-
Website
http://www.epltalk.com -
Original page
http://www.epltalk.com/mike-riley-should-never-referee-a-big-match-again/4221 -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
jm1
5 comments · 1 points
-
PorkRomeo
4 comments · 1 points
-
eplnfl
43 comments · 3 points
-
ChrissMari
18 comments · 3 points
-
AtlantaPompey
69 comments · 3 points
-
-
Popular Threads
/not really
//distant second in the league
///just wanted to flex a little, on a day that I felt like I could.
He got that call wrong, to be sure, but in the moment it did look quite bad. With the benefit of replays it became clear that while Lampard had gone in feet-first, it wasn't in a malicious or particularly dangerous way. And the reason why Alonso went sprawling had a lot to do with his own momentum caused by leaping into the challenge.
Sure, it would have been better for Riley to get it right, but the way people talk about referees, they act as though it's simply expected that they'll be able to see every single moment from every angle of the entire 90 minutes. It's not possible, and the fact that people act like this says a lot more about their own desire to grandstand than anything else. A ref is simply a man performing a job like anyone else. They will *always* get things wrong. There is not, and can never be, a perfect ref. Acting like it's an ever-lasting strike against a guy that he got one (admittedly big) call wrong is a recipe for ending up with no refs at all.
I'd take this sort of comment a lot more seriously if people ever (EVER) commented about refs that had good games, or demonstrated a recognition that a ref has to make hundreds of split-second calls in every game - many of which go completely unnoticed because they involve the decision to let things go.
I personally would love to have the stats compiled by the folks that rate the refs made publicly available. I think it would help a lot to clarify who is consistently making good decisions and poor ones. And it might just possibly reduce the number of comments like this one, which take a single example and turn it into some sort of judgment about the entire character and capability of a man.
As for Riley, sorry but he has a pattern of taking big games and ruining them. I've seen it too many times. If it was one strike, fine. However this isn't strike one.
The referee's job is to not end up the center of attention. Sadly Riley does an exceptional job of becoming the center of attention in most games he officiates. He had a perfect vantage of what happened, there was no one in his way, yet blew it. Sorry that is going to get called out by me every single time.
However I do agree that the FA's judgment of referees after every match should be made public. Then we can all see who they think are doing a good job.
Even the comment that the job of the referee is to "not end up the center of attention" demonstrates this point. The job of the referee is to officiate the game to the best of his ability. There are 90 minutes of the game and it only takes one second to make a mistake with large ramifications.
There are countless things that go into being a good referee. Control of the game, judicious use of cards, keeping out of the run of play while maintaining good positioning, perfect memory of the entire rulebook, the pace to keep up with the game, the quick reflexes necessary identity important areas of contention, the ability to hold the snapshot of an image in your mind to give yourself more than the split-second in which to consider the decision. And plenty more.
Obviously, a breakdown like Riley's today results from a failure of one or more of these. But just as obviously, if you are interested in actually determining who is most likely to referee games well, you can't simply operate on the "makes big mistakes - fire him!" attitude because that washes away all the complexities that go into the job.
Let me put it this way: who do you think is a good referee? How many good referees are there in England right now? For most people that list is vanishingly small because they operate on precisely the principle of "a ref is good when I don't notice him." And that's fine if you aren't going to engage in analysis. But once you start saying things like "Mike Riley Should Never Referee a Big Match Again" you are in the business of judging relative referee quality.
There is a very clear difference between "calling out" a mistake, which obviously is fine, and treating that one mistake as sufficient evidence to declare him unfit for the job. Doing the latter is exactly the kind of shallow analysis that drives me away from a lot of football sites and fans and toward places like this.
It may well be the case that Riley isn't particularly good. But I will say that apart from this mistake, I thought he had a pretty good game.
As for referees who I think do a good job, while people will disagree with this one, I think Howard Webb does a good job. I also think Chris Foy, Mark Halsey and Steve Bennett do a good job.
Guys who I think are average would be Andre Marriner, Lee Mason, Martin Atkinson, Peter Walton, and Phil Dowd.
The referees who I question their judgment more times than I would like to remember are Mike Riley, Mike Dean, Rob Styles and Alan Wiley. I hope that list helps you.
What do I think makes a good referee. First off, you don't blow the big calls consistently. Yes referee's are human beings just like we are, but you don't time in and time out make the same mistakes. Secondly, you have authority of the match you referee and don't take any BS off of anyone. Another thing I like to see in referees is the fact they know when to let the game flow and not allow the game to become start/stop just for the sake of hearing the whistle. Finally, stay out of the way and make the calls when they need to be made.
