Bournemouth match thread

[taylors lovechild]

Richards' second yellow would have been soft if it had been his first yellow, but to give him a second yellow for the lightest of touches on the guy's hand was plain ridiculous. That just doesn't happen in the PL, not just in this game, but in any game. In fact, twice the ref didn't give a second yellow to a Bournemouth player for more significant offences. I would be interested to hear his explanation. Was it a brain fart? Did he forget Richards had been booked? They earn in the region of 70-150k a season, so it's not like £15 a game Sunday league refs, they should be held accountable.

Maybe I'm imagining it, but it does feel this season that refs have been far keener to book our players than those of the opposition. I know we have Will 'One for the Team' Hughes in our team, but that can't explain everything.

 

[MrRobbo]

You need to ask yourself what goes through a ref’s mind just before he brandishes a second yellow. The mind works pretty damn quick so he had plenty of time to think what fouls had occurred elsewhere, the severity of the foul in question, its location on the pitch and the impact his forthcoming decision would have on the game.

It’s really not difficult as a professional referee to have those thoughts rattling through your head as you approach the player.

When you break it down like this it kind of makes you wonder what the hell led him to the conclusion that Richards should be excluded from the game?

Exactly.

Especially as its the first half (in injury time too). The ref has to be considering if the foul was that bad that its worth ruining the game for.

 

[PatrickA]

I do not subscribe to this allegation one iota.
Any errors of judgement are not based on any bias but honest appraisals in pressurised situations.
There are post-match forensic examinations of performances and referees want to display the best version of themselves game on game.

I recall e g you being quite happy to hammer Anderson and express your concerns about his qualities as a central defender and the mistakes he would on occasions make.

Nothing in the case of Anderson about 'errors of judgement in pressurised situations ' for him, but in contrast you seem quite happy to give referees a free pass when incompetent displays are there for all to see.

Errors of players are hammered, but errors of referees deemed ok and just 'being human.'

With regard to' honest appraisals ' I have a good friend who was a referee at a high level.
He was quite open about how the referees and linesmen would often concoct stories at half time and at the end of games to cover each other's backs when they made errors during games.
There was also often a 'cosy club' with the assessors who reviewed their performances and determined career progression.

Your stance seems to be it's fair game to criticise everyone in football except the referee which is patently absurd and illogical.

I'm sure you won't change your view, just as I won't that there are some referees who make mistakes that are just as costly as any that Anderson ever made.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

You need to ask yourself what goes through a ref’s mind just before he brandishes a second yellow. The mind works pretty damn quick so he had plenty of time to think what fouls had occurred elsewhere, the severity of the foul in question, its location on the pitch and the impact his forthcoming decision would have on the game.

It’s really not difficult as a professional referee to have those thoughts rattling through your head as you approach the player.

When you break it down like this it kind of makes you wonder what the hell led him to the conclusion that Richards should be excluded from the game?

Good post - I actually think he was right not to send Scott off, and it was good refereeing in the sense it gave him the perfect bit of breathing room to let the Richards one go as well... it's almost unbelievable he then didn't do make the most of that breathing room.

Awful decision.

 

[Willo]

I recall e g you being quite happy to hammer Anderson and express your concerns about his qualities as a central defender and the mistakes he would on occasions make.

Nothing in the case of Anderson about 'errors of judgement in pressurised situations ' for him, but in contrast you seem quite happy to give referees a free pass when incompetent displays are there for all to see.

Errors of players are hammered, but errors of referees deemed ok and just 'being human.'

With regard to' honest appraisals ' I have a good friend who was a referee at a high level.
He was quite open about how the referees and linesmen would often concoct stories at half time and at the end of games to cover each other's backs when they made errors during games.
There was also often a 'cosy club' with the assessors who reviewed their performances and determined career progression.

Your stance seems to be it's fair game to criticise everyone in football except the referee which is patently absurd and illogical.

I'm sure you won't change your view, just as I won't that there are some referees who make mistakes that are just as costly as any that Anderson ever made.

We all form judgement about the performances of players and express our viewpoints, often quite stridently.
Apropos Anderson whilst I was critical of certain aspects of his game, I did recognise his passing qualities and expressed such sentiments on HOL.
Players are of course also 'Human' and one does not expect them to be free from culpability, the same applies to referees.
I have consistently asserted that referees err from time to time.

