|
|
Post by winger on Nov 8, 2010 10:06:55 GMT
Tony Pulis wants to see end of season refs vote. Premier League clubs vote on the performance of refs and the three with least amount are relegated.
|
|
|
|
Post by CillaBlacksPissFlaps on Nov 8, 2010 10:09:40 GMT
Cracking idea is that, and the top three from the Championship promoted.
Bye bye Marrinar, Dean & Walton you utter cunts of the highest order.
|
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 8, 2010 10:11:35 GMT
just three to be relegated?!
|
|
|
|
Post by onlyonesirstan on Nov 8, 2010 10:11:41 GMT
I bet the top teams would vote differently to us  |
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Nov 8, 2010 10:12:54 GMT
realpolitik disaster
|
|
|
|
Post by onlyonesirstan on Nov 8, 2010 10:14:00 GMT
real politik? do they play in the spanish third division |
|
|
|
Post by RINGO STARR on Nov 8, 2010 10:14:56 GMT
Fook me lads, we'd have no ref's left if this came into force.
Then you'd have some clubs giving refs decent votes and other clubs giving poor votes. Then the refs would favour the clubs who had given them the decent vote the season before in order to retain their job status etc.
A terrible idea in my opinion.
The referees should be assessed by a panel. This panel should include retired officials, retired players/managers and members from the Football Association. This would allow people at all levels of the game to give a consistent approach to decisions as opposed to past ref's sticking up for their own like they do currently or the F.A being too lenient on poor decisions.
|
|
|
|
Post by scfcrob on Nov 8, 2010 10:16:00 GMT
3 up and 3 down that with each prem club having one vote.
It would give an incentive to refs not just to favour the big influential clubs.
Not a bad idea me thinks.
|
|
|
|
Post by ColonelMustard on Nov 8, 2010 10:17:37 GMT
real politik? do they play in the spanish third division  they need to be more direct in my opinion |
|
|
|
Post by Meggsy on Nov 8, 2010 10:20:27 GMT
Refs need to have fines imposed. When they have a bad game and make the wrong decisions as well as dropping them to a lower league for a few games they should be hit in the pocket.
|
|
|
|
Post by gaznandi on Nov 8, 2010 10:27:05 GMT
Just been watchin him on SSN, comes across very well again..
SSS were even highlighting the controversial decisions on the right of the screen as he was talking...
He also made the point that Clattenburg misses a game due to the spurs/man u debacle yet no ref has missed a single minute due to our decisions..
Also made the point that its not only this season decisions have gone against us...
Nice to be in the spotlight for the right reasons innit, any shit decisions against us in the next few games will set alarm bells ringing...
|
|
|
|
Post by RINGO STARR on Nov 8, 2010 10:28:35 GMT
Ref's simply need assistance in the aid of video technology.
It really is as simple as this.
Whilst we all complain about the poor decisions, I think refs have a difficult job and should have decent assistance. Whats the point of a fourth official. All he does is hold up an electronic board a couple of times in the game to indicate how much time remains.
His other role as 4th official is to monitor the managers (i.e make sure they don't walk out of a white box by the side of the pitch).
I've said it before on other threads that the 4th official should be sat in a designated area of the stadium watching the game on a monitor with a direct link up to the referee. Any decisons that the referee feels he has missed or isn't certain on would then be passed to the 4th official for him to assess the situation.
Within a matter of seconds the 4th official could be talking to the referee offering his assistance. It wouldn't slow the game down, it would allow goals like Lampards against the Germans to have stood in the world cup, and the numerous goals we've 'scored ' this season.
The technology is readily available its just a matter of Blatter and all of the other idiots ruining football at present to have some bollocks and realize that we need to modernize the way that football is officiated.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokebill on Nov 8, 2010 10:31:23 GMT
juliette_grace juliette ferrington
"it gives the opportunity for the top officials in the championship to work in the premier league."
5 minutes ago
juliette_grace juliette ferrington
tony pulis: "i think every club should have one vote and we should mark referees after every game."
8 minutes ago
juliette_grace juliette ferrington
"i went to look for martin atkinson after i did the press but he'd left the ground. he's said nothing to me."
