Lambert charged £8,000 for Chelsea post match comments

[seanthevillan]

Anyone know if Wenger was fined/charged for his post-match comments? I can't see anything on the internet so assumed he wasn't. Managers of a few teams use their interviews to get sympathy/put pressure on refs and it goes unnoticed/unpunished - that's why this is unfair.

[Surrey Villain]

Anyone know if Wenger was fined/charged for his post-match comments? I can't see anything on the internet so assumed he wasn't. Managers of a few teams use their interviews to get sympathy/put pressure on refs and it goes unnoticed/unpunished - that's why this is unfair.

Absolutely on the nail. Wenger's comments were far worse than Lambert's.

[cheltenhamlion]

I also mentioned bullying of officials in the character assassination I wrote far too much about in relation to Sralex for Dave the other day.

[paul_e]

I understand the FA's stance here. They have to uphold the authority of referees, otherwise the game will just become a free-for-all and nobody will have any respect for the man in the middle. You might well argue that's already the case, but I think allowing people to slag off refs willy nilly would only make things worse.

I also don't see the point in making them explain their decisions. Most referees make so many mistakes - even during a single game - that every account of themselves they gave afterward would basically be an abject and humiliating mea culpa. Remember, these guys aren't competing, they're just trying to enforce the rules and they don't get paid 20 grand a month or more to do it.

Their job is made incredibly difficult by the cheating wankers they have to officiate. Maybe they could be made to explain themselves after the game, but far better to start by introducing draconian retroactive punishment for players who try to hoodwink them.

Is in not just as humiliating for their error to be shown on the hour for a day or 2 on SSN?  Is it not just as bad for them to heckled for 90minutes from the crowd next time they ref the slighted team?  Asking for an account from the ref humanises them more than the current situation and would help highlight that they're making the decisions they think are right at the time.  That this also makes them think the decision over for an extra second or 2 and hopefully stops some of the truly terrible decisions you see every now and then even better.

Think of the arsenal game a few weeks ago, the ref coming out and saying he thought Koscielney went through Gabby in playing the ball so he gave the penalty and this being proven correct would've shut up the arsenal fans who are convinced that even though he may have got it right he lucked out and shouldn't have given it (which I've seen a lot of, despite evidence that the decision was spot on).

[SamTheMouse]

Is in not just as humiliating for their error to be shown on the hour for a day or 2 on SSN?  Is it not just as bad for them to heckled for 90minutes from the crowd next time they ref the slighted team?  Asking for an account from the ref humanises them more than the current situation and would help highlight that they're making the decisions they think are right at the time.  That this also makes them think the decision over for an extra second or 2 and hopefully stops some of the truly terrible decisions you see every now and then even better.

Think of the arsenal game a few weeks ago, the ref coming out and saying he thought Koscielney went through Gabby in playing the ball so he gave the penalty and this being proven correct would've shut up the arsenal fans who are convinced that even though he may have got it right he lucked out and shouldn't have given it (which I've seen a lot of, despite evidence that the decision was spot on).

On your first point, yes I can see there's an argument that it might 'humanise' the refs a bit more. Some might even have sympathy for them, I guess if they owned up to genuine mistakes. Although they would be apologising so often nobody would have any faith in officials at all. Also, I can't see how it would make any difference to the actual decisions they make. They might bottle out of some difficult calls, but on average, ultimately they will still get as many decisions right and as many decisions wrong.

In your Arsenal example, I'm not clear why the Arsenal fans would shut up just because the ref says yes, I though Koscielny went though Gabby and so I got the decision correct. Their response would surely just be: well he would say that, wouldn't he?

[London Villan]

I still think they should try what the refs in American Football do, where they explain the decisions on the pitch. It could be just a series of hand gestures (!) that explains to the crowd what's happening and why they have made the decision. You might not agree, but at least you'll know.

[lovejoy]

he just needs to be a bit more savvy in how he conveys his message.
Personally I'd have asked the interviewer what he thought of the ref's performance and fed off that.

[olaftab]

I think he should have been even more blunt. £8K is worth calling a cheat a cheat in public.

[adrenachrome]

he just needs to be a bit more savvy in how he conveys his message.
Personally I'd have asked the interviewer what he thought of the ref's performance and fed off that.

That's what Ron Saunders used to do.

[Chico Hamilton III]

I think he should have been even more blunt. £8K is worth calling a cheat a cheat in public.

"I was once fined £5000 for calling Coventry fans “wankers”. Best £5k I’ve ever spent."

Ian Wright