Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: KevinGage on November 08, 2010, 02:13:24 PM
-
here (http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11701_6494969,00.html)
Tony Pulis believes a system of promotion and relegation for referees will help to ensure that bigger clubs are not favoured in the Premier League.
Pulis has been angered by a number of key decisions that have gone against Stoke in recent weeks and feels the standard of officiating detracts from an otherwise thrilling division.
The Potters were denied a penalty against Sunderland at the weekend when Lee Cattermole clearly handled the ball on the line, which would have also resulted in the Black Cats midfielder being sent off if it had been spotted by referee Martin Atkinson.
Pulis was also unhappy that Ryan Shawcross was later sent off for two bookable offences as Stoke went down to a 2-0 defeat, while a couple of weeks ago Manchester United's Gary Neville escaped a red card with the game still in the balance.
The manager thinks smaller clubs in the Premier League are too often on the wrong end of major calls and insists it is now time to make changes.
"It cannot be right that these decisions consistently go on without being addressed," he told Sky Sports News ahead of the clash with Birmingham on Tuesday.
"Don't kid yourself that this hasn't happened in the first two years that we were in the Premier League. We've had decisions that have been absolutely abysmal but we have kept our grace and just got on with things.
"We know we are not going to get certain decisions that other clubs are going to get. I think that has been made blatantly obvious over the past few games, but there comes a point where you have to stand up and say 'this is not right'.
"The last thing I want to do is be sat here the day before a game talking about referees but I have to say the treatment this football club has had with respect to the decisions has been appalling."
Constructive
Pulis believes the best way to be fair to every club would be to introduce a ratings system for referees, with the weakest officials dropping down to the second tier.
He explained: "Over the weekend I have thought about it and I want to be constructive, so I think we should put in place a system where every Premier League club has a vote at the end of the season on referees, and the bottom three referees should be relegated to the Championship and the top three referees from the Championship should be promoted.
"And you can mark referees at the end of a game."
Pulis does not think there is any consistency in how referees are dealt with following poor performances, highlighting Mark Clattenburg's recent decision to allow Nani's controversial goal to stand for Manchester United against Tottenham.
"Clattenburg misses a game because of bad decisions he made in the game between Manchester United and Tottenham but the three bad decisions we have had against us, which have been as big for our club, those referees have refereed the next week," he said.
"How can that be right? So not only are we not getting the same decisions on the football pitch, i.e. Gary Neville's two challenges and Ryan Shawcross' two challenges, we are also not being treated right in respect of the ways the referees are being treated.
"So if you give everyone a vote and the opportunity to mark referees after every game, the perception is that referees can't help but at times go for the bigger clubs because of the power and the status and everything.
"If you get 14 clubs voting against those referees that might take away a little bit of their perception because if they keep performing to a level where they are more subservient to the bigger clubs, 14 clubs will vote them out of the Premier League."
Interesting to see where he might rank the inept tosspot that gave his side an injury-time free kick for Petrov giving Pennant a really menacing stare.
I think we should def look at it - if we can also include a ranking system that sees the three managers who bellyache the most also relegated.
-
Pulis does seem to be becoming a bit of a moaning git, but he does have a point.
For instance, can anyone imagine for a moment a referee giving that Nani goal AGAINST Man U at Old Trafford? No, me neither.
-
Maybe I'd have a bit more respect for him if he called the questionable decisions that went in his favour (unlikely I know) and didn't witter on about no luck in 11 games when I know that to not be the case in at least one match.
-
hes complaining that because referees make poor decisions against what he percieves to be "lesser teams" in the premier league, he wants to inflict them on to the championship?
isnt that a bit hypocritical?
-
If he really wants to make it easier for refs to make the right decisions, Pulis could always drop any player of his who takes a dive and tries to con the ref.
-
he could also tell his players to stop intentionally going through the man when they aggressively take the ball...
-
It would be interesting to see refs doing post match interviews.
-
Can Clattenburg just be put into administration so he can't referee a match again?
-
Well as much as Stoke have had a bad run of decisions I didn't hear Pulis moan at the referees performance when he allowed a free-kick for Pennants dive before they beat us. Not that I'd expect to but what goes around etc.
As for the relegation thing, no it can't happen. Apart from it being nonsensical you have to remember the refs retire also. So you can't have a season where 3 go down and one or two refs retire, so you don't then relegate anyone.
Also, what effect would it have in a match officiated by an already relegated ref? What about if two or three refs are under pressure to 'stay up' wouldn't that put added stress onto them and their officiating if they have to be worried about losing points?
No, nonsense idea.
-
Maybe I'd have a bit more respect for him if he called the questionable decisions that went in his favour (unlikely I know) and didn't witter on about no luck in 11 games when I know that to not be the case in at least one match.
Quite right. Until managers and players get equally irate about the decisions that go in their favour then it's best to ignore everything they have to say on the subject of referees.
They don't want consistency, they don't want common sense to be applied, they just want decisions to go their way. When they do, you don't hear a peep out of them.
-
Don't they already do this anyway, albeit in a temporary way?
