URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       RateTheRef
  HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 69739--------------------------------------------------
       Scott Jackson  Stevenage v Port Vale
   DIR By: Jake the Peg
       Date: October 22, 2023, 3:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Any views on this non-penalty
  HTML https://twitter.com/Tom_Amos/status/1715774827687010742/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1715774827687010742&currentTweetUser=Tom_Amos&mode=profile
       #Post#: 69741--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Scott Jackson  Stevenage v Port Vale
   DIR By: takethejag
       Date: October 22, 2023, 3:45 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Probably not to be honest as the link doesn't work
       #Post#: 69745--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Scott Jackson  Stevenage v Port Vale
   DIR By: Guidedog
       Date: October 22, 2023, 4:54 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I’ve seen it elsewhere, can only think he was unsighted and AR
       let him down, but would like to know. Maybe AR’s were instructed
       not to get involved with penalty decisions ?
       #Post#: 69748--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Scott Jackson  Stevenage v Port Vale
   DIR By: Jake the Peg
       Date: October 22, 2023, 6:36 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: takethejag link ---
       >
       > Probably not to be honest as the link doesn't work
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Worked on my phone?  Try this
  HTML https://twitter.com/Tom_Amos/status/1715774827687010742?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1715784679578550777%7Ctwgr%5Ee5aa663c0b519779e90f8caa37ef9c60e84ba223%7Ctwcon%5Es2_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.onevalefan.co.uk%2Fforum%2Findex.php%3Fapp%3Dcoremodule%3Dsystemcontroller%3Dembedurl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fx.com%2Fportlyvale%2Fstatus%2F1715784679578550777%3Fs%3D4626t%3DAG0DDsGOVkGEHlGHUYdGZA
       #Post#: 69750--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Scott Jackson  Stevenage v Port Vale
   DIR By: Leggy
       Date: October 22, 2023, 6:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       There have been a number of threads this weekend where the
       willingness of the ARs to intervene where they are in a position
       to help the referee has been questioned.  It is a long time
       since I refereed at any decent level and had the benefit of
       neutral ARs, but I always emphasised the need to work as a team
       and ensure that - as a team - we got the right decision.
       Fast forward to 2023:  What instructions are given to today's
       top level ARs in this regard?  I have no evidence, but do
       suspect that some of the referees to not want ARs for overtly
       intervening (i.e. flagging) for anything other than ball in/out
       of play, direction of restart and offside.  I do appreciate that
       the comms allows ongoing verbal communication but if this is how
       teamwork is taking place today the uneducated need to be made
       aware.  Either though a future Howard Webb / Michael Owen
       programme or by ARs flagging (where appropriate) to support the
       communications that have taken place.
       I'd welcome contributions from those who are more "in the know"
       than me.
       #Post#: 69751--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Scott Jackson  Stevenage v Port Vale
   DIR By: RefGod
       Date: October 22, 2023, 7:19 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       There is no way ARs at Step 1 and above with comms are flagging
       for that. I would question why an AR is flagging for that at any
       level for that matter. Whilst the referee may have cut the other
       officials out pre-match on penalties, if he was blindsided, I
       would understand why no one else was willing to get involved.
       Maybe selfish but if it's judged wrong then you're killing your
       own season alongside the referee. The entire team won't be
       penalised because that's the referee's decision to make.
       It's a clear penalty.
       #Post#: 69757--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Scott Jackson  Stevenage v Port Vale
   DIR By: rustyref
       Date: October 22, 2023, 9:19 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: Leggy link ---
       >
       > There have been a number of threads this weekend where the
       willingness of the ARs to intervene where they are in a position
       to help the referee has been questioned.  It is a long time
       since I refereed at any decent level and had the benefit of
       neutral ARs, but I always emphasised the need to work as a team
       and ensure that - as a team - we got the right decision.
       >
       > Fast forward to 2023:  What instructions are given to today's
       top level ARs in this regard?  I have no evidence, but do
       suspect that some of the referees to not want ARs for overtly
       intervening (i.e. flagging) for anything other than ball in/out
       of play, direction of restart and offside.  I do appreciate that
       the comms allows ongoing verbal communication but if this is how
       teamwork is taking place today the uneducated need to be made
       aware.  Either though a future Howard Webb / Michael Owen
       programme or by ARs flagging (where appropriate) to support the
       communications that have taken place.
       >
       > I'd welcome contributions from those who are more "in the
       know" than me.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Don't really think instructions have changed much in decades,
       ARs still get involved in decisions in their credible area.  The
       difference at the top levels now they can get involved in
       decisions out of their credible area without drawing attention
       to themselves by using comms.  Pre-comms there is no way on
       earth an AR is flagging for a penalty there, it just wouldn't be
       in any way credible.  Now they can at least say something like
       "are you sure about that Scott" and they can have a chat without
       anyone really knowing the referee is getting information from
       somewhere else.
       My instructions when at L3 for penalties were always the pretty
       standard "I've seen it and given it so don't get involved, I've
       seen it and turned it down so don't get involved, or I'm staring
       at you and asking for help.  Caveat to this is if I've dropped
       an absolute clanger and every other person in this ground knows
       I'm wrong, in which case get involved".  Don't remember
       instructions from L2As when I lined on Conference / National
       League having been too much different, just not all added the
       caveat of bailing out if they've dropped a clanger.
       Worth adding that there's a clip from a different angle on a
       Facebook refereeing group, and the view is pretty much 50/50 as
       to whether it is a penalty.  The logic for those seeing no being
       that the ball hits the attacker's heel and significantly changes
       direction, the attacker then moves into the path of the defender
       who has already committed to a tackle towards where the ball was
       originally going.
