NO REF Round 3 v Perth Glory

[ballantyne]

I think it's really important to be aware that it is such a footballing cliche that the ref was biased against one's team, that it's horrifyingly easy to misinterpret comments about the referee.
For mine, I don't think we get that many serious suggestions of deliberately poor refereeing - certainly not enough to justify an perception that the refs are under constant, unwarranted, attack on this forum.
The thing is that we have seen two really important, borderline calls go against us in the first two games of the season, and we had a number of those go against us in the first half of the last season - you have to be able to express that when discussing the game, otherwise, what's the point?
If Roy doesn't get that pen two weeks ago, I'm 100% certain that they don't win it 5-1 - in fact, I would argue that based on performance last week and the first half hour of that game, there's a fair chance that we could have taken it, or at least pulled off a tie.
As it was, that pen took the wind out of our sails and gave Roy an extra push... That matters when you're reviewing the game, but you can't express it if you can't whinge about the reffing decisions.

I can express it this way: if conceding an equaliser turns you to such mush you concede 4 more in a shocking display of comedy defending, you've got a lot more to worry about than the refereeing. And in front of a cracking crowd, too. Absolutely heart-breaking.
You agree then, that there is potential for massive confirmation bias here. I can just imagine the fans down the other end, stroking their chins and saying "damn fine referee this one, hats off FFA" - not!
If we are going to talk validly about football, I feel we need have a clear view of the game, not one clouded by an obsession with the officiating.

 

[bikinigirl]

I can express it this way: if conceding an equaliser turns you to such mush you concede 4 more in a shocking display of comedy defending, you've got a lot more to worry about than the refereeing. And in front of a cracking crowd, too. Absolutely heart-breaking.
You agree then, that there is potential for massive confirmation bias here. I can just imagine the fans down the other end, stroking their chins and saying "damn fine referee this one, hats off FFA" - not!
If we are going to talk validly about football, I feel we need have a clear view of the game, not one clouded by an obsession with the officiating.

. maybe you were just continuing your point rather than responding to nebbake's post specifically ... but I think what people are trying to say is that things can have a dramatic impact on the momentum of the game. in the jets game the penalty had more than one impact on the momentum:

• roy lifted
• which lifted their whole team

. on the other side of the equation:

• we failed to lift to the challenge ... but, importantly
• it seemed to take Baro out of the game - fearful that he would continue to be penalised for everything (or maybe it just effected his confidence - regardless, it had an effect)

. are those decisions reasons for a loss or bad performance? no* ... they are excuses. excuses shouldn't be used to justify a result as one sided as a 1-5 loss - but they can effect the moment of the combatants which in turn effects the outcome. so again, not a reason, but certainly a valid discussion point when considering the impact on a game. to me, if you don't discuss such things, you are neglecting a huge part of the game

* there are probably exceptions to every rule

Maybe I'm over-sensitive to it, then.

. yeah maybe

 

[nebakke]

I can just imagine the fans down the other end, stroking their chins and saying "damn fine referee this one, hats off FFA" - not!
If we are going to talk validly about football, I feel we need have a clear view of the game, not one clouded by an obsession with the officiating.

The thing is - the ones I've talked to did not do that. We had a bunch of Newie fans in front of us in the bay, I had a bit of a chat to a couple of them and amongst the banter they were about as dimbfounded by the pen and a couple of other decisions as the rest of us.
The difference obviously was that they aren't complaining about it though - why would they?

I just don't see how we can have a clear view of the game without including the refereeing - is a pretty important part of the whole thing.
Noone is saying that everything was rosy, save for the refereeing - but you cannot discount the impact of the refereeing both on the outcome and on how the game was played - he damn near lost control of the game by the end of the first half, that's not irrelevant. It impacts how the players play the game and how they perform.

 

[Ozhammer]

Without wishing to add unnecessary fuel to the fire, we all know that every decision made by a referee will likely have 50% of the participants offside (see what I did there? ).

What is already getting under my skin is how little the VAR seems to be improving the standard of officiating, when the expectation was that it would solve a lot of the problems. It is rapidly becoming a bit of a joke and the FFA needs to work hard to make sure that gets addressed swiftly, or it will just become another source of collective frustration.

Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[scottmac]

Natch.
I just recently got frustrated rather than bored with the constant harping about the refereeing.
Other team's forums have whinging about the refs, but here at ccmfans.net it has become the lifeblood, the sine qua non, in fact the doctrine, as one commenter has even suggested this thread be censored.

NOT censored. f**king deleted. It's bullshit that you would excludea part of the game to talk about. Refs always have and always will be a point of conversation after a game. Sometimes alot more than others. Its just a fact. YOUR the one trying to censor the conversation.

 

[adz]

The "NO REF" thing is only a suggestion and for this thread. There is another thread for the game where the usual anything goes applies. I don't see the problem?

 

[Big Al]

Without wishing to add unnecessary fuel to the fire, we all know that every decision made by a referee will likely have 50% of the participants offside (see what I did there? ).

What is already getting under my skin is how little the VAR seems to be improving the standard of officiating, when the expectation was that it would solve a lot of the problems. It is rapidly becoming a bit of a joke and the FFA needs to work hard to make sure that gets addressed swiftly, or it will just become another source of collective frustration.

Just my 2 cents worth.

The problem with VAR is everyone wants it to fix every call that goes against there team.
It is there for obvious errors not judgement calls or for SFC. Thats it.

The VAR has not been introduced with any education. The fans just don’t understand it. Then the VAR will go do something stupid soon that everyone will go WTF.
It doesn’t belong in football imo.

I like goal line technology and that’s it.

As much as ref’s can be frustrating that is part of sport at all levels.

No version of review in any sport has taken away controversy

 

[scottmac]

The "NO REF" thing is only a suggestion and for this thread. There is another thread for the game where the usual anything goes applies. I don't see the problem?

The problem is we have 2 threads for the same thing with conversation now split.

 

[adz]

Yeah fair call

 

[adz]

Closing this one so we can keep all the game convo in one place. If the refs don't f**k up so much, they won't even get a mention.