[Thumper]

Never really seen the Warnock bashing before, though I suppose I've probably just not been paying attention. I always thought he was alright.

Hughes is going to take to this like Colin Calderwood took to Hibs. Throwing money at a manager who got eight draws in a row with a Citeh side worth more than Katy Perry's laundry basket is a great strategy in this financial market.

[Reid]

Didn't think Warnock was doing bad job. Hughes will definately keep them up though, and maybe push them on from next season.

[Swampy]

Fife Saint, on 08 January 2012 - 18:46, said:

I quite like him.

Me too. Good guy who brought Sheffield United up for a friendly with Morton once due to his ties to the area.

[Swampy]

Supras, on 08 January 2012 - 23:42, said:

The way he's treated referees is a fucking disgrace. I'd pay good money to see that fat c**t trying to ref a game, he'd be fucking hopeless.

This is the refs' stock reply to everything but it's truly ridiculous. By this logic, because you're tearing into him the just response would be for you to be a Premier League manager and for us all to see how you get on. When you fail miserably the outcome would be... well, what?

If you think you're so hard done by as a ref stand down and let someone else have a go.

This post has been edited by Swampy: 10 January 2012 - 21:03

[Supras]

Swampy, on 10 January 2012 - 21:03, said:

This is the refs' stock reply to everything but it's truly ridiculous. By this logic, because you're tearing into him the just response would be for you to be a Premier League manager and for us all to see how you get on. When you fail miserably the outcome would be... well, what?

If you think you're so hard done by as a ref stand down and let someone else have a go.

I'd love to take the opportunity to manage a Premier League team but I'm not coming out in the press saying how terrible all Premier League managers are and "how can they sleep at night after having made that decision."

If a referee has a bad game he doesn't come out and blame the manager. If a team Warnock managed ever lost he blamed the referee. He makes personal comments about referees and insinuates they are cheats. In the Norwich game he said "who says cheats don't prosper" after saying the linesman guessed. It was clear juxtaposition. And yes I am aware he would claim the comment was made about Bradley Johnson. As detailed by the picture, and anyone watching Neil Warnock, he behaves entirely inappropriately towards match officials and it the actions of people like him that convince amateur hard men junior managers they can verbally abuse officials.

It is absolutely not the kind of image that the game was to project and any referee who makes comments along the lines of "we never get anything from that referee" should get the most serious reprimand i.e. points deduction. It is a clear and blatant insinuation the referee is a cheat and if such a view perpetrates there is no reason for referees to turn up to games any more. Things at the top level filter down, if a referee blindly accepts players and managers bullying him and trying to intimidate him it will happen lower down where the referee is on his own and has no protection.

And it's not the stock reply to everything, but I think it would be an excellent starting point. I can't manage a Premiership team and I freely admit as to having little idea of the pressures involved. Anyone can feasibly referee, the test is not difficult and within 10 weeks you could be on the pitch. I would encourage all fans and players to do this, it would give you an excellent insight into the world of refereeing.

I'm not hard done by, but it could and should be a lot better.

This post has been edited by Supras: 10 January 2012 - 21:31

[Jimmy85]

Referees are a bit like lawyers in the sense that you really wouldn't want to socialise with them as the chances are they have real problems functioning in situations where they aren't centre of attention.

[Supras]

Jimmy85, on 10 January 2012 - 21:36, said:

Referees are a bit like lawyers in the sense that you really wouldn't want to socialise with them as the chances are they have real problems functioning in situations where they aren't centre of attention.

Have you ever met a referee?

Some referees actually get recognised on night outs by players. It's quite funny when it happens.

[ICTChris]

Is Colin not a qualified referee? Think it was on wikipedia but obviously that could be unreliable.

[Supras]

ICTChris, on 10 January 2012 - 21:51, said:

Is Colin not a qualified referee? Think it was on wikipedia but obviously that could be unreliable.

Yeah, he went to a beginners class 40 years ago and became a refereeing expert.

Dunno if he ever did a game. Maybe he did and was pish and has been really bitter about it ever since.

This post has been edited by Supras: 10 January 2012 - 22:02

[Swampy]

Supras, on 10 January 2012 - 21:30, said:

I'd love to take the opportunity to manage a Premier League team but I'm not coming out in the press saying how terrible all Premier League managers are and "how can they sleep at night after having made that decision."

If a referee has a bad game he doesn't come out and blame the manager.

I stopped reading at this point. Referees don't come out and say anything. They hide behind passive-aggressive nonsense issued by the governing authorities. We're always hearing about the pressure on referees but they are, when off the pitch, extremely cloistered. And low-level referees like yourself, well, you simply do blame managers when things go bad for you (evidence: this thread).

