interviewing referees after game
- Thread starter gregga88
- Start date
Captain Black
Well-Known Member
Exactly why not make them explain there actions , that they are well paid for.
TimzRFudz
Well-Known Member
Totally agree.
I'd go even further, I'd wire the cunts up for audio so they can explain every decision on the pitch the same way American Football referees do. Would maybe make them stop to think for a second as opposed to hitting the turbo button and flashing red cards for incidents they haven't seen.
I actually think this could happen if there was appetite for it in the right places. That place is quite simply Sky. Dead easy. Alongside the next multibillion (EPL) multimillion (SPFL) deal they do they simply throw in a clause that referees have to give interviews after the game. Sorted.
I'd go even further, I'd wire the cunts up for audio so they can explain every decision on the pitch the same way American Football referees do. Would maybe make them stop to think for a second as opposed to hitting the turbo button and flashing red cards for incidents they haven't seen.
I actually think this could happen if there was appetite for it in the right places. That place is quite simply Sky. Dead easy. Alongside the next multibillion (EPL) multimillion (SPFL) deal they do they simply throw in a clause that referees have to give interviews after the game. Sorted.
Bluenose1979
Well-Known Member
Think the refs association don't want them to do it in case they say something that incriminates them.
They seem to take the stance of "we'll explain nothing about our decisions, we'll never admit we're wrong and if anybody criticises us they will be in front of the beaks at Hampden on the Monday morning - deal with it."
They absolutely should be talking after matches.
Why can a player or manager do an interview post-match and freely be critical of themselves, other players, opponents, etc but say a ref had a shite game and you're over the coals?
Teflon-coated kits they wear.
They seem to take the stance of "we'll explain nothing about our decisions, we'll never admit we're wrong and if anybody criticises us they will be in front of the beaks at Hampden on the Monday morning - deal with it."
They absolutely should be talking after matches.
Why can a player or manager do an interview post-match and freely be critical of themselves, other players, opponents, etc but say a ref had a shite game and you're over the coals?
Teflon-coated kits they wear.
gregga88
Active Member
what could they say that possibly could incriminate them
especially after a game like sunday
IrvineLoyal
Well-Known Member
I can vaguely mind a ref giving an interview after a game back in early 90s
Paddy bonner came 40 yards outside his goal and brung Eoin jess down and ref was on sportscene giving explanation to why it wasnt a red
Paddy bonner came 40 yards outside his goal and brung Eoin jess down and ref was on sportscene giving explanation to why it wasnt a red
It would be better if they put their match report in within a few hours of the match ending.
Not three days to fit it in with an agenda.
Not three days to fit it in with an agenda.
Wugs
Well-Known Member
I actually said this tonight, talking to a stranger in a boozer,they have to be accountable for their decisions.
Thewandofpedro
Well-Known Member
It’s mental that refs are above criticism really.
Make an arse of it, get called out by a manager and it’s the manager in the dock and out of pocket.
The fact these cretins know that they won’t have to face up to public scrutiny makes them poorer refs as they have no incentive due to a lack of public accountability.
Make an arse of it, get called out by a manager and it’s the manager in the dock and out of pocket.
The fact these cretins know that they won’t have to face up to public scrutiny makes them poorer refs as they have no incentive due to a lack of public accountability.
GranvillusClutterbuckus
Well-Known Member
What about changing the system completely.
Referees body should be setup, to consist only of professional referees who respond to uefa directly. Referee certification can be carried out by any country, but a final UEFA certification is required to referee in another country.
SFA approach UEFA to provide a list of referees at the start of each season, which must consist of an equal number of national and non national referees.
Appeals procedure should be done through the SFA who consider the case before deciding to uphold or not. Decisions made by SFA not agreed with by the complainant can be appealed going to UEFA. Similarly, if the SFA are not happy with a referee in general, they must make a case to UEFA.
Or sumfin like that.
Referees body should be setup, to consist only of professional referees who respond to uefa directly. Referee certification can be carried out by any country, but a final UEFA certification is required to referee in another country.
SFA approach UEFA to provide a list of referees at the start of each season, which must consist of an equal number of national and non national referees.
Appeals procedure should be done through the SFA who consider the case before deciding to uphold or not. Decisions made by SFA not agreed with by the complainant can be appealed going to UEFA. Similarly, if the SFA are not happy with a referee in general, they must make a case to UEFA.
Or sumfin like that.
Stewart G
Well-Known Member
Sounds good but in reality everyone would slaughter them even more.
