Comments on: Arsenal this past week: the ref’s perspective

By: Pat

Pat — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 12:29:29 +0000

Nothing wrong with “fret”, it saves precious headline space, but i imagine “worried” would have been plainer to Southerners!
And i agree Tony, you can have the greatest blog in the world, but if you don’t write eye-catching headlines, you don’t get anyone reading…

By: Tony Attwood

Tony Attwood — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 09:18:23 +0000

They are called sub-editors Wonderinggoon and their job is to write headlines.

At their best they are magic (SuperCallyGoBalistic CelticAreAtrocious) at their worst they change the whole essence of the story leaving the writer wondering what the hell happened between his computer and the paper.

One of the great advantages of blogs is one gets to write ones own headlines.

Tony

By: Wonderinggoon

Wonderinggoon — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 08:00:59 +0000

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/dec/21/sami-nasri-arsenal-hull-city

I don’t believe for a second that the writer intended that title. The article itself was quite plain and fair I think, even including Nasri’s side of the story (which was true).

Some nasty editorial persons…

Oh how I fret, sorry, hmmph.

By: walter

walter — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:40:04 +0000

On the Nasri incident fact is that Mr. Bennet forgot one important rule and that is to always try to have the players involved in front of you. By not doing this he missed the whole situation and he could have prevented it.
Certainly with the way the Hull players protesting every decision and keeping the ball to waste time and to prevent a flowing game he should have anticipated that the Hull players once again would hold on to the ball and that this could mean trouble.

By: walter

walter — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:25:07 +0000

Let’s just say that paying a ref 5 times the money he gets from the FA to do a match by a club in a brown envelop is big money for the ref and a small amount of money for the club.

Even I have been offered more money then the set price and when you say you only want the money you are entitled to they said: “oh it was a misunderstanding, whe thought this was the right amount we had to pay you, sorry.”
And then to know that a club knows in advance how much they have to pay me to do my match….

But in the highest division there normally is no payment in cash for the ref as all payments go trough the bank directly from the FA. In my country it is like that.

By: tim

tim — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:30:35 +0000

Mark, nice point about ref pay. It’s amazing if it’s true, especially if after almost single match day, a new ref controversy seems to splash across our screens.

Raising their pay might also help players respect refs more. It’s a joke when you realize how the “incorruptible lion” John Terry is paid 2-3 times more in one week, than a ref makes in one year.

It seems so easy to do, at not much of a cost compared to the scale of the business…

By: Adam Smith

Adam Smith — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:51:49 +0000

Sorry my brain is not functioning today. I meant 250K a year not a week,apologies.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:24:08 +0000

3 million a year?

No way. Referees earn up to about £60,000 a year.

That sounds like a good salary, but its an absolute pittance.

The skill levels required by a referee are extremely high. You could argue that he needs to be the most skilful man on the pitch. He also has to endure extreme stress and in some cases referees recieve death threats. His work is under the most intense public and media scrutiny.

Who would want to be a referee?

Now factor in that players and managers are earning huge salaries, sometimes up to 5/6 million a year. They earn these wages because its a high profile job, with extreme pressure, in the public arena……

………and in what way does a referee differ from them?

Not much.

So if I was a ref, 60k would frankly feel like a slap in the face with a wet kipper.

Realisticaly I would have thought they need to be on 2-3 hundred thousand a year. That would reflect the very high profile nature of the job, and personally I think would cut out a lot of the corruption we suspect in the game.

By: Adam Smith

Adam Smith — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:47:52 +0000

I meant less corruption.

By: Adam Smith

Adam Smith — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:46:29 +0000

Off topic Tony but,

Stan Kroenke has bought 25 more shares in Arsenal and is within 17 shares of the threshold that would force him to make a takeover bid.

Make of that what you will,but regarding the salary ref’s get the maximum i believe is 60K a week, and I don’t see that even if they were on 250K a week, it would actually lead to more corruption.Greed is the main factor.Anyone can be bought at the right price.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:07:58 +0000

“The refs get paid in two years what the top stars get in one month”
That’s interesting, what do premier league refs actually get paid?

A quick scan of the internet says £1200 a game, or up to 70k a year.

