ‘failing to control their players’. Well, if the refs didnt cause and stir up so much sh1t then it wouldnt happen in the first place!

[BigAl&Toby]

21 hours ago, REDOXO said:

Post match assessment is clear. By who and how many latterly will depend on what’s gone on 
 

The Premier League has a billion cameras.

The championship and EFL clubs all film (and are filmed) at a much higher standard then ever before and have hard copy CDs etc etc that are given over to actually assess those decisions incidents that require it to the match assessor on the day.

I have been handed more than one over the years as it was considered there wasn’t much to look at in the game! (I guess it’s pretty easy to just make another one or have it downloadable if there was something that subsequently came to light) 

I use hospitality a little bit, particularly away, and have been introduced to a few, as alluded, and on one notable occasion with a Premier League referee who was along for the ride
 

But assessors go to games I can assure you of that. It is to what extent they are always at every game itself (currently) Toby was referring too and I guess this may have changed as technology has altered as I said. 
 

I think MILF is Roger Milward who was always at city post his FA Cup final etc etc etc but that was a long time ago.  I have met assessors way way way way more recently than Rogers days at games, whom I must add are really knowledgeable and prepared to chat with the people at their table. 

Twas indeed Rog. And you’re right. Sometimes he was there as an assessor. Sometimes in his self appointed role as everyone’s favourite mate!

Whilst assessors might well be at BS3 they ain’t there to assess match day referees. The only assessment that goes on now at Chimp level is post match by video.

The days of The Milf bursting in whilst I was having a shower are long gone.

Out of interest though did you know that the 3 officials today are tipped for the top? Might be next season.

If you were there today I’d be interested to know how you viewed them? Overall I thought Josh did ok…