Shrimpsvoices

I have found an old report from a couple of years ago where Dave Artell was incandescent with rage at a referee awarding a very dodgy penalty against his team Crewe Alexandra. The referee's name? David Rock, the very same referee who awarded the very dodgy penalty this week against the Shrimps. Why do we keep on letting these poor officials spoil the beautiful game?

fulwoodshrimp wrote:Why do we keep on letting these poor officials spoil the beautiful game?

Because we don't have any better ones to replace them with

We need refereeing to be a professional career option that is reasonably well paid, so [for example] a player who had to take an insurance payout due to injury, but still fit enough to run a lot, would think of it as being something worth doing, or people who are healthy but [for example] aren't good enough to be a professional player, would go in to it.

Until then, we scrape the bottom of the barrel because there isn't anything else in the barrel.

its gone now, move on, we've got Sarfend coming up Tuesday night.

its like when redrobo posts what other fans think of the game after we've played em.

I understand if we paid referees a decent wage and attracted ex-pro players and keen football enthusiasts the situation would be greatly improved but I appreciate we have to make the best of the bunch we currently have. I suspect the referee assessors have a big job to do to deliver often difficult messages. For instance I would love to know what Mr Rock's assessor thought of his performance the other day and what suggestions were made about improving his performance. I do suspect at the present time the assessors settle for a comfortable ride and don't offer much constructive criticism to help in the referee's development. With the right help a poor official could be helped to improve but that doesn't seem to happen and a poor referee like Mr Rock continues to be poor throughout his refereeing career and continues to affect matches and often determines the results of games.

Give me human error over VAR any day. I think it balances out, could not see a foul on Letheren vs Salford but the goal was disallowed and that game has to be a classic for how it ended. Didn't get the decision on Saturday but who knows what may come in the weeks ahead. Might get a soft penalty to win it at Wembley, maybe just don't let Cole take it.

error over VAR any day. I think it balances out, could not see a foul on Letheren vs Salford but the goal was disallowed and that game has to be a classic for how it ended. Didn't get the decision on Saturday but who knows what may come in the weeks ahead. Might get a soft penalty to win it at Wembley, maybe just don't let Cole take it.
Bristol Shrimp

Quite. Naturally, we tend to forget to decisions that go for us and hold onto the ones that go against us. I'd forgotten about the Salford goal until you mentioned it, but did think of Barrow at home where their lad got sent off for a dubious handball. We were lucky to hold on for 3 points ahainst 10 men, but we just remember the result.

It evens itself out over a season.

That being said, yesterday was the first referee I remember who seemed to get a number of key decisions wrong. Although it didn't lead to a goal, the shirt tug by Wes Hoolahan which didn't receive a booking was a perfect illustration of his lack of consistency and control of the game.

Only just got round to watching EFL on Quest from Friday, they all thought the sending off was harsh on Gibson, hint of offside and the ball was bearing out for a throw in, then two agree that it was never a pen, the forward pushed the ball then thrust his leg out in front of Cooney who couldn’t get out of the way!!
And following on from this watched Cambridge highlights yesterday and another dodgy penalty got them back into it, bloody luck they are having!

Bristol Shrimp wrote:Give me human error over VAR any day.

I think VAR could be useful if it was used only for "clear cut" errors. Personally, I think the referee should only be allowed to view VAR once. If it is a 'clear error', it will be obvious on re-watching it once. If it isn't obvious, then stick with the initial decision. That way, VAR would take no more than 45 seconds to be reviewed.