LOL, now we can see the problem!

Why is the money in professional football not being properly distributed? If the players are making 7 figure annual salaries, then why aren’t the referees salaries comparable with that?
A complete failure on the part of the FA to run the sport properly seems the straightforward answer.

I had imagined these guys were on around 200,000 – 250,000K a year.
I had no idea that the real figure was about a fifth of that.

Now I’m not saying good salaries will cure corruption, a certain Chelsea defender and our politicians show that isn’t always the case.

But I think if the refs were properly paid, they would become less corruptible.

IMO.

By: Bankky

Bankky — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 14:59:26 +0000

The officiatin is bad this day.every ref commit one or two mistake in everygame dat is too bad.there must be improvement if d technology video wil be d solution let embrace it.

By: Cape Gooner

Cape Gooner — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 14:50:46 +0000

@ Walter 1:33pm. “I think Upson went in with his left leg and played the ball away with that leg. I think he was sliding with his right leg under his own body. Can anyone confirm this because it is the difference between foul or no foul. If it happened like I said then he had no intention to make a foul as he played the ball with the leg that he was attacking the ball with and succesfully.”

What you describe here is exactly what happened to RvP. The Italian took the ball with his extended left leg, while his right leg was under his body. His right foot was protruding from under his left thigh and his studs thudded into Rvp’s ankle. I thought that despite the fact that he had no intention of fouling RvP, it was a classic “second leg” tackle, dangerous and illegal.

By: Samuel

Samuel — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:50:05 +0000

In last night,s game at Upton park Carvalho blatantly clatters into the West Ham player who hasn,t yet received the ball from the cross,a clear penalty to the home team ,but where,s the ref as it,s in the penalty area?

By: Samuel

Samuel — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:46:24 +0000

The refs get paid in two years what the top stars get in one month ,yet they (refs)persist with lecturing highly paid brats ,get on with the action and show more cards if necessary ,not incessant lecturing and holding up of play .

By: Samuel

Samuel — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:42:58 +0000

Shame poor inept refs who cannnot see blatant dives in the box or shirt pulling ,kicking from behind ,managers/coaches out of their technical areas ,or managers influencing the time keepers ,after all they,re only human ,so where are the two assistant refs ,who can,t judge offsides or onsides so blind are they ?

By: walter

walter — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:39:26 +0000

Arsesession, I agree with you and Finngun. Give in those games the refs the tools to review critical decisions at once. The time lost will be a fraction on the time lost these days when players surround refs and assistants if they think a decision is wrong. It also will stop those surroundings from the ref as the decision can be reviewed by other officials outside the field.

By: walter

walter — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:33:25 +0000

About the Chelsea penalty: If I remember it right as I haven’t seen the game and only just with half an eye on my tv when they showed higlights. So must be carefull.
I think Upson went in with his left leg and played the ball away with that leg. I think he was sliding with his right leg under his own body. Can anyone confirm this because it is the difference between foul or no foul. If it happened like I said then he had no intention to make a foul as he played the ball with the leg that he was attacking the ball with and succesfully.
If he went out with als his right leg towards the Chelsea player and stuck it out to be sure he hit the player then there is a foul and is the penalty correct.
Should have payed a little bit more attention yesterday evening….

By: Arsesession

Arsesession — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:28:46 +0000

Looking at the bigger picture for the sport; what is the state of officiating standards?
Why would any intelligent person want to submit their character to weekly 2nd guessing, criticisms, and film replay.
I’ll bet if you check with those in charge of referee’s in the UK, they are losing many of their better officials and development and replacement of new “talent” is waning.

The play of the game is too fast, players are too polished in deception, and home crowd influence is a reality.

If you want to attract a better quality of official, you need to give him the tools to get it right. It will not slow the game down, but it will offer immediate justice for the fans, managers, and players.

By: LRV

LRV — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:13:35 +0000

Mr Dean, in my view, is a very bad referee; even Andy Gray commented on his inconsistent consistency. Besides this, he bought bigtime into the general English xenophobia. He hates Arsenal with a passion.

What is sad is that the FA are in no position to ‘bell the cat’.