We see everything in slo-mo and from every angle and they have one chance. Explaining why they made certain decisions will never placate the supporters (of any team) who think there is some kind of agenda against them.
We see everything in slo-mo and from every angle and they have one chance. Explaining why they made certain decisions will never placate the supporters (of any team) who think there is some kind of agenda against them.
TARBERT LOYAL
Active Member
the ruling bodies in football will not allow referees to give interviews after games. to answer why they sent the player off or give the penalty etc. because it would become clear to everybody that they have bean told by the ruling bodies. to favour the big clubs in games and not the small clubs and yes in the past we would have got favours off referees in games. but the main reason is if the ruling bodies let referees say after a game why they give is decision that decision. they would worry that the clubs and fans would want more rules change and everything they do done in the open for everybody to see not in secret as they do now.
Disco Deejay
Well-Known Member
They trialled it in Scotland about 20 years ago.
Refs spoke to the media about an hour after the game, to explain major decisions. All it did was highlight how bad they were and they didn't stand up well to cross examination.
It was quickly dropped, using the excuse that they were too mentally tired after a game to give interviews and there was no point in giving them a day or two later, as everything had been dissected by tv pundits.
Refs spoke to the media about an hour after the game, to explain major decisions. All it did was highlight how bad they were and they didn't stand up well to cross examination.
It was quickly dropped, using the excuse that they were too mentally tired after a game to give interviews and there was no point in giving them a day or two later, as everything had been dissected by tv pundits.
Londonderry_Bear
Active Member
For me interviewing them after games just created a sense of celebrity around them and that won't help.
As a first step to greater transparency is like to see their match reports that they submit published on the SFA website for everyone to read
As a first step to greater transparency is like to see their match reports that they submit published on the SFA website for everyone to read
Beer Belly Loyal
Well-Known Member
Don't need to do interviews...just lift the phone to the manager and apologise for their incompetence.
It's already been trialled with St Brenda under the guidance of Liewell.
It's already been trialled with St Brenda under the guidance of Liewell.
Porto Loyal
Well-Known Member
we are in danger of turning into them with all this nonsense about referees.
I have family members involved in refereeing for many years, at the top level. The idea there is any sort of anti Rangers conspiracy is as ridiculous as it was when the scum were questioning referees when decisions were going against them. When Paul McBride was doing all his stuff for Celtic, the one thing you never heard him say was anything about a refereeing conspiracy as he’d been there and knew it was nonsense.
Personally, I think the game has got a lot faster and the constant tv angles means it’s easier to spot things the ref missed/got wrong. Interestingly, there appears to be divided opinion about the incidents on Sunday. One ex-grade one I spoke to thought that the Morelos incident was a red, and so was the penalty, but he said others had different thoughts.
I have family members involved in refereeing for many years, at the top level. The idea there is any sort of anti Rangers conspiracy is as ridiculous as it was when the scum were questioning referees when decisions were going against them. When Paul McBride was doing all his stuff for Celtic, the one thing you never heard him say was anything about a refereeing conspiracy as he’d been there and knew it was nonsense.
Personally, I think the game has got a lot faster and the constant tv angles means it’s easier to spot things the ref missed/got wrong. Interestingly, there appears to be divided opinion about the incidents on Sunday. One ex-grade one I spoke to thought that the Morelos incident was a red, and so was the penalty, but he said others had different thoughts.
A) it would only increase anger/conspiracy theorists because they would obviously be media trained and give non committal answers the way most managers and players do now.
B) who would be doing the interviewing? The media who hate us? You think they would ask the questions we want asked or probe answers which didn't stack up? I don't.
B) who would be doing the interviewing? The media who hate us? You think they would ask the questions we want asked or probe answers which didn't stack up? I don't.
Cooperfan
Well-Known Member
While that's true I still think they should be able to explain their decisions.
GreigC
Well-Known Member
As an International official in another sport, I wouldn't like to give an interview right after the game. Don't get me wrong, in the most part I remember the huge decisions, but generally there's a significant amount that I genuinely can't remember one way or the other.
I can look at a video replay, tell you what I saw, and why I gave a decision. Although generally that is done at least 3 hours post game.
That said, I remember the big decisions......but the most controversial decisions, at least in my sport, tend not to be the biggest decisions you make.
But Football Referees in Scotland, are held to account no where near the level that any other official in the country is - be that at club level, or above. And that is irrespective of the sport played.
I can look at a video replay, tell you what I saw, and why I gave a decision. Although generally that is done at least 3 hours post game.