9 minutes ago
juliette_grace juliette ferrington
tony pulis: "I've had quite a few phone calls from managers but also there's been a big sway in public opinion about what has happened."
|
|
chelli
Academy Starlet
Posts: 132
|
Post by chelli on Nov 8, 2010 10:33:58 GMT
I've never understood why we can only have English refs. We have foreign managers and players. There's the languege problem but it doesn't stop neutral refs in Internationals, and you could probably make english a stiipulation (not that it would be much use to Tevez) - so why not try and attract the best from around the world with a decent pay structure. Pay them a living wage as a retainer on a three year contract but really decent money for appearances.
As some guy above said - there would be an independent panel made up of Mangers Association, PFA and Ref's Association who would review performances every week. If they were up with the game, fair and consistent they would get more games - if they were inconsistent or poor or got game changing decisions wrong they would be dropped for x weeks.
Everyone else in Football can become a millionaire - why not refs - so long as they are good at what they do.
Also give the panel the right of comment on the behaviour of the likes of Terry, Ferguson, Ferdinand and the rest who go out of their way to intimidate refs
|
|
|
|
Post by scfcrob on Nov 8, 2010 10:55:01 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by gaznandi on Nov 8, 2010 11:05:47 GMT
We're on SSN now...
|
|
|
|
Post by dexter97 on Nov 8, 2010 11:06:09 GMT
Ref's simply need assistance in the aid of video technology. It really is as simple as this. Whilst we all complain about the poor decisions, I think refs have a difficult job and should have decent assistance. Whats the point of a fourth official. All he does is hold up an electronic board a couple of times in the game to indicate how much time remains. His other role as 4th official is to monitor the managers (i.e make sure they don't walk out of a white box by the side of the pitch). I've said it before on other threads that the 4th official should be sat in a designated area of the stadium watching the game on a monitor with a direct link up to the referee. Any decisons that the referee feels he has missed or isn't certain on would then be passed to the 4th official for him to assess the situation. Within a matter of seconds the 4th official could be talking to the referee offering his assistance. It wouldn't slow the game down, it would allow goals like Lampards against the Germans to have stood in the world cup, and the numerous goals we've 'scored ' this season. The technology is readily available its just a matter of Blatter and all of the other idiots ruining football at present to have some bollocks and realize that we need to modernize the way that football is officiated. Agreed. Gives them help to make the really difficult calls, and takes away their excuses when they still manage to feck it up. It's long overdue. Unfortunately I can't see it happening any time soon. |
|
|
|
Post by Staffsoatcake on Nov 8, 2010 11:08:48 GMT
Good idea,but we will still be left with a load of other wankers. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by gaznandi on Nov 8, 2010 11:11:31 GMT
Dermot Gallagher is in the studio at 11.30 to give his point of view so they should reshow all that's been said...
|
|
|
|
Post by stokie23 on Nov 8, 2010 11:17:02 GMT
WOOOW....how much television coverage is this getting!
I bet were gonna get all the decisions tuesday, but surely thats not what anyboday wants... buckling under the pressure , weak refereeing.
Top idea from Tony though, cant see a floor in it, they should be under as much pressure as the football clubs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Nov 8, 2010 11:35:47 GMT
Reading some of the threads on here, I'm not sure how many supporters know how PL referees are managed these days (no reason why they should). Although the FA are responsible for the overall governance of the game, neither they nor the PL have direct managerial control over the officials. These days that is done by a separate organisation set up for the purpose called the Professional Game Match Officials (PGMO) Ltd. It is now run by Mike Riley (previously Keith Hackett) who is the refs. boss Their website is www.refworld.com It's worth a look, including the section on the role of the assessor. There is also a "ask the ref" facility - but they appear to rotate the PL refs. on it, and it's not Martin Atkinson this week  Last year I went to a presentation from PGMO on how they work, and I was surprised at just how closely they monitor the performance of each team of officials in each game. They have an enormous amount of data from this pro-zone ( or whatever it's called), and produce graphs showing exactly where the ref was on the field during the whole 90 mins, particularly looking at positioning during crucial incidents. They have meetings as a group each week where they closely analyse controversial incidents. It's no consolation to us but I think Martin Atkinson will have an uncomfortable week on the back of Saturday as I suspect Andre Marriner will have had after the Man yoo game. One thing I think we should push for is the publication of assessor's scores. This is