 

[Eagleman13]

I recall e g you being quite happy to hammer Anderson and express your concerns about his qualities as a central defender and the mistakes he would on occasions make.

Nothing in the case of Anderson about 'errors of judgement in pressurised situations ' for him, but in contrast you seem quite happy to give referees a free pass when incompetent displays are there for all to see.

Errors of players are hammered, but errors of referees deemed ok and just 'being human.'

With regard to' honest appraisals ' I have a good friend who was a referee at a high level.
He was quite open about how the referees and linesmen would often concoct stories at half time and at the end of games to cover each other's backs when they made errors during games.
There was also often a 'cosy club' with the assessors who reviewed their performances and determined career progression.

Your stance seems to be it's fair game to criticise everyone in football except the referee which is patently absurd and illogical.

I'm sure you won't change your view, just as I won't that there are some referees who make mistakes that are just as costly as any that Anderson ever made.

Bingo. Your friend is spot on, i know, having been there myself, both as a ref & as an assessor. Tho, i do have a genuine Q? for Willo, Have you ever been a referee?

 

[Willo]

Bingo. Your friend is spot on, i know, having been there myself, both as a ref & as an assessor. Tho, i do have a genuine Q? for Willo, Have you ever been a referee?

I qualified but extensive work commitments precluded me from officiating.
I have however had numerous interactions with the refereeing fraternity over several years, some of whom who have officiated at the highest level, accordingly I have gained an insight into the complexities of the job.

 

[Teddy Eagle]

We all form judgement about the performances of players and express our viewpoints, often quite stridently.
Apropos Anderson whilst I was critical of certain aspects of his game, I did recognise his passing qualities and expressed such sentiments on HOL.
Players are of course also 'Human' and one does not expect them to be free from culpability, the same applies to referees.
I have consistently asserted that referees err from time to time.

Yes, referees make mistakes and miss or misinterpret some things, as has been said players diving and other incidences of skulduggery are often involved, but VAR was supposed to help them yet because of the convoluted rules about when it can and can't get involved we're still seeing errors being regularly made.
Personally I think cards are far too easily issued leading to many games being played 10 v 11 and the subsequent suspensions.
Maybe they could either increase the threshold for yellows or introduce a third card for more trivial offences possibly with a sin-bin involved.

 

[Eagleman13]

I qualified but extensive work commitments precluded me from officiating.
I have however had numerous interactions with the refereeing fraternity over several years, some of whom who have officiated at the highest level, accordingly I have gained an insight into the complexities of the job.

Fair play to you for that. you must've qualified the same way i did, through the 'County' set-up. I only asked, because, if you have been a ref, only then can you gain an understanding of what goes on in the mind of one. Where as my days of being a ref at a high standard were over because i had reached 45 which was the age most European ref's had to stop for their standard. I consequently became an assessor both for the FA & then progressed to become one for UEFA.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

I 'qualified' as a referee as a 16 year old - it's the easiest course I've ever taken part in, and I think there are primary school kids who could pass it.

 

[NMPalace]

Richards' second yellow would have been soft if it had been his first yellow, but to give him a second yellow for the lightest of touches on the guy's hand was plain ridiculous. That just doesn't happen in the PL, not just in this game, but in any game. In fact, twice the ref didn't give a second yellow to a Bournemouth player for more significant offences. I would be interested to hear his explanation. Was it a brain fart? Did he forget Richards had been booked? They earn in the region of 70-150k a season, so it's not like £15 a game Sunday league refs, they should be held accountable.

Maybe I'm imagining it, but it does feel this season that refs have been far keener to book our players than those of the opposition. I know we have Will 'One for the Team' Hughes in our team, but that can't explain everything.

Totally agree. Couldn't make the game, but after watching the highlights even the 1st yellow looked quite soft. As for the 2nd, Kluivert pushes his arm back (clearly not a natural position) to fend Richards off so it was difficult not to make any contact. The contact itself was minimal and Kluivert clearly exaggerated the impact.