I agree that some of the treatment they get is over the top, and the unique way football is arranged among professional sports (no video etc.) makes their job difficult. But every single ref knows exactly what they're getting into. To expect deference from coaches when the stakes are so high is massively unrealistic. The refereeing establishment does a terrible job of commanding respect, and while that's not a one-way street they're far from blameless.

[Supras]

Swampy, on 11 January 2012 - 18:19, said:

I stopped reading at this point. Referees don't come out and say anything. They hide behind passive-aggressive nonsense issued by the governing authorities.

Hide behind passive aggressive nonsense? Referees are told quite clearly "do not speak to the press. If you are going to do it make sure it is cleared by the association". The process of speaking to the media is so restrictive that referees effectively never speak to the media. The only time I've ever seen a ref speaking to teh media was Howard Webb after being appointed to the world and the interview went as follows:

"Howard, are you happy to get the World Cup."
"Yeah, I'm pretty happy."

So nothing interviews are OK. But I don't quite know who you are criticising here, referees or refereeing association? Should referees go completely against the instructions of their bosses? Do you do that in your job?

I think it's correct referees don't speak to the media, some will be comfortable with it and some will not, it'd be incorrect to force everyone to do it. And if you think referees are "arrogant" and "want to be celebrities" when they come out and state categorically how wrong that opinion you hold is they will be even more hated. But referees do speak to managers after matches and Jose Mourinho once complained bitterly about the performance of an official but refused to speak to him after the game because referees "always have an explanation".

Of course they do Jose, what did you expect them to say "I dunno why I gave it". That would infuriate you even more! And fans would soon be the same, "pfft these referees have an answer for everything don't they! Grrr, why don't they come out and admit they are wrong/a complete cheat and have it in for my team!"

Quote

We're always hearing about the pressure on referees but they are, when off the pitch, extremely cloistered. And low-level referees like yourself, well, you simply do blame managers when things go bad for you (evidence: this thread).

You will have to quantify "extremely cloistered". Sure they go to training camps etc. but what are you expecting them to hang about in supporters pubs or something? How public do you want them to be? Believe it or not even the top refs are pretty normal people who live normal lives. I never blame a manager if I have a bad game (evidence : my life). Of course in youth football players will mimic their coaches and if their coaches are behaving inappropriately then, well, the game is a lot harder to referee. But I've had some storming games with cunting coaches.

Quote

I agree that some of the treatment they get is over the top, and the unique way football is arranged among professional sports (no video etc.) makes their job difficult. But every single ref knows exactly what they're getting into. To expect deference from coaches when the stakes are so high is massively unrealistic. The refereeing establishment does a terrible job of commanding respect, and while that's not a one-way street they're far from blameless.

I don't think that is necessarily the case. I don't think referees expect things such as their children been given death threats at school (as happened to Willie Collum). And I'm not going to go into detail, but if some of the lesser reported incidents that happen throughout all the levels of football were commonplace nobody would be a referee. If we improve it, throughout the system, but particularly at the top then more people would want to be a referee and the standard would be higher. If you ask someone why they don't want to be a referee they talk about all the abuse they would get, if that abuse wasn't there then maybe they would become referees.

The way you are posing that the relationship will have to be inherently antagonistic and I disagree that it should be. The referee is a neutral arbiter tasked with ensuring the laws of the game are followed and facilitating the game to actually take place. That should never be questioned, and that is why any question or insinuation regarding a referees intergrity should be met with the harshest punishment. It devalues the game and if every coach was Neil Warnock a lot fewer people would want to be a referee.

If you disagree with a penalty decision then, fine, nobody will really care so long as you do it in a relatively tactful way. People disagree with stonewall penalties, it is to be ignored. But when it becomes personal, and when it questions your integrity then it has to be dealt with. No matter of the stakes if you don't respect yourself nobody else is going to respect you. Rugby is a passionate game but NOBODY ever questions the referee on the pitch (less they incur severe punishment), why can't that be the case in football?

What changes would you make to the refereeing establishment? I've already said my piece numerous times regarding technology.

[Swampy]

Supras, on 11 January 2012 - 22:20, said:

Hide behind passive aggressive nonsense? Referees are told quite clearly "do not speak to the press. If you are going to do it make sure it is cleared by the association". The process of speaking to the media is so restrictive that referees effectively never speak to the media. The only time I've ever seen a ref speaking to teh media was Howard Webb after being appointed to the world and the interview went as follows:

"Howard, are you happy to get the World Cup."
"Yeah, I'm pretty happy."

