DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 67371--------------------------------------------------
Re: Worthing v Aveley
DIR By: RefGod
Date: August 30, 2023, 5:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref25 link ---
>
> [quote author=aaa link=topic=5154.msg67366#msg67366
date=1693427546]
> [quote author=RCG link=topic=5154.msg67364#msg67364
date=1693422561]
> Was there an observer at the game? If so, their report will
definitely form evidence for the prosecution. Then the FA will
charge at least the 2 active officials with failing to apply
LotG. Only after this would any suspension be put in place.
>
--- End Quote ---
This is not PL nor FL so I would be very surprised if anyone is
suspended. From this season, all Step 2 matches have Observer
on them so its purely big 6.5 (Major advice) in one of the
Application of Law sections, or unless there is any other error
which may reduce it further.
[/quote]
Just to be clear; are you suggesting that is likely based on
understanding of past incidents or(and?) are you suggesting that
the officials concerned should not face sanction for the error
because they officiate at Step 2 rather than a higher level?
In my opinion, all 3 officials should be charged with less than
proficiently applying the Laws of the Game. This is an
unacceptable error for officials to have made at Step 2 (and I
would say the same down to at least Step 6 referee [i.e. Level
4] if not lower). This isn’t an obscure situation - it is a
routine understanding of what to do in the event of encroachment
at a penalty kick.
Based on past decisions of competitions where this kind of thing
has happened, there is the potential for the match to be ordered
to be replayed (although I accept such past decisions relating
to PK offences may have been quite a while back and things may
have moved on). I do note that recently decisions have been made
to replay matches due to refereeing Law errors (such as sin bins
in The FA Cup). It is simply not acceptable for there to be the
potential for a National League match to have to be replayed due
to an error of this nature.
A side comment on the observation scheme - the fact that this
error would be graded the same as if the referee had got a
judgement call about whether a challenge would be a penalty / no
penalty or a red card / yellow card (which is what a 6.5 is -
one Match Changing Situation judged incorrectly) cannot, in my
view, be right.
[/quote]
This is quite literally one MCS judged incorrectly.
#Post#: 67372--------------------------------------------------
Re: Worthing v Aveley
DIR By: RefGod
Date: August 30, 2023, 5:25 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: tef link ---
>
> One very helpful local referee a few years back made us some
"cheat-sheets" covering all the penalty kick infringement
scenarios which were small enough to fit in my card notebook.
Invaluable as a safety net for those occasions where you might
have a moment of doubt. He also made something similar for
sin-bin scenarios. Still have them to this day!
>
> Were there any consequences for the officials? Would you
expect to be stood down for a couple of weeks for an error in
law like this?
>
--- End Quote ---
The referee was initially given appointments for September. I am
not aware of the assistants or if the referee retained his
fixtures.
#Post#: 67374--------------------------------------------------
Re: Worthing v Aveley
DIR By: aaa
Date: August 31, 2023, 2:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Ref25 link ---
>
> [quote author=aaa link=topic=5154.msg67366#msg67366
date=1693427546]
> [quote author=RCG link=topic=5154.msg67364#msg67364
date=1693422561]
> Was there an observer at the game? If so, their report will
definitely form evidence for the prosecution. Then the FA will
charge at least the 2 active officials with failing to apply
LotG. Only after this would any suspension be put in place.
>
--- End Quote ---
This is not PL nor FL so I would be very surprised if anyone is
suspended. From this season, all Step 2 matches have Observer
on them so its purely big 6.5 (Major advice) in one of the
Application of Law sections, or unless there is any other error
which may reduce it further.
[/quote]
Just to be clear; are you suggesting that is likely based on
understanding of past incidents or(and?) are you suggesting that
the officials concerned should not face sanction for the error
because they officiate at Step 2 rather than a higher level?
In my opinion, all 3 officials should be charged with less than
proficiently applying the Laws of the Game. This is an
unacceptable error for officials to have made at Step 2 (and I
would say the same down to at least Step 6 referee [i.e. Level
4] if not lower). This isn’t an obscure situation - it is a
routine understanding of what to do in the event of encroachment
at a penalty kick.