essentially a public activity. Other public officials have their performance publicly scrutinised and I don't see why referees shouldn't. But it's all very secret at the moment. Personally, I agree with Ringo about technology, but a lot of people inside the game and a lot of fans don't. I don't believe in theories of conspiracies against Stoke. I can't see who would organise it or how they could do it. But there is no doubt that we have had a terrible run of awful decisions, and it may raise questions about the unconscious psychology of referees towards certain teams like Stoke. Or maybe we have just suffered 6 tails in row in this particular coin tossing competition, in which case we are due a few heads ;D. I think we have to make constructive suggestions about what to do, not just hot-headed silly responses. I'm not at all sure about this latest idea of TPs but it is good that he is initiating a public debate about it. What do you think the FSF should be asking for ? A lot of pressure on Clattenburg ( who of course never gets anything wrong  ) tomorrow night. On the one hand he will be conscious about not making another bad call against us whilst on the other not being seen to just react in Stoke's favour to TP's and broadcaster's comments. I think I just might put a fiver on Etherington first goal (he'd take a penalty wouldn't he ?) |
|
stodge
Youth Player
Posts: 333
|
Post by stodge on Nov 8, 2010 11:41:57 GMT
Ref's simply need assistance in the aid of video technology. It really is as simple as this. Whilst we all complain about the poor decisions, I think refs have a difficult job and should have decent assistance. Whats the point of a fourth official. All he does is hold up an electronic board a couple of times in the game to indicate how much time remains. His other role as 4th official is to monitor the managers (i.e make sure they don't walk out of a white box by the side of the pitch). I've said it before on other threads that the 4th official should be sat in a designated area of the stadium watching the game on a monitor with a direct link up to the referee. Any decisons that the referee feels he has missed or isn't certain on would then be passed to the 4th official for him to assess the situation. Within a matter of seconds the 4th official could be talking to the referee offering his assistance. It wouldn't slow the game down, it would allow goals like Lampards against the Germans to have stood in the world cup, and the numerous goals we've 'scored ' this season. The technology is readily available its just a matter of Blatter and all of the other idiots ruining football at present to have some bollocks and realize that we need to modernize the way that football is officiated. I'm with this. The wonders of technology, if a referee can consult a linesman and a linesman can flag to stop the game then what on earth is the difference to extending this to the 4th official, suitably equipped with replay equipment and coms to the ref. We are blaming the referees because the controversy has been taken out of most other top level sport, cricket, Rugby, Tennis all use technology at the highest levels to ensure fairness and the right result. Personally I don't think the refs or anyone else is out to get us. I do think some are influenced by ref'ing the big teams and I think we have been on the end of some really unlucky decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by Cupid Stunt on Nov 8, 2010 11:52:24 GMT
Fook me lads, we'd have no ref's left if this came into force. Then you'd have some clubs giving refs decent votes and other clubs giving poor votes. Then the refs would favour the clubs who had given them the decent vote the season before in order to retain their job status etc. A terrible idea in my opinion. The referees should be assessed by a panel. This panel should include retired officials, retired players/managers and members from the Football Association. This would allow people at all levels of the game to give a consistent approach to decisions as opposed to past ref's sticking up for their own like they do currently or the F.A being too lenient on poor decisions. It could be a secret ballot at the end of the season?  |
|
|
|
Post by gaznandi on Nov 8, 2010 12:02:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by gaznandi on Nov 8, 2010 12:09:47 GMT
Good point from a poster on 365..
D_M_S
"Good idea, he'll probably get fined for this because he's from a 'little' club, but it wouldn't work. In a game with contentious match-affecting decisions, the Manager of the winning team would rate the ref highly enough to cancel out the negative score from the 'victimised' manager."
|
|
|
|
Post by foster on Nov 8, 2010 12:24:33 GMT
Not sure the voting system would work as it would still influence how referees make decisions.
For example, if you've already had one bad game and pissed off a team then you may as well shaft them for the rest of the season (when arbitrating one of their games) since you know they're going to mark you down already.
As Stoke, would we be able to vote all referees as poor since they all give decisions against us?.. Or would you rank them in order. In which case, we'd still have to give a wanker of a referee a decent position since he was probably the best of a bad bunch.