-
Besides which, it wouldn't work because managers cannot be objective. The only way to be objective is for managers to mark refs from games other than their own, and if 19 out of 20 managers have no issue with the ref over a weekend, how keen will they be to watch the ref of a game they only have an academic interest in?
-
Maybe I'd have a bit more respect for him if he called the questionable decisions that went in his favour (unlikely I know) and didn't witter on about no luck in 11 games when I know that to not be the case in at least one match.
Quite right. Until managers and players get equally irate about the decisions that go in their favour then it's best to ignore everything they have to say on the subject of referees.
They don't want consistency, they don't want common sense to be applied, they just want decisions to go their way. When they do, you don't hear a peep out of them.
Both correct.
This will be another attempt by a manager to put pressure on the next referee to take charge of (in this case) a Stoke game. Utterly bizarre to think anybody aside from managers would agree with this.
-
I think rather than wanting this to come to pass what he's actually doing is planting a seed.
By droning on and on (and on and on) about the issue he might think that refs might me more inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in future.
We'll see. But if I was a ref I'd be more inclined to put the boot in further.
-
We'll see. But if I was a ref I'd be more inclined to put the boot in further.
[/quote]
Me too.
-
I don't remember Pullis moaning at Pennant's dive against us which led to their equaliser.
-
I think ref's so far this season have been shocking. How any referee calling himself a professional could miss Cattermole playing Goalie is beyond me.
-
Me too Clampy i think they have been shocking some of the decisions they get wrong are unbelievable.
-
hes complaining that because referees make poor decisions against what he percieves to be "lesser teams" in the premier league, he wants to inflict them on to the championship?
isnt that a bit hypocritical?
This is what I always say, Why should a shit ref be inflicted on anyone else, The championship don't want shit ref's nor does anyone else!
Your always going to get bad decisions as its human error without replays you can't always see everything but some of the ref's you see are awful. See Nani's goal.
My mate always call's them top 4 decisions and you do see top sides getting the decisions especially at Mould trafford and Stamford bridge
-
I think its a reasonable idea.
There should also be something similar for refs.
They each get to vote on which manager has been the most confrontational, disrespectful and one eyed when talking about their decisions. The manager who gets the most votes is banned from football forever.
Fairs fair.
-
Fair play and the good of the game is the farthest thing from Pulis' mind. He is only concerned for the team he manages. The same goes for Wenger, Fat Sam, Ferguson etc.
Bitter, paranoid, bullying and blessed with an inability to accept defeat without casting the blame on the one bloke who takes to the field with no intention of cheating.
Put your own house in order before launching an attack on ref's, Pullis. Your hipocrisy is astounding.
-
I cant see Phil Dowd being that excited about reffing at Oxford
-
The danger of this sort of proposal is that it punished refs for honest mistakes as well as venal, cowardly decisions. Much as we have seen our own share of dreadful decisions so far this season, I would still recognise this as being a difficult job to do, both physically and mentally. If we persecute refs even more, why should new people think about taking it up as a career?
Jimmy Hill all used to go about ex-pros moving into refereeing and I am sure that that there are plenty of lower league players who retire without the financial backing of an average Premiership player who would be grateful for the opportunity.
-
Such a proposal would not improve referee decisons in the eyes of managers, players, or fans one bit.
The fact is the game is played at a much faster pace, but everything can then be slowed down and replayed from the plethora of cameras from every angle. Then pawed over and analysed by a media intent on creating controversy to get people interacting with their programme. TalkSport does it, Sky does it.
Players dive, players cheat, players try to get opponents sent off or booked, players take it on themselves to question the referee during the game, managers scream at 4th officials on the touchline.
You can bring in goal line technology but there will still be everything else going on that someone will always disagree with.
So either bring in technology for everything and we stretch a game out stop/start over 3 hours, or realise that there has to be human error and interpretation from the officials.
Its not bad officials that are making fans fall out of love with the game, its the greed, the cheating, the questioning of authority, the player power. I suggest they look at themselves and put their own houses in order. But they wont do that because the stakes are so high, so it has to done for them. Instead of some simplistic system that wouldnt improve standards, we should have draconian measures instead of the toothless respect the ref campaign. Players should not be able to approach officials at all. Managers should not be able to comment on officials decisions at all. Players should be retrospectively punished if camera evidence after shows blatant cheating. Diving in the box where it is shown there was zero contact should carry something like a 6 game ban.
Sounds tough ? Yes it is, but all the people in the game bleating and whining week after week as if referees have committed serious crimes against humanity make me sick.
-
Followers of American Football will know that the NFL operates a continual assessment of all their judges and referees. After each match a report is sent to the NFL by both clubs in which each official is given an assessment and a rating. These are used to monitor the performance of the officials and, incidentally to decide which of these should have the honour (honor) of officiating at the Super Bowl.
-
I think its a reasonable idea.
There should also be something similar for refs.
They each get to vote on which manager has been the most confrontational, disrespectful and one eyed when talking about their decisions. The manager who gets the most votes is banned from football forever.
Fairs fair.
Oh if only I could do that in some of the leagues I referee in......that's a top idea!