Based on past decisions of competitions where this kind of thing
has happened, there is the potential for the match to be ordered
to be replayed (although I accept such past decisions relating
to PK offences may have been quite a while back and things may
have moved on). I do note that recently decisions have been made
to replay matches due to refereeing Law errors (such as sin bins
in The FA Cup). It is simply not acceptable for there to be the
potential for a National League match to have to be replayed due
to an error of this nature.
A side comment on the observation scheme - the fact that this
error would be graded the same as if the referee had got a
judgement call about whether a challenge would be a penalty / no
penalty or a red card / yellow card (which is what a 6.5 is -
one Match Changing Situation judged incorrectly) cannot, in my
view, be right.
[/quote]
On a given match, there will be one/few incorrect AOL so to keep
suspending Officials, we will have little left to officiate
matches.
Only Step 2 and above use match footage so if you're lucky to
get footage from Step 3 & below in order to penalise the
Officials, its more of luck than norm.
I understand that Officials get suspended if they applied wrong
directive on FA competition. Its very common because the losing
team protested. But its difficult for losing clubs to ask for
replay/suspension when AOL was incorrectly applied especially as
many don't even know the correct law themself.
Just saying..
#Post#: 67381--------------------------------------------------
Re: Worthing v Aveley
DIR By: Ref25
Date: August 31, 2023, 5:56 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: RefGod link ---
>
> [quote author=Ref25 link=topic=5154.msg67370#msg67370
date=1693433800]
> [quote author=aaa link=topic=5154.msg67366#msg67366
date=1693427546]
> [quote author=RCG link=topic=5154.msg67364#msg67364
date=1693422561]
> Was there an observer at the game? If so, their report will
definitely form evidence for the prosecution. Then the FA will
charge at least the 2 active officials with failing to apply
LotG. Only after this would any suspension be put in place.
>
--- End Quote ---
This is not PL nor FL so I would be very surprised if anyone is
suspended. From this season, all Step 2 matches have Observer
on them so its purely big 6.5 (Major advice) in one of the
Application of Law sections, or unless there is any other error
which may reduce it further.
[/quote]
Just to be clear; are you suggesting that is likely based on
understanding of past incidents or(and?) are you suggesting that
the officials concerned should not face sanction for the error
because they officiate at Step 2 rather than a higher level?
In my opinion, all 3 officials should be charged with less than
proficiently applying the Laws of the Game. This is an
unacceptable error for officials to have made at Step 2 (and I
would say the same down to at least Step 6 referee [i.e. Level
4] if not lower). This isn’t an obscure situation - it is a
routine understanding of what to do in the event of encroachment
at a penalty kick.
Based on past decisions of competitions where this kind of thing
has happened, there is the potential for the match to be ordered
to be replayed (although I accept such past decisions relating
to PK offences may have been quite a while back and things may
have moved on). I do note that recently decisions have been made
to replay matches due to refereeing Law errors (such as sin bins
in The FA Cup). It is simply not acceptable for there to be the
potential for a National League match to have to be replayed due
to an error of this nature.
A side comment on the observation scheme - the fact that this
error would be graded the same as if the referee had got a
judgement call about whether a challenge would be a penalty / no
penalty or a red card / yellow card (which is what a 6.5 is -
one Match Changing Situation judged incorrectly) cannot, in my
view, be right.
[/quote]
This is quite literally one MCS judged incorrectly.
[/quote]
Whilst I agree that is accurate in how the incident/decision
fits into the observation scheme, it doesn’t paint the full
picture or give context to the scale or seriousness. The same
statement could be made if a referee awards a penalty in a
challenging situation when a legal tackle was in fact made. That
happens in the game; it’s a judgement call and will be a
subjective opinion based on one look from one angle.
That to me is an error which should not, in the context of a
referee’s performance and the score awarded, be graded the same
as where a referee without question applies the law incorrectly
having seen and recognised the undisputed facts.