I also don't think that Managers would give an impartial assessment of a referee. Fergie and Wenger tend to hold grudges and they would probably rank a ref poorly just because they lost a game that he was involved in through no fault of his own.
I think an independant panel should be set up to deliver within 24 hours of each match their verdict of a refs performance and determine what score they get for it with an ongoing referees league table. This could be used to determine which refs go up or down the leagues based on performance. In addition, refs should be paid according to performance and on the scores they received from the independant panel of judges.
I sincerely hope that the poor decisions going against us continue to get highlighted from now on. Maybe refs will think twice before turning a blind eye in our games.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokebill on Nov 8, 2010 12:39:52 GMT
Pulis doesn't want a marking system, his idea is clearly designed to get our plight in the spotlight. He's tried to say it calmly over time, but nobody listens.
He's jumped on the first bit of national attention we've received this week and tried to get it snowballing. Trying to instill the same fear for referee's that Wenger or Fergie can create with a single sentence.
Whether it'll work long term, who knows. But I can't see a ref chalking off a 'Tuncay goal' in the coming weeks - and our treatment can't get any worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by Alvechurch Assassin on Nov 8, 2010 13:25:59 GMT
Reading some of the threads on here, I'm not sure how many supporters know how PL referees are managed these days (no reason why they should). Although the FA are responsible for the overall governance of the game, neither they nor the PL have direct managerial control over the officials. These days that is done by a separate organisation set up for the purpose called the Professional Game Match Officials (PGMO) Ltd. It is now run by Mike Riley (previously Keith Hackett) who is the refs. boss Their website is www.refworld.com It's worth a look, including the section on the role of the assessor. There is also a "ask the ref" facility - but they appear to rotate the PL refs. on it, and it's not Martin Atkinson this week Last year I went to a presentation from PGMO on how they work, and I was surprised at just how closely they monitor the performance of each team of officials in each game. They have an enormous amount of data from this pro-zone ( or whatever it's called), and produce graphs showing exactly where the ref was on the field during the whole 90 mins, particularly looking at positioning during crucial incidents. They have meetings as a group each week where they closely analyse controversial incidents. It's no consolation to us but I think Martin Atkinson will have an uncomfortable week on the back of Saturday as I suspect Andre Marriner will have had after the Man yoo game. One thing I think we should push for is the publication of assessor's scores. This is essentially a public activity. Other public officials have their performance publicly scrutinised and I don't see why referees shouldn't. But it's all very secret at the moment. Personally, I agree with Ringo about technology, but a lot of people inside the game and a lot of fans don't. I don't believe in theories of conspiracies against Stoke. I can't see who would organise it or how they could do it. But there is no doubt that we have had a terrible run of awful decisions, and it may raise questions about the unconscious psychology of referees towards certain teams like Stoke. Or maybe we have just suffered 6 tails in row in this particular coin tossing competition, in which case we are due a few heads ;D. I think we have to make constructive suggestions about what to do, not just hot-headed silly responses. I'm not at all sure about this latest idea of TPs but it is good that he is initiating a public debate about it. What do you think the FSF should be asking for ? A lot of pressure on Clattenburg ( who of course never gets anything wrong ) tomorrow night. On the one hand he will be conscious about not making another bad call against us whilst on the other not being seen to just react in Stoke's favour to TP's and broadcaster's comments. I think I just might put a fiver on Etherington first goal (he'd take a penalty wouldn't he ?) All good information, but really we should all stop reading after Mike Riley is mentioned. He demonstrated the most biased refereeing of a game I have ever witnessed - the 1-1 home league game with ManC last season. |
|
|
|
Post by bettyswallox on Nov 8, 2010 13:32:30 GMT
Interestingly, Rio Ferdinand doesn't seem to be against the idea on Twitter:
from @rioferdy5 - "Stoke have had some big decisions go against them lately, refs should be promoted+relegated, an interesting shout from Tony Pulis. u think??"
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2010 13:48:16 GMT
"Clattenburg misses a game because of bad decisions he made in the game between Manchester United and Tottenham but the three bad decisions we have had against us, which have been as big for our club, those referees have refereed the next week," Pulis said.
^
Nail on Head
|
|
) tomorrow night. On the one hand he will be conscious about not making another bad call against us whilst on the other not being seen to just react in Stoke's favour to TP's and broadcaster's comments.