So nothing interviews are OK. But I don't quite know who you are criticising here, referees or refereeing association? Should referees go completely against the instructions of their bosses? Do you do that in your job?

I'm criticising the refereeing associations - I thought that was clear enough. But let's not pretend that the referees get no say in how they are governed. Ones at your level don't but the ones at the professional level do. The EPL referees comprise a very powerful union and they are quite delighted with the current state of affairs. The idea that they're gagged against their will is just plain funny.

Quote

I think it's correct referees don't speak to the media, some will be comfortable with it and some will not, it'd be incorrect to force everyone to do it. And if you think referees are "arrogant" and "want to be celebrities" when they come out and state categorically how wrong that opinion you hold is they will be even more hated. But referees do speak to managers after matches and Jose Mourinho once complained bitterly about the performance of an official but refused to speak to him after the game because referees "always have an explanation".

You won't find me sticking up for Mourinho. He's even worse for the passive aggression. But refereeing should be like management in the sense that an explanation counts for a hell of a lot to the paying public. If any given referee doesn't want to speak out they wouldn't be compelled to, would they? If their performances were good enough they'd still rise to the top.

Quote

Of course they do Jose, what did you expect them to say "I dunno why I gave it". That would infuriate you even more! And fans would soon be the same, "pfft these referees have an answer for everything don't they! Grrr, why don't they come out and admit they are wrong/a complete cheat and have it in for my team!"

You're missing the point, namely that on several high-profile occasions when referees have come out with their explanations they are just absolute bullshit. Remember what led to the refereeing strikes last year? Lies from referees.

Quote

You will have to quantify "extremely cloistered". Sure they go to training camps etc. but what are you expecting them to hang about in supporters pubs or something? How public do you want them to be? Believe it or not even the top refs are pretty normal people who live normal lives. I never blame a manager if I have a bad game (evidence : my life). Of course in youth football players will mimic their coaches and if their coaches are behaving inappropriately then, well, the game is a lot harder to referee. But I've had some storming games with cunting coaches.

As public as anyone else involved with the professional game. The idea that I'd have them hauled in front of cameras with a torch in their eyes is just inaccurate.

Quote

I don't think that is necessarily the case. I don't think referees expect things such as their children been given death threats at school (as happened to Willie Collum). And I'm not going to go into detail, but if some of the lesser reported incidents that happen throughout all the levels of football were commonplace nobody would be a referee. If we improve it, throughout the system, but particularly at the top then more people would want to be a referee and the standard would be higher. If you ask someone why they don't want to be a referee they talk about all the abuse they would get, if that abuse wasn't there then maybe they would become referees.

Death threats against anyone - children or otherwise - is completely unacceptable. I'd like to think the referees and their bosses would report such incidents to the police, who would, I'm sure, deal with them correctly.

Quote

The way you are posing that the relationship will have to be inherently antagonistic and I disagree that it should be. The referee is a neutral arbiter tasked with ensuring the laws of the game are followed and facilitating the game to actually take place. That should never be questioned, and that is why any question or insinuation regarding a referees intergrity should be met with the harshest punishment. It devalues the game and if every coach was Neil Warnock a lot fewer people would want to be a referee.

I don't think it should ever be questioned without good reason. But there are scores of bent refs across Europe and the world. In any case if P&B's any guide the most severe charge laid against most refs is that they're incompetent, not that they're corrupt or biased.

Quote

If you disagree with a penalty decision then, fine, nobody will really care so long as you do it in a relatively tactful way. People disagree with stonewall penalties, it is to be ignored. But when it becomes personal, and when it questions your integrity then it has to be dealt with. No matter of the stakes if you don't respect yourself nobody else is going to respect you. Rugby is a passionate game but NOBODY ever questions the referee on the pitch (less they incur severe punishment), why can't that be the case in football?

That's a cultural question and I'd far prefer it as well. I hate seeing referees surrounded by gurning mobs of players. I hate even more having to watch a referee step backwards so he's not knocked over. I'd like to see refs do more to stamp this out.

At top-level rugby I think the use of TV evidence makes a big difference as well and I'd suggest a similar thing for top-level football.

Quote

What changes would you make to the refereeing establishment? I've already said my piece numerous times regarding technology.

I'd end this stupid "no comment" policy and I'd also make moves towards the use of video replays. I'd also try to staff the ones in Scotland with fewer habitual liars but that's probably too much to ask given that the job is custom-built for such people.

[Swampy]

Also: Warnock, for all the idiotic bile he attracts from fans of other teams, has received 95% positive messages from QPR fans after his sacking.