That said, I remember the big decisions......but the most controversial decisions, at least in my sport, tend not to be the biggest decisions you make.
But Football Referees in Scotland, are held to account no where near the level that any other official in the country is - be that at club level, or above. And that is irrespective of the sport played.
OsoDeMadrid
Well-Known Member
If. You went to the cinema and one of the main actors every word was silenced out and the ending was cut out you'd probably ask for your money back.
Paying 30 quid and more to watch a sporting contest with no clue why certain decisions happen is just the same in my opinion.
Last edited:
devilman
Well-Known Member
It'll be one of the ways the SFA are using to protect them from their incompetence. A referee should be made to explain their decisions and publicly - they don't work for free. Only a liar, cheat or someone incompetent would have a problem with doing that.
Nobody is expecting referees to be right all the time. Mistakes will happen - however, SFA refs make massive mistakes on a very, very regular and NO, they do not fucking balance out over a season.
Nobody is expecting referees to be right all the time. Mistakes will happen - however, SFA refs make massive mistakes on a very, very regular and NO, they do not fucking balance out over a season.
calder ranger
Member
Certain there used to be a website back around when Hugh Dallas was a ref ,where they came out and explained contentious decisions - which I think got binned when they started putting ref's windows in.
In Rugby and other spectator sports around the world you can buy ear pieces which let you hear the officials/players conversations - a great idea adding value to the event, of course there reputation for fair play is beyond question.
The SFA might want to consider whether they like it or not Gerrard will attract more attention and focus on the SPL than it would normally get and as such it gives them an opportunity to bring more revenue into the game or lose it via broadcasting,sponsors etc,they don't seem to care its more likely going to be the latter.
Who would want there brand associated with the nonsense we get served up here, literally to a man including rhabids in the media agreed the Morelos red ruined the game as a spectacle.
In Rugby and other spectator sports around the world you can buy ear pieces which let you hear the officials/players conversations - a great idea adding value to the event, of course there reputation for fair play is beyond question.
The SFA might want to consider whether they like it or not Gerrard will attract more attention and focus on the SPL than it would normally get and as such it gives them an opportunity to bring more revenue into the game or lose it via broadcasting,sponsors etc,they don't seem to care its more likely going to be the latter.
Who would want there brand associated with the nonsense we get served up here, literally to a man including rhabids in the media agreed the Morelos red ruined the game as a spectacle.
songsofglory
Well-Known Member
I think it would be quite interesting. Most fans want to hear from the ref after a game. Probably more hassle than its worth for the governing bodies.
I have sympathies why they wouldn't want to be interviewed straight after the game for a couple of reasons but the main one being composure and recollection. It can take time to regain. For example I remember reading that nadir cifti got away with grabbing a lino by the throat because the defence lawyer tied the lino in knots and he couldn't remember which arm he'd grabbed him with. Now picture the scenario of Lennon getting off with technicalities (more so than he does now) on a regular basis because a ref bumbles a bit during post match interviews.
devilman
Well-Known Member
That's fine - they can show them the events as they happened and they can talk us all through it. Even if it doesn't happen right after the game the referee should be made to explain their decisions. Especially the game changing ones they get wrong on such a regular basis.
Either that or the SFA need to agree to a proper points system for refs. Decisions they get wrong cost them points. The points decide what games they get and what portion of their fee they get.
Southernlion
Well-Known Member
At Twickenham you can purchase ear-phones so that you can hear what the referee is saying to the players & touch judges. I presume that TV subscribe to this link so even if, in your opinion, the ref has got it wrong, you know his rationale.
I'd like referee reports to be published but I'm not sure the data protection laws and how they would affect that.
My problem with the points system and demotions is that a) the people administering the points need to be unbiased which then delves into more layers of conspiracy. B) the bias we speak of is unconscious IMO due to the social pressure of celtic and the media so punishing it would not rectify it. C) if you demote refs then you must promote to replace. In doing so you are putting new guys, not deemed to be as good as the demoted guys, in the firing line. How would that pan out?
I think the only solution is having a 4th official from another country. The same way they do in tournaments. They also have to attack the source of the pressure. Celtic fc and the media.
VaucluseBear
Well-Known Member
For starters he could say "I refereed the game fairly" - that's pretty incriminating to me!what could they say that possibly could incriminate them
Walter2
Well-Known Member
These so called referees have to be made accountable,they are ruining players and managers careers,costing clubs hard earned revenue through poor,biased opinion making,untouchables in scottish football,s.f.a. Referees,an sellik,dragging the football offering in Scotland to an all time low!i.m.o.