       #Post#: 69764--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Scott Jackson  Stevenage v Port Vale
   DIR By: RefGod
       Date: October 22, 2023, 10:25 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: rustyref link ---
       >
       > [quote author=Leggy link=topic=5305.msg69750#msg69750
       date=1697975805]
       > There have been a number of threads this weekend where the
       willingness of the ARs to intervene where they are in a position
       to help the referee has been questioned.  It is a long time
       since I refereed at any decent level and had the benefit of
       neutral ARs, but I always emphasised the need to work as a team
       and ensure that - as a team - we got the right decision.
       >
       > Fast forward to 2023:  What instructions are given to today's
       top level ARs in this regard?  I have no evidence, but do
       suspect that some of the referees to not want ARs for overtly
       intervening (i.e. flagging) for anything other than ball in/out
       of play, direction of restart and offside.  I do appreciate that
       the comms allows ongoing verbal communication but if this is how
       teamwork is taking place today the uneducated need to be made
       aware.  Either though a future Howard Webb / Michael Owen
       programme or by ARs flagging (where appropriate) to support the
       communications that have taken place.
       >
       > I'd welcome contributions from those who are more "in the
       know" than me.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Don't really think instructions have changed much in decades,
       ARs still get involved in decisions in their credible area.  The
       difference at the top levels now they can get involved in
       decisions out of their credible area without drawing attention
       to themselves by using comms.  Pre-comms there is no way on
       earth an AR is flagging for a penalty there, it just wouldn't be
       in any way credible.  Now they can at least say something like
       "are you sure about that Scott" and they can have a chat without
       anyone really knowing the referee is getting information from
       somewhere else.
       My instructions when at L3 for penalties were always the pretty
       standard "I've seen it and given it so don't get involved, I've
       seen it and turned it down so don't get involved, or I'm staring
       at you and asking for help.  Caveat to this is if I've dropped
       an absolute clanger and every other person in this ground knows
       I'm wrong, in which case get involved".  Don't remember
       instructions from L2As when I lined on Conference / National
       League having been too much different, just not all added the
       caveat of bailing out if they've dropped a clanger.
       Worth adding that there's a clip from a different angle on a
       Facebook refereeing group, and the view is pretty much 50/50 as
       to whether it is a penalty.  The logic for those seeing no being
       that the ball hits the attacker's heel and significantly changes
       direction, the attacker then moves into the path of the defender
       who has already committed to a tackle towards where the ball was
       originally going.
       [/quote]
       If an official at that level is asking are you sure about that
       Scott? over comms on a penalty appeal l, I'd expect to find them
       on the portal as an example of poor practice. That's worse than
       remaining silent.
       #Post#: 69770--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Scott Jackson  Stevenage v Port Vale
   DIR By: rustyref
       Date: October 22, 2023, 11:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: RefGod link ---
       >
       > [quote author=rustyref link=topic=5305.msg69757#msg69757
       date=1697984350]
       > [quote author=Leggy link=topic=5305.msg69750#msg69750
       date=1697975805]
       > There have been a number of threads this weekend where the
       willingness of the ARs to intervene where they are in a position
       to help the referee has been questioned.  It is a long time
       since I refereed at any decent level and had the benefit of
       neutral ARs, but I always emphasised the need to work as a team
       and ensure that - as a team - we got the right decision.
       >
       > Fast forward to 2023:  What instructions are given to today's
       top level ARs in this regard?  I have no evidence, but do
       suspect that some of the referees to not want ARs for overtly
       intervening (i.e. flagging) for anything other than ball in/out
       of play, direction of restart and offside.  I do appreciate that
       the comms allows ongoing verbal communication but if this is how
       teamwork is taking place today the uneducated need to be made
       aware.  Either though a future Howard Webb / Michael Owen
       programme or by ARs flagging (where appropriate) to support the
       communications that have taken place.
       >
       > I'd welcome contributions from those who are more "in the
       know" than me.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Don't really think instructions have changed much in decades,
       ARs still get involved in decisions in their credible area.  The
       difference at the top levels now they can get involved in
       decisions out of their credible area without drawing attention
       to themselves by using comms.  Pre-comms there is no way on
       earth an AR is flagging for a penalty there, it just wouldn't be
       in any way credible.  Now they can at least say something like
       "are you sure about that Scott" and they can have a chat without
       anyone really knowing the referee is getting information from
       somewhere else.
       My instructions when at L3 for penalties were always the pretty
       standard "I've seen it and given it so don't get involved, I've
       seen it and turned it down so don't get involved, or I'm staring
       at you and asking for help.  Caveat to this is if I've dropped
       an absolute clanger and every other person in this ground knows
       I'm wrong, in which case get involved".  Don't remember
       instructions from L2As when I lined on Conference / National
       League having been too much different, just not all added the
       caveat of bailing out if they've dropped a clanger.
       Worth adding that there's a clip from a different angle on a
       Facebook refereeing group, and the view is pretty much 50/50 as
       to whether it is a penalty.  The logic for those seeing no being
       that the ball hits the attacker's heel and significantly changes
       direction, the attacker then moves into the path of the defender
       who has already committed to a tackle towards where the ball was
       originally going.
       [/quote]
       If an official at that level is asking are you sure about that
       Scott? over comms on a penalty appeal l, I'd expect to find them
       on the portal as an example of poor practice. That's worse than
       remaining silent.
       [/quote]
       Fair point, it would be more specific, point I was making is
       they can offer input without anyone knowing.
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1