[Supras]

Swampy, on 14 January 2012 - 21:41, said:

I'm criticising the refereeing associations - I thought that was clear enough. But let's not pretend that the referees get no say in how they are governed. Ones at your level don't but the ones at the professional level do. The EPL referees comprise a very powerful union and they are quite delighted with the current state of affairs. The idea that they're gagged against their will is just plain funny.

But what knowledge do you actually have of refereeing associations? Which ones do you specifically dislike? It is like a multinational company, I don't think there is much the SFA can do to change things and as for the individual regional associations there is practically nothing. Refereeing associations across the world are pretty similar, and this is quite intentional given there are strict guidelines on how they should be governed. One rogue association where all the refs go down the pub to talk to supporters would just not happen.

You greatly overestimate the "power" that professional referees have. Let's take your example, if all refs wanted to talk to the media they could - so long as they have no aspirations towards the FIFA list and if they were on it weren't bothered being taken off it. Oh, and so long as they didn't mind losing their jobs. Because that is what would happen. Richard Scudamore dictates what the referees do, he has stated quite clearly he doesn't want "celebrity referees". It's a fairly unique situation in England whereby the professional referees are employed by the league and not the FA. If Scudamore tried to force them to speak to the media he might have a problem, but there is no indication he wants to do this.

Some referees might be happy with the status quo, some might not be. But what they think isn't all that important, they are certainly not breaking doors down to speak to the media because they know what a disaster it would be.

Quote

You won't find me sticking up for Mourinho. He's even worse for the passive aggression. But refereeing should be like management in the sense that an explanation counts for a hell of a lot to the paying public.

I disagree with both these points. I think the "paying public", in the case of football fans, are predominantly partisan, illogical, unreasonable and incredibly stupid. Managers press conferences do not placate them at all - they have descended into cliche driven nonsense of zero value whatsoever. Any referees press conferences would quickly become the same but it's fraught for a number of other reasons.

What do people expect from these "explanations".

"Why didn't you give a penalty?"

"I didn't see a foul."

And so on, in fact I could do it. Seeing why a referee made a certain decision is not at all difficult.

But referees make mistakes, and when they get it wrong it would be a case of. "Okay here is the incident from 6 angles, now say into the camera that you, incorrectly did not award this penalty." Okay thanks, that is your weekly public humiliation over.

Then in two weeks time he gives another press conference but hasn't given another penalty. He has to do the same but of all a sudden his competency is under question, fans and clubs think this referee can't give correct penalty decisions. They don't want him refereeing their games. And he himself is getting pretty sick of humiliating himself in public every week.

It is the same reasoning behind why refs aren't publically demoted and why the list isn't published. If a referee makes a big error and is publically demoted his career is over, he can never come back to the top level and can't even go back to a lower level. He has lost all legitimacy. And if a league table was published no team would want the guy at the bottom. That is why decisions on demoting referees happen over the course of a season and are kept pretty damn quiet. The true cut throat nature of refereeing is only evident during World Cups and European Championships where if even your assistant makes a mistake you all go home.

Quote

. If any given referee doesn't want to speak out they wouldn't be compelled to, would they? If their performances were good enough they'd still rise to the top

Well, yes. You can't have a situation where some refs speak to the press and some don't. And you say referees know what they are getting themselves in for but if they are being forced into doing a press conference then that would be something they wold not have been expecting and would not have been trained for. Willie Collum and Craig Thomson are the two top refs in Scotland - can you imagine either of them giving a press conference? They'd both be terrible at it.

And even if we assume it would placate some fans - i.e. you - it would infuriate many more. People don't like being told they are stupid and wrong and that would be the extent of these press conferences. If Chris Foy had came out after the Kompany tackle and said, correctly, that it was a straight red card do you think that would be the discussion over? Of course not, I've seen a fan saying any ref who thinks that Kompanys challenge was a red card should be sacked for breach of contract. That is level of idiocy you are up against.

And if you think that referees are "arrogant" and "want to be the centre of attention" then this view would be a lot more widespread if their smug faces were on TV every day saying, categorically, that you, the viewing public, is wrong.

Quote

You're missing the point, namely that on several high-profile occasions when referees have come out with their explanations they are just absolute bullshit. Remember what led to the refereeing strikes last year? Lies from referees.

Really, besides the refereeing strike when else has it happened? And that is not what led to the refereeing strike, what you think they got all angry because they weren't allowed to lie any more? They did because they considered the abuse was reaching an unacceptable level - it was a brave and correct decision in my opinion.

