Shrimpsvoices

Not sure if this merits a seperate thread but it is an issue that has raised its head in the 'shit ref database' and 'reffing crisis' threads.

Several people feel that we are in 'defecit' for decisions going our way. Similarly, when there was a growing agreement that the penalty and the Murphy sending off were probably correct there were several people said things like 'ok then, he got that right but what about the stamp on ....' Are we in defecit or is it that most fans think the ref has got it in for them? I tend to look at opposition forums after games and there have been lots of times when both sets of fans feel hard done by. In fact this is probably most games.

I always tend to make decisions in my head as the games go on, the curse of having once been a ref. In the Barnet game, just below me, I saw Kevin take out a player as they competed for a ball near the touchline. We got the throw in but it should have been a direct free kick for Barnet. Being wiley, Kev made sure it was on the blind side of the ref. I say two shirt pulls, one goal kick for us which should have been a corner and a sly push. All par for the course- nothing to do with bias just the ref missing things. Wiley old campaigners like Kev know exactly how to do it.

Here is a bit of research that suggests refs are unconsciously biased!

https://www.theguardian.com/football/bl ... sean-ingle

friedshrimp wrote: In the Barnet game, just below me, I saw Kevin take out a player as they competed for a ball near the touchline. We got the throw in but it should have been a direct free kick for Barnet. Being wiley, Kev made sure it was on the blind side of the ref. I say two shirt pulls, one goal kick for us which should have been a corner and a sly push. All par for the course- nothing to do with bias just the ref missing things. Wiley old campaigners like Kev know exactly how to do it.

Yeah then to cover his tracks he went straight to ground and tied his bootlaces up!

I don't think they set off to be biased and I wouldn't want to believe they are. As you say both sets of fans/management blame the officials for everything so they can't win, unless it's on Sky and after 15 replays they have been proved one way or the other.
I would say that more decisions in a game seem to go to the 'big' Club/crowd

I don't believe that most referees are intentionally biased but unwittingly support the big teams in the league- the Portsmouths and Lutons get the marginal decisions in their favour at the expense of the smaller clubs including the Shrimps. I also believe too many referees are promoted too quickly before they have learnt their trade- I thought Michael Salisbury was a prime example of this when he dealt with the stamp on Kenyon and his response. A few years ago Stuart Atwell was promoted to the Premiership list after one season in the league. He proved to be a disaster and was effectively demoted to rebuild his career. Another problem to me is most referees haven't played the game to any level and so don't have a feel for it. I would like some ex-professionals to be fast tracked onto the list. I think we also need to look at how referees are promoted and how they are assessed. I'm not sure the assessors really tell it like it is as some very poor referees continue to wreak havoc for years.

fulwoodshrimp wrote:I don't believe that most referees are intentionally biased but unwittingly support the big teams in the league- the Portsmouths and Lutons get the marginal decisions in their favour at the expense of the smaller clubs including the Shrimps. I also believe too many referees are promoted too quickly before they have learnt their trade- I thought Michael Salisbury was a prime example of this when he dealt with the stamp on Kenyon and his response. A few years ago Stuart Atwell was promoted to the Premiership list after one season in the league. He proved to be a disaster and was effectively demoted to rebuild his career. Another problem to me is most referees haven't played the game to any level and so don't have a feel for it. I would like some ex-professionals to be fast tracked onto the list. I think we also need to look at how referees are promoted and how they are assessed. I'm not sure the assessors really tell it like it is as some very poor referees continue to wreak havoc for years.

A couple of thoughts in relation to this.

there was a scheme a while back to fast track players to be refs. Only nigel clough registered any interest as I remember and the scheme was dropped. I think most players see refs as the enemy. Anybody who has played at a reasonable level would not consider the remuneration worhtwhile. More payment needed which Keith did mention.

I think assessors do tell it as it is. the sad fact is there are not enough refs to go round and the game cannot be played without a ref. When I trained there was one one ref who was considered a joke (apart from me!). He was so fat he used to just stand on the halfway line and blow his whistle from there. He was at the basic level of 3Y for about 15 years. secretaries used to dread getting hime but he was better than no-one. He got crap assessment year after year. At the lowest level games get called off for lack of a ref.

there simply are not enough people interested and the ongoing abuse they get means fewer people interested and people promoted before they are ready. This actually happened to me.