#Post#: 67382--------------------------------------------------
Re: Worthing v Aveley
DIR By: Ref25
Date: August 31, 2023, 6:08 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: aaa link ---
>
> [quote author=Ref25 link=topic=5154.msg67370#msg67370
date=1693433800]
> [quote author=aaa link=topic=5154.msg67366#msg67366
date=1693427546]
> [quote author=RCG link=topic=5154.msg67364#msg67364
date=1693422561]
> Was there an observer at the game? If so, their report will
definitely form evidence for the prosecution. Then the FA will
charge at least the 2 active officials with failing to apply
LotG. Only after this would any suspension be put in place.
>
--- End Quote ---
This is not PL nor FL so I would be very surprised if anyone is
suspended. From this season, all Step 2 matches have Observer
on them so its purely big 6.5 (Major advice) in one of the
Application of Law sections, or unless there is any other error
which may reduce it further.
[/quote]
Just to be clear; are you suggesting that is likely based on
understanding of past incidents or(and?) are you suggesting that
the officials concerned should not face sanction for the error
because they officiate at Step 2 rather than a higher level?
In my opinion, all 3 officials should be charged with less than
proficiently applying the Laws of the Game. This is an
unacceptable error for officials to have made at Step 2 (and I
would say the same down to at least Step 6 referee [i.e. Level
4] if not lower). This isn’t an obscure situation - it is a
routine understanding of what to do in the event of encroachment
at a penalty kick.
Based on past decisions of competitions where this kind of thing
has happened, there is the potential for the match to be ordered
to be replayed (although I accept such past decisions relating
to PK offences may have been quite a while back and things may
have moved on). I do note that recently decisions have been made
to replay matches due to refereeing Law errors (such as sin bins
in The FA Cup). It is simply not acceptable for there to be the
potential for a National League match to have to be replayed due
to an error of this nature.
A side comment on the observation scheme - the fact that this
error would be graded the same as if the referee had got a
judgement call about whether a challenge would be a penalty / no
penalty or a red card / yellow card (which is what a 6.5 is -
one Match Changing Situation judged incorrectly) cannot, in my
view, be right.
[/quote]
On a given match, there will be one/few incorrect AOL so to keep
suspending Officials, we will have little left to officiate
matches.
Only Step 2 and above use match footage so if you're lucky to
get footage from Step 3 & below in order to penalise the
Officials, its more of luck than norm.
I understand that Officials get suspended if they applied wrong
directive on FA competition. Its very common because the losing
team protested. But its difficult for losing clubs to ask for
replay/suspension when AOL was incorrectly applied especially as
many don't even know the correct law themself.
Just saying..
[/quote]
I can’t imagine many (if any) people are saying every single
matter that is strictly an incorrect application of law should
lead to a charge - I’m certainly not. I think scale and impact
are important, as well as whether there is any kind of
subjective element to the decision (for example, was the ball in
or out of play when an offence occurred which may impact how the
game is restarted).
I don’t think there are errors on the scale of the one in this
incident happening so frequently as to merit charges in large
numbers that would see competitions deprived of suitably
qualified officials. However, where there is a major impact on
the game (such as player not sent off for two yellows, penalty
kick retake not applied correctly having identified
encroachment), then I think it is appropriate for a charge to be
issued. I make no comment on what the outcome should be to a
charge as every incident would be different.
I don’t think it is difficult in a situation such as this for a
losing club to identify the issue and complain.
#Post#: 67384--------------------------------------------------
Re: Worthing v Aveley
DIR By: Ref Watcher
Date: August 31, 2023, 6:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
There is a difference between Application of Law and knowing
Law. Application of Law, as far as match observers are
concerned, covers things such as appropriate disciplinary
sanctions, judgement of DOGSO, dealing with persistent
offenders, etc. There is an assumption that the official knows
Law. This sections deals with how it is applied. Knowing, or
rather not knowing, Law is altogether different and to me is a
more serious "offence".
*****************************************************
Page 2 of 2
DIR Previous Page