Quote

As public as anyone else involved with the professional game. The idea that I'd have them hauled in front of cameras with a torch in their eyes is just inaccurate.

Death threats against anyone - children or otherwise - is completely unacceptable. I'd like to think the referees and their bosses would report such incidents to the police, who would, I'm sure, deal with them correctly.

Really? I assume you mean they would be giving television interviews in the immediate aftermath of the match so what would it be if they weren't "hauled in front of cameras with a torch in their eyes"? Written statements? Radio only interviews? Be more specific.

And you'd be surprised how often it happens. Fairly new referees I know have been getting death threats on the pitch from even younger players as well as the typical morons on the sidelines. They are even more susceptible because they are less likely to act beyond a red card. It can be really hard to get new guys to stand up for themselves given they don't really know the role and are effectively on a trial period. And just to highlight how hard it is nearly everyone is terrible for their first few games - it's just not an easy job at all.

Quote

I don't think it should ever be questioned without good reason. But there are scores of bent refs across Europe and the world. In any case if P&B's any guide the most severe charge laid against most refs is that they're incompetent, not that they're corrupt or biased.

Oh, well, certainly. But if I had any evidence I would be giving it to the police and not stating it in public. And I can't think of any examples of referees in the UK - they are renowned throughout the world for their honesty and integrity. It is something we should be very proud of in fact - but no, we are as bad as anyone to label the cheat card. And I would disagree with that as well - I would say accusations of cheating would happen every week on this forum and I think it has happened every game I have ever been to.

And regarding incompetence, incompetent compared to who exactly? They are incompetent in the same way that Rooney is an incompetent footballer. It is a meaningless statement, often made by people who do not know the laws of the game.

Quote

That's a cultural question and I'd far prefer it as well. I hate seeing referees surrounded by gurning mobs of players. I hate even more having to watch a referee step backwards so he's not knocked over. I'd like to see refs do more to stamp this out.

At top-level rugby I think the use of TV evidence makes a big difference as well and I'd suggest a similar thing for top-level football.

Well, it's difficult but Craig Thomson is someone who is making steps to stamp this out. He booked the Johnnies captain Jody Morris after he and others complained about the offside goal. That is a positive step but it will take time. Younger referees are being told quite explicitly to stamp down on it so perhaps it will be far less prevalent in, say, 10 years. Positive body language is incredibly important, we don't want refs squaring up to anyone but step back, assume your position and inform players to take a walk. Don't be running away from anyone the referee is in charge of the situation, not the players.

But this is also fraught with difficulties, if you go to the juniors forum (where all the best young refs are) the criticism is that refs want to make it all about themselves and "make a name for themselves". It's bullshit, they are doing what they are told and paying a big price for it. I think I've mentioned it elsewhere but the junior game with the 19 year old ref, who gave out 17 yellows, 4 reds and sent off both managers. There's a DVD of that is the consensus is "sure, he could have avoided a few yellows" but his biggest mistake was letting the keeper off with pointing to him and indicating he was going to slit his throat. You look at those stats and you think the ref has ruined the game when in fact the players made it virtually impossible for him.

Quote

I'd end this stupid "no comment" policy and I'd also make moves towards the use of video replays. I'd also try to staff the ones in Scotland with fewer habitual liars but that's probably too much to ask given that the job is custom-built for such people.

Well, I've already discussed the first point but your last statement really highlights that you are unreasonable as any fan. Scottish refereeing is not custom built for habitual liars - don't be so ridiculous.

Some of your points are valid, I think referees are clustered and protective but they are in a position where everybody hates them - can you really blame them for adopting such an attitude?

Swampy, on 14 January 2012 - 21:42, said:

Also: Warnock, for all the idiotic bile he attracts from fans of other teams, has received 95% positive messages from QPR fans after his sacking.

Did you just make that statistic up?

And sorry for the long posts, I wrote it in stages and kinda lost track. Oh well.

This post has been edited by Supras: 15 January 2012 - 15:56

[Diamonds are Forever]

Apologies if posted elsewhere, but couldn't see it. Joey Barton has been having a go at Warnock on twitter:
"Neil Warnock saying I talk to much. Now that is funny #mikebassett".
"If I talked about Neil, he'd do well to get another job. Twitter cost him his job???? I can think of a million other things! #shutitwarnock".
"Looking forward to the game against Wigan tomo. 1st time in a while we actually have a plan and seem organised" - Thought this one was particularly bitchy

A few other comments aswell, they both come across as a couple of bitter idiots. I wonder if one of the mistakes that Barton refers to was signing him and making him captain...