Hope all that helps.
The Bosingwa thing was terrible, but IIRC the linesman was right on top of it and didn't do anything. Seems like he should have done something there. That's the sort of thing I wouldn't expect the head ref to be in charge of because they can't go bustling into corners or they'll be caught off guard once the ball is cleared. They have to assume their assistants will catch things like that. That said, I wasn't paying that close attention, so I have no idea where Riley was at that point, or if it was legitimate to expect him to miss it.
Its never a red no matter how hard it is to be a referee, he was standing right there, Lampard connects with the ball, at which time Alonso was about a ayrd away, he then lowers his studs and Alonso kicks him, a reckless tackle by Alonso. And he desreved a yellow. but in fairness it should have been advantage Chelsea.
Oh, wait, it was at Anfield, makes perfect sense now (Mike Riley would need a spine to make that call).
And Django you are absolutely right. Bosingwa should have not only been red carded, but to me that's five matches he should be thinking about his actions. That was absurd, stupid, and quite frankly pathetic.
As much as we get on the refs about their decisions, could any of us have deciphered the Lampard red card incident without the benefit of replay? I certainly couldn't. I can imagine that Wiley saw that Lampard had gone to ground with studs up/off the ground by a fair bit. Yes, with replay, all of us can see that it was two men going after the ball hard, but in the heat of the moment?
Bottom line, did he get it wrong? Likely, yes, but I'm sure a lot of us would've gotten it wrong at game speed.
Regarding Riley smiling and chuckling a bit after the fact... the FA will likely not give a crap about it. Why? The two are likely UNRELATED as he was chuckling at a comment from a Chelsea player. Personally, I thought that it showed that Riley had moved past the decision and was watching the game in the present. Who would want him to have the decision weighing on his mind for later calls? I certainly wouldn't. I believe that Riley should actually be praised for that part of the game.
As for using younger refs in the big games to get expierence. The first time they have a poor send off or give a dubious penalty, people will be screaming why such inexpeirenced refs are doing these games and not Webb or a Mike Dean.
Is this more sarcasm? Evra missed 4 games for NOT throwing a punch against some Chelsea groundstaff yob who did. Simply because the FA decided not to believe his version of events. Or the CCTV. And despite apologizing afterward, they did not consider rescinding any of the 4 match ban.
For all his diving, Cristiano Ronaldo gets grabbed and hauled to the ground in front of the ref TWICE without so much as a whistle, let alone the penalty they deserved. In the case against Chelsea and Carvalho, Ronaldo ended up getting carded for being bulldogged by the Chelsea defender.
Rio Ferdinand misses 9 months for NOT taking drugs, while players who fail drug tests get shorter sentences.
United take on FA Disciplinary for a large card count at Stamford Bridge despite the game being far from testy. Howard Webb (he of the "he's usually good, but..." ) just felt like throwing cards. Like he did when he sent off Ronaldo for a so-called intent-to-gain- unlawful-advantage handball.
United have goals disallowed because the three blind mice are too clueless to notice when a ball has been touched into play.
Scholes and Vidic both get suspended for Champions League matches because of cards accumulated in Non-CL matches.
Vidic gets two dodgy yellows at Anfield, which means noting can be protested Suspension issued without recourse.
Meanwhile John Terry rugby tackles players and gets his cards rescinded. Wait and see - Lampard will get this one rescinded too.
Yeah - United get off scot-free all the time!
Bosingwa deserved a straight red. I can't believe the assistant referee didn't call Mike Riley's attention on that one.
Cheers,
The Gaffer
I also think the point is not which teams and which players are favoured by refs, but rather that refs should make consistent calls in their games. If Lampard knew that Riley has the tendency to send players off for high studs, then he would know not to tackle as he did. But because Gerrard got off with a warning, well why shouldn't Lampard do the same? Supporting Arsenal, I often feel like many many decisions go against us, but I've realised that bad decisions against the team you support never go unnoticed, whereas there are always decisions going against teams.
The ref must blow to the best of his ability, i agree, but the ref is also trained to stand in positions where he can get the best views of whats going on, and I don't think Riley does well in that department. And neither does he consult his linesmen. In that sense I think there are MANY better referees, and in THAT sense I think Mike Riley is a poor ref.