DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
RateTheRef
HTML https://ratetheref.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: General Discussion
*****************************************************
#Post#: 106652--------------------------------------------------
Re: Merging SG1 and SG2?
DIR By: Blind Referee
Date: May 25, 2026, 10:31 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I would disagree with a lot of what you’ve said
Game certainly isn’t any quicker - more intricate and balanced
but certainly not quicker
Players have always been trained to gain every advantage they
can get - they only benefit from this because referees continue
to fall for their antics
My point was for all the extra investment - all the extra
coaching, there has been no noticeable and tangible improvement
- 10 years ago on a Prem game we had 4 officials and
occasionally a coach - now we have 4 officials, two officials
watching live footage, a coach and either one or two delegates
at every game
I’m pretty sure f you asked all of the stakeholders - the
players, managers, owners, spectators - have standards improved
over the last 10 years, especially given the huge sums invested
in refereeing, the overwhelming answer would be no they havent -
we still get too many key decisions, major decisions incorrect -
we now have resorted to having Ref Watch on a Monday to try and
defend the mistakes made
#Post#: 106653--------------------------------------------------
Re: Merging SG1 and SG2?
DIR By: mac
Date: May 25, 2026, 10:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
You can’t really, as decisions are always subjective.
I’m with you on all the above, the only counter is that for all
the aids available there isn’t significant improvement for the
impact on the game.
Again part of the problem is that with such subjectivity it’s
hard to make massive gains, but a big part of the problem is
that ‘we’ were largely sold an end to all refereeing controversy
and it couldn’t be further from it.
#Post#: 106657--------------------------------------------------
Re: Merging SG1 and SG2?
DIR By: Lanyardhater
Date: May 25, 2026, 12:15 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
A Jackanory story entitled “What football wanted, football got”.
“We must have a specialised pool of referees just to officiate
in the Premiership” said football, “to end all these
controversies”.
They got their ‘elite’ group. And the controversies continued.
“We must have a select group of professsional referees” said
football, “to end all these controversies”.
They got their professional referees. And the controversies
continued.
“These professional referees need help” said football. “We must
give them VAR to end all these controversies”. And the
controversies continued. Well not just continued but
mushroomed.
We are now at the stage of tinkering around with VAR, issuing
endless directives, and fiddling with an already
over-complicated set of laws. To end all these controversies,
of course.
Well it ain’t gonna happen. Not next season, not the season
after, not ever. It’s the nature of the beast. “Football”
makes me laugh when it says “All we ask of referees is that they
get the decisions right.” Utter rubbish! All football wants is
that every subjective decision is given in their team’s favour,
that referees protect their own players, but “the game’s gone”
when they protect their opponents, that referees clamp down
strictly on blatant time-wasting by the other team but ignore
their own team’s time-wasting, which of course isn’t
time-wasting at all but game management, etc. etc. etc.
“Football” says it wants consistency from referees - but
football itself is not consistent in what it wants. Just one
example. In those halcyon days before VAR, a manager was
interviewed on Match of the Day after his team had a goal
chalked off when an assistant referee was seen flagging for a
foul after the referee had initially signalled a goal. The
manager said that the referee should have been strong enough to
stand by his original decision.
Later that season, this same team had a goal given against them
after the referee had overruled a flagging assistant. You’re
ahead of me, aren’t you! Yes, this same guy came on MotD to
complain that what’s the point of having an assistant if the
referee doesn’t take any notice of them? (It was actually the
same interviewer on both occasions. Needless to say, he didn’t
point out the contradiction!).
That’s what we’re up against. Always have been. Always will
be. This circle cannot be squared.
When most of us are dead and buried, there will be no referees,
no assistant referees, no observers, no select groups, no
referee managers or coaches. There will just be an all-seeing
computer hanging over the pitch. And STILL football will moan
when a crucial decision goes against their team. The computer
must have had a glitch at the crucial moment. The computer
can’t have looked at the right angles. And football will say
“What we need is better computers. To end all these
controversies.”
And football will get those better computers, whatever it costs.
And guess what? The controversies will continue.
(Not) THE END.
#Post#: 106658--------------------------------------------------
Re: Merging SG1 and SG2?
DIR By: rustyref
Date: May 25, 2026, 12:21 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: mac link ---
>
> You can’t really, as decisions are always subjective.
>
> I’m with you on all the above, the only counter is that for
all the aids available there isn’t significant improvement for
the impact on the game.
>
> Again part of the problem is that with such subjectivity it’s
hard to make massive gains, but a big part of the problem is
that ‘we’ were largely sold an end to all refereeing controversy
and it couldn’t be further from it.