Give the foul and move on. The fact that Scott did a worse foul only 10 minutes earlier and didn't get a 2nd booking (correct decision IMHO) makes the Richards sending off even more ridiculous.

After a poor sending off refs often try to even things up (not saying it's right, but it often happens). The Adams foul on Hughes was that opportunity and yet the ref ignored it.

In terms of refs and bookings some teams seem to moan and have constant dialogue with refs whereas we seem to do it less. Maybe this has an impact. In both games with Brentford, for example, i noticed this from the first whistle.

Can you remember the George Graham Arsenal team who applauded the lino for every offside. There's some logic behind these actions.

 

[Eagle-Trucker]

I do not subscribe to this allegation one iota.
Any errors of judgement are not based on any bias but honest appraisals in pressurised situations.
There are post-match forensic examinations of performances and referees want to display the best version of themselves game on game.

You can dress it up how you want to Willo , it wont change my mind . Cheats ! down right cheats . I dont care what you subscribe to . I have my opinion and i stand by it .

 

[silvertop]

The Standard of reffing in this country is getting worse. They are self-governing and hold themselves to account, which I'm amazed is allowed to continue in this current climate. It's getting to a point that someone needs to take it higher - say the Court of Arbitration for Sport - to force the Refs to improve. If only it can be proven absolutely that decisions are costing teams financially - i.e. costs them a league position or missed out on a cup final berth, but I cannot see how that is possible. We need the PGMOL to face the press or be mic'ed up or some other way they can be held to account or they'll never improve - why would they?

Years ago, the outrageous Sorondo sending off at the Hawthorns got us relegated (and not the last game foul by Leigertwood as some have said). We were down for some time, eventually drifted into administration and - very nearly - extinction.

Yes, referee's decisions can be very important indeed.

 

[PatrickA]

The effect of VAR has to be factored in as well.
It can allow referees not to make decisions or to evade responsibility , and then you have cases where VAR refuse to get involved when senior referees like Michael Oliver make mistakes as VAR don’t want to contradict such senior figures.

I accept that mistakes will be made, but so suggest that referees are always blameless and only ever guilty of ‘honest human errors’ is patently ludicrous.
On that basis they could be incompetent every week, but it wouldn’t matter as they are only displaying ‘human fallibility.’

 

[NEILLO]

The effect of VAR has to be factored in as well.
It can allow referees not to make decisions or to evade responsibility , and then you have cases where VAR refuse to get involved when senior referees like Michael Oliver make mistakes as VAR don’t want to contradict such senior figures.

I accept that mistakes will be made, but so suggest that referees are always blameless and only ever guilty of ‘honest human errors’ is patently ludicrous.
On that basis they could be incompetent every week, but it wouldn’t matter as they are only displaying ‘human fallibility.’

Interesting that you mention him.

His lamentable failure to apply the most basic of rules around head injuries by not stopping the game immediately after Mateta had been assaulted by the Millwall goalkeeper, and then having to rely on VAR to arrive at the red card decision was not ' human error '. It was incompetence. And the fact that he wasn't selected to officiate the following weekend more than suggests that was how it was viewed by Howard Webb & Co.

 

[Spindle]

With the greatest of respect this is a gumbo of tripe and a heaving load of codswallop.

I have consistently asserted that referees are human beings who err from time to time in pressurised situations.

So you now admit he made an error?

 

[Spindle]

We all form judgement about the performances of players and express our viewpoints, often quite stridently.
Apropos Anderson whilst I was critical of certain aspects of his game, I did recognise his passing qualities and expressed such sentiments on HOL.
Players are of course also 'Human' and one does not expect them to be free from culpability, the same applies to referees.
I have consistently asserted that referees err from time to time.

So it's a bit like being crap at being consistent but great at brandishing cards, so like Anderson

 

[DenTyler]

I didn’t realise until I watch ‘refs & mics’ whatever it’s called on sky, the the fuckwit ref we had Saturday is the same ref that saw nothing wrong with tzkowskis tackle against Liverpool. I’ve now got the feeling that seeing as Howard Webb said it was a clear Red and an absolute error, he had words with the ref and now he is so terrified of missing something the fool has gone the other way. Not a single mention of the softness of the richards Yellows.