Lambert charged £8,000 for Chelsea post match comments

[Villafirst]

So the ref can be completely shit at his job an get away with it scot free?

[danlanza]

What a fucking joke.
Lambert says what every body else would say and gets fined 8 grand. The ref should pay that fine because he was shite all game.
What a bloody travesty. Getting a bit boring , this top 4 shite now, their managers doing all the moaning and getting away with it.
 Boils my piss it does.
Refuse to pay the fine until the wanking load of shite that is the FA watch the game and see exactly what happened.
Bunch of arseholes the FA.

[frankmosswasmyuncle]

Couldn't there be some kind of post match ref comment made on video, explaining his decisions. "I  made this decision because of this...".
Not live and to be questioned but just to explain.
It's the consistent inconsistency that f**ks up everyone's understanding of the rules.
So, one game a ref sends a player off for using an elbow.
In the Chelsea game he books Ivanovic for using an elbow (sending off?) so must have made a reasoned decision as to why NOT to take stronger action.
Players, managers and supporters need to know what is a booking, sending off etc, so that we ALL know what's what.
A move towards the rugby union use of ref microphones, explaining on the spot, would be a step forward imho.

[danlanza]

Couldn't there be some kind of post match ref comment made on video, explaining his decisions. "I  made this decision because of this...".
Not live and to be questioned but just to explain.
It's the consistent inconsistency that f**ks up everyone's understanding of the rules.
So, one game a ref sends a player off for using an elbow.
In the Chelsea game he books Ivanovic for using an elbow (sending off?) so must have made a reasoned decision as to why NOT to take stronger action.
Players, managers and supporters need to know what is a booking, sending off etc, so that we ALL know what's what.
A move towards the rugby union use of ref microphones, explaining on the spot, would be a step forward imho.

Spot on mate. Refs should be made to do an interview after every game. Infact, with the money in football now make refs fully proffesional. Pay them a bloody good wage to do one thing, proffesional reffing and nothing else. Fucking Grammar school teachers are not up to the job, proven.

[dave.woodhall]

Couldn't there be some kind of post match ref comment made on video, explaining his decisions. "I  made this decision because of this...".
Not live and to be questioned but just to explain.
It's the consistent inconsistency that f**ks up everyone's understanding of the rules.
So, one game a ref sends a player off for using an elbow.
In the Chelsea game he books Ivanovic for using an elbow (sending off?) so must have made a reasoned decision as to why NOT to take stronger action.
Players, managers and supporters need to know what is a booking, sending off etc, so that we ALL know what's what.
A move towards the rugby union use of ref microphones, explaining on the spot, would be a step forward imho.

Spot on mate. Refs should be made to do an interview after every game. Infact, with the money in football now make refs fully proffesional. Pay them a bloody good wage to do one thing, proffesional reffing and nothing else. Fucking Grammar school teachers are not up to the job, proven.

You mean like they have been since 2001?

[frankmosswasmyuncle]

No idea on this Dave, but how many are full-time?
Some are; others not?
In many ways they are the most important person on the pitch yet the perception of them is still an amateurish one because they are somewhat anonymous, ironically with almost no "voice".
Surely a brief non-confrontational explanation of a decision from a member of a professional body is reasonable.
It would be helpfully informative.
And that's not the Batham's talking dan!

[dave.woodhall]

No idea on this Dave, but how many are full-time?
Some are; others not?
In many ways they are the most important person on the pitch yet the perception of them is still an amateurish one because they are somewhat anonymous, ironically with almost no "voice".
Surely a brief non-confrontational explanation of a decision from a member of a professional body is reasonable.
It would be helpfully informative.
And that's not the Batham's talking dan!

The Select Group is made up of 18 refs who do Premier League and some Football League games. I agree that they should have to explain their decisions.

[frankmosswasmyuncle]

No idea on this Dave, but how many are full-time?
Some are; others not?
In many ways they are the most important person on the pitch yet the perception of them is still an amateurish one because they are somewhat anonymous, ironically with almost no "voice".
Surely a brief non-confrontational explanation of a decision from a member of a professional body is reasonable.
It would be helpfully informative.
And that's not the Batham's talking dan!