>
--- End Quote ---
The media might have sold it as that, but I don't recall the
likes of FIFA, UEFA, IFAB and PGMOL doing so, they would have
been foolish to do so as 80%+ of decisions are subjective. The
authorities explained it as eliminating major errors such as the
Thierry handball vs Ireland. Anyone believing VAR would remove
all refereeing controversy was either extremely optimistic or
naive in the extreme, or probably both of those things. Those
who have officiated at higher levels will tell you that in
training seminars videos are regularly shown that split the
room, so why would VAR be any different?
#Post#: 106665--------------------------------------------------
Re: Merging SG1 and SG2?
DIR By: mac
Date: May 25, 2026, 2:47 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
I think it’s a bit naive to say the media (for all of their many
faults) were the sole sellers of “we need this because.” Yes,
that Henry example was well used, and who wouldn’t want that,
but then those same people said “well we’ve got it now, and
it’ll do xyz so we might as well use it for that.” And so by
trying to to correct Henry’s handball we’ve messed the handball
law completely and started disallowing goals a hair’s breadth
offside.
I remember an Elleray documentary where he describes how his
buzzer flags work and say that’s all he wants from technology.
Then suddenly VAR is “what the game needs” and he’s out there as
a FIFA figurehead as a big proponent of VAR. So definitely not
just a media narrative.
Anyway, back to merging SG1…I’ve never been sure of the merits
of SG2 anyway and with talent groups dominating now, it’s a bit
of an unnecessary group now. All I would be wary of it using too
many so called SG1 (I guess I mean established) in the
championship as it is clear they’ve become reliant on VAR.
#Post#: 106669--------------------------------------------------
Re: Merging SG1 and SG2?
DIR By: ajb95
Date: May 26, 2026, 1:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote from: Lanyardhater link ---
>
> A Jackanory story entitled “What football wanted, football
got”.
>
> “We must have a specialised pool of referees just to officiate
in the Premiership” said football, “to end all these
controversies”.
>
> They got their ‘elite’ group. And the controversies
continued.
>
> “We must have a select group of professsional referees” said
football, “to end all these controversies”.
>
> They got their professional referees. And the controversies
continued.
>
> “These professional referees need help” said football. “We
must give them VAR to end all these controversies”. And the
controversies continued. Well not just continued but
mushroomed.
>
> We are now at the stage of tinkering around with VAR, issuing
endless directives, and fiddling with an already
over-complicated set of laws. To end all these controversies,
of course.
>
> Well it ain’t gonna happen. Not next season, not the season
after, not ever. It’s the nature of the beast. “Football”
makes me laugh when it says “All we ask of referees is that they
get the decisions right.” Utter rubbish! All football wants is
that every subjective decision is given in their team’s favour,
that referees protect their own players, but “the game’s gone”
when they protect their opponents, that referees clamp down
strictly on blatant time-wasting by the other team but ignore
their own team’s time-wasting, which of course isn’t
time-wasting at all but game management, etc. etc. etc.
>
> “Football” says it wants consistency from referees - but
football itself is not consistent in what it wants. Just one
example. In those halcyon days before VAR, a manager was
interviewed on Match of the Day after his team had a goal
chalked off when an assistant referee was seen flagging for a
foul after the referee had initially signalled a goal. The
manager said that the referee should have been strong enough to
stand by his original decision.
> Later that season, this same team had a goal given against
them after the referee had overruled a flagging assistant.
You’re ahead of me, aren’t you! Yes, this same guy came on MotD
to complain that what’s the point of having an assistant if the
referee doesn’t take any notice of them? (It was actually the
same interviewer on both occasions. Needless to say, he didn’t
point out the contradiction!).
>
> That’s what we’re up against. Always have been. Always will
be. This circle cannot be squared.
>
> When most of us are dead and buried, there will be no
referees, no assistant referees, no observers, no select groups,
no referee managers or coaches. There will just be an
all-seeing computer hanging over the pitch. And STILL football
will moan when a crucial decision goes against their team. The
computer must have had a glitch at the crucial moment. The
computer can’t have looked at the right angles. And football
will say “What we need is better computers. To end all these
controversies.”
>
> And football will get those better computers, whatever it
costs. And guess what? The controversies will continue.
>
> (Not) THE END.
>
--- End Quote ---
George Orwell would be proud 😁👍
#Post#: 106672--------------------------------------------------
Re: Merging SG1 and SG2?
DIR By: Blind Referee
Date: May 26, 2026, 3:47 am
---------------------------------------------------------
As I’ve stated above, and probably laboured the point now - the
issues aren’t the speed of the game, the behaviour of the
players etc or any other excuse we can put forward to defend the
current referees - issue is coaching
Our referees are fitter than ever, yet positioning is poor when
it matters - don’t get into the correct position to judge
We have more training than ever, with more coaches and “help”
yet we continue to fail to detect and enforce SFP
Merging groups, bringing in more help, whatever they choose to
do, is only masking the real problem which is poor coaching and
poor development
Whole structure from top down needs changing ( improving ) with
far more accountability for lack of improvement and failure
*****************************************************
Page 3 of 3
DIR Previous Page