Players becoming Referees

p1akuw47h5r3it

After another weekend of refereeing blunders, do you think the FA should allow/fast track retired footballers into refereeing premier league games??

Bounty Hunter

Why would an ex-pro wanna be a ref? thankless job tbh. It would mean going from being adored by the fans to abused by them and for far less money.

edit: not to mention the question of them being impartial when calling decisions for/against players/teams they have played with or know personally etc..

Adamcp898

Not to mention the endless ''He was *insert team here* through and through and was blatantly bias towards them in that game'' complaints you'd get. Some of them are biased enough on the TV as pundits tbh

D.S.

They simply need to improve training and standards for referees. Refs are not consistent in applying the rules. They also suffer from weak and ineffective linesman who should have much more input to the game.

They also take way too much sh!t from players. Only the captain of a team should be allowed to speak to a referee. Any other chat from any other player should be an automatic yellow.

The addition of video technology could be a useful decision for taking the heat out of games if used correctly.

Put simply, the standard of refereeing is still abysmal for a professional sport..Ex players though will do nothing to help the game. If anything, would introduce a whole new type of media circus around referrees and also jeopardize impartiality, or more importantly, percieved impartiality..

stovelid

Why would they be more effective than a normal ref? Like saying the best payers make the best pundits. Which we now isn't true.

Professional refs and video technology is the answer, not fast tracking someone into a position because they were a pro.

Guy:Incognito

stovelid wrote: »

Why would they be more effective than a normal ref? Like saying the best payers make the best pundits. Which we now isn't true.
.

The problem is that refs seem to read certain things very badly that a player that has been in the situation loads of times and can read it better. Tackles and the like that someone looking on thinks are much worse than they are.

stovelid

Stekelly wrote: »

The problem is that refs seem to read certain things very badly that a player that has been in the situation loads of times and can read it better. Tackles and the like that someone looking on thinks are much worse than they are.

It's a good point, but prem level refs are hardly unschooled in ball. They must have ref'd thousands of games. Perhaps you could have a diverse panel available to offer instant advice on video replays. A different ref, an ex-pro, etc.

mayordenis

The pundits idea is the perfect comparison surely players who've played hundreds of gmaes should know it the best (shearer, dixon, redknapp) better than the like of (Guilleme Ballague, Greham Hunter, Oliver Kay).

The fact is you see rugby players literally asking why blatant fouls were given you see footballers cheating all the live long day (I'm sorry this isn't a debate) Ronaldo today, Why should all the footballers who don't respect officials and actively cheat become the ones in power? It would a complete farce.

ArmaniJeanss

Stekelly wrote: »

The problem is that refs seem to read certain things very badly that a player that has been in the situation loads of times and can read it better. Tackles and the like that someone looking on thinks are much worse than they are.

Whatever the problems with referees, I think this particular one is a total myth perpetuated by TV pundits.

Every referee has almost certainly played 100s of games of football - obviously at amteur/junior level 10+ years ago etc. So the whole 'they don't understand a tough tackle' thing is surely wrong.

LuckyLloyd

D.S. wrote: »

They simply need to improve training and standards for referees. Refs are not consistent in applying the rules. They also suffer from weak and ineffective linesman who should have much more input to the game.

They also take way too much sh!t from players. Only the captain of a team should be allowed to speak to a referee. Any other chat from any other player should be an automatic yellow.

The addition of video technology could be a useful decision for taking the heat out of games if used correctly.

Put simply, the standard of refereeing is still abysmal for a professional sport..Ex players though will do nothing to help the game. If anything, would introduce a whole new type of media circus around referrees and also jeopardize impartiality, or more importantly, percieved impartiality..

Agree with a lot of this, and think that the bolded part is a very simple measure to enact that could help things massively.

If you are going to get former pros, it's only going to be guys who plied their trade at the lower levels, and thus have the financial incentive (because they aren't set for life) to take all of the bollocks that goes with the job, who will be applying.

Daysha

D.S. wrote: »

They simply need to improve training and standards for referees. Refs are not consistent in applying the rules. They also suffer from weak and ineffective linesman who should have much more input to the game.

They also take way too much sh!t from players. Only the captain of a team should be allowed to speak to a referee. Any other chat from any other player should be an automatic yellow.

The addition of video technology could be a useful decision for taking the heat out of games if used correctly.

Put simply, the standard of refereeing is still abysmal for a professional sport..Ex players though will do nothing to help the game. If anything, would introduce a whole new type of media circus around referrees and also jeopardize impartiality, or more importantly, percieved impartiality..

And what happens when the captain is the goalie? Is he expected to run half the pitch every time his team gives away a foul he doesn't agree with?

ArmaniJeanss

deise59 wrote: »

And what happens when the captain is the goalie? Is he expected to run half the pitch every time his team gives away a foul he doesn't agree with?

Currently goalkeepers are only ever captains because captain is a relatively unimportant concept, little more than a cointosser.

Under this rule captain would actually be important, so you simply wouldn't have your keeper as captain.

Daysha

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Currently goalkeepers are only ever captains because captain is a relatively unimportant concept, little more than a cointosser.

On the pitch, perhaps, but certainly not off it. If you ever read autobiographies of footballers or managers, you'll understand the role of a captain is far more important than just barking orders on the pitch.

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Under this rule captain would actually be important, so you simply wouldn't have your keeper as captain.

So if a team has a vastly experienced 30 something yr old goalie and relatively inexperienced young outfield side, the goalie should be forbidden to become captain under the new rule?

ArmaniJeanss

deise59 wrote: »

On the pitch, perhaps, but certainly not off it. If you ever read autobiographies of footballers or managers, you'll understand the role of a captain is far more important than just barking orders on the pitch.



So if a team has a vastly experienced 30 something yr old goalie and relatively inexperienced young outfield side, the goalie should be forbidden to become captain under the new rule?

OK, accepted.
Change the rule to 'each team is allowed nominate one player who may speak to the referee, said player need not be the captain'.
Acceptable compromise?

Daysha

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

OK, accepted.
Change the rule to 'each team is allowed nominate one player who may speak to the referee, said player need not be the captain'.
Acceptable compromise?

I guess I could live with it :cool:

LuckyLloyd

Yeah, nothing stopping you having a Club Captain goalkeeper and passing the armband (and thus the speaking rights) for games to whichever outfield player is the most switched on and levelheaded.

Guy:Incognito

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Whatever the problems with referees, I think this particular one is a total myth perpetuated by TV pundits.
.

They ref like they've never seen a game though and only heard out it by readign books. Theres somethign wrong.

D.S.

deise59 wrote: »

And what happens when the captain is the goalie? Is he expected to run half the pitch every time his team gives away a foul he doesn't agree with?

Look if a decision is made by the ref, he isn't going to retract his decision if a player doesn't agree with it. If a Captain happens to be a goalie, he can use the most appropriate opportunity to have a chat with the ref if he feels he needs a word (i.e. when the ref is in his half, half time, full time etc). If anything, it would further help to take the heat out of the game.

I have a general issue with players thinking they have some right to mouth off to a ref or challenge a decision. Only the Captain should be allowed to talk to the ref, and at best, he should only be allowed to query a decision he doesn't understand, not challenge a decision he doesn't like. While a Goalie could be slightly more disadvantaged than a outfield player, it wouldn't be hugely inadversely so if the Captain was restricted to only querying decisions.

A ref decision should be non-negotiable and non-debateable.