The Select Group is made up of 18 refs who do Premier League and some Football League games. I agree that they should have to explain their decisions.

Thanks DW.
Do they have to be full-time to be part of that Select group?
I assume they meet regularly to discuss issues in the game. It would be great if they could tell how/why on a regular basis to keep us abreast of "current thinking".

[dave.woodhall]

No idea on this Dave, but how many are full-time?
Some are; others not?
In many ways they are the most important person on the pitch yet the perception of them is still an amateurish one because they are somewhat anonymous, ironically with almost no "voice".
Surely a brief non-confrontational explanation of a decision from a member of a professional body is reasonable.
It would be helpfully informative.
And that's not the Batham's talking dan!

The Select Group is made up of 18 refs who do Premier League and some Football League games. I agree that they should have to explain their decisions.

Thanks DW.
Do they have to be full-time to be part of that Select group?
I assume they meet regularly to discuss issues in the game. It would be great if they could tell how/why on a regular basis to keep us abreast of "current thinking".

I think they're allowed to have other jobs but in reality most if not all are full-time.

[villan from luton]

Paul Lamberts comments were fully justified and not a rant after his team losing that evening. The referee had a mare, surely that cannot be disputed by anyone

[frankmosswasmyuncle]

I would imagine PL's comments were applauded by a large number of managers/players outside the Sky 4!

[Percy McCarthy]

As the ghost of Pongo says, the fine was for one sentence. You are allowed to say he got things wrong or was rubbish, you can't say he was cheating.

[danlanza]

Couldn't there be some kind of post match ref comment made on video, explaining his decisions. "I  made this decision because of this...".
Not live and to be questioned but just to explain.
It's the consistent inconsistency that f**ks up everyone's understanding of the rules.
So, one game a ref sends a player off for using an elbow.
In the Chelsea game he books Ivanovic for using an elbow (sending off?) so must have made a reasoned decision as to why NOT to take stronger action.
Players, managers and supporters need to know what is a booking, sending off etc, so that we ALL know what's what.
A move towards the rugby union use of ref microphones, explaining on the spot, would be a step forward imho.

Spot on mate. Refs should be made to do an interview after every game. Infact, with the money in football now make refs fully proffesional. Pay them a bloody good wage to do one thing, proffesional reffing and nothing else. Fucking Grammar school teachers are not up to the job, proven.

You mean like they have been since 2001?

They are not paid enough to do the job properly. Do they go to Ref school ?
A proffesional ref would not buckle under pressure. Whilst we are on the subject of Refs, if the language that over paid tossers give to refs was fineable for every swear word they used then most Prem players would earn fuck all per week. Football needs to wake up and show the refs some respect, like Rugby refs get, as was posted earlier. Long bloody argument is going to start now no doubt.
Swear at a ref- Red card, simple.

[dave.woodhall]

Couldn't there be some kind of post match ref comment made on video, explaining his decisions. "I  made this decision because of this...".
Not live and to be questioned but just to explain.
It's the consistent inconsistency that f**ks up everyone's understanding of the rules.
So, one game a ref sends a player off for using an elbow.
In the Chelsea game he books Ivanovic for using an elbow (sending off?) so must have made a reasoned decision as to why NOT to take stronger action.
Players, managers and supporters need to know what is a booking, sending off etc, so that we ALL know what's what.
A move towards the rugby union use of ref microphones, explaining on the spot, would be a step forward imho.

Spot on mate. Refs should be made to do an interview after every game. Infact, with the money in football now make refs fully proffesional. Pay them a bloody good wage to do one thing, proffesional reffing and nothing else. Fucking Grammar school teachers are not up to the job, proven.

You mean like they have been since 2001?

They are not paid enough to do the job properly. Do they go to Ref school ?

No, they get the job as a prize in an annual raffle.

[Louzie0]

Who in the FA with responsibility and an overview could be fined or otherwise sanctioned for failing to maintain the supply of the best standard of refereeing available to serve the PL?

It's got to be somebody's bailiwick.

If they are going to hand out fines for 'inappropriately worded criticism' from the folks on the ground (consumers) there also has to be a corporate responsibility for maintaining appropriate standards and sanctions for failing to meet them.