It isn't PGMOL as it is every professional league in the world. OFFINABUS send offs are incredibly rare at any senior level.
EFL OFFINABUS
- Thread starter OnlyUseMeWhistle
- Start date
Donate to RefChat
Help keep RefChat running, any donation would be appreciated
- Status
Runner Ref
RefChat Addict
I’ll agree with you there. However, this is a prime example of PGMOL not caring.
It’s weak officiating, caused by weak leadership. But it is the caused by even weaker leadership within UEFA/FIFA/IFAB
We discussed it al length the other week how this captains only thing is a load of rubbish. This clip shows exactly why.
This needs a yellow minimum and a red would be ok.
Why have all these "professional" referees got to the point where this is ignored? The sheep all woriied about their marks and/or futures?
Gavin Ward / Hugh gilroy should explain their rationale here.
Would the observer say anything here? A total letdown of us grassroots refs.
Why have all these "professional" referees got to the point where this is ignored? The sheep all woriied about their marks and/or futures?
Gavin Ward / Hugh gilroy should explain their rationale here.
Would the observer say anything here? A total letdown of us grassroots refs.
"mans game" is totally meaningless as a phrase.
Maybe "****ing move" is fine but repeatedly being told to **** off is not going to fly
I should imagine that we see the world prism through very different facets
I would be relatively comfortable with this player's behaviour as I see it as a normal form of communication in the context of the exchange. Evidently, it offends you or you consider it unnacceptable.
It merits a caution to prevent it from escalating into more serious misconduct. If i was AR, i think i'd be distracted by blaming myself because the impact of the ARs interjection was negative and that's not the influence we want to have on the participants. Probably, better to accept a bit of fault on both sides and move on.
We don't have to see the world in the same light, nor is this realistic
I just don't think finding this offensive makes you any less of a man.
I honestly don't think that was what @Big Cat was implying... albeit I wouldn't want to talk for him.
Do we blame the officials involved for wanting to further their career and thus not doing anything?
As I said above, only because the camera caught it so well, is this a story. If the camera hadn't caught it so well but the officials did act on it, they'd be getting slated. Be that right or wrong, that's the world we live in. If this happens in my game, exactly as it does here, only if my AR asks me to sanction for it would I do so. And if it happened to me as an AR, I wouldn't call the referee over to do anything (unless he has already acted on similar) as I wouldn't want to affect his match control.
Yes, I wasn't intent on implying anything
'Man's game'.... I guess I was identifying a very evident difference between the men's and women's game. I think the two are entirely different kettles of fish in so many ways. The two are almost like a different sport, given the cultural feel to them
In my world, a bit of industrial language is OK, depending on the context and manner in which it's delivered
I just felt that the player behaved as expected 'when irritated by the AR's interjection'. We've all done it. Especially when senior AR speaking to the TA's. All too often, less is more because speaking provides fuel for misconduct, which is what we'd all like to prevent
If we've been complicit in any way by inflaming a situation, we're much more likely to turn a blind eye to douse the flames rather than pour more fuel on by recommending a sanction
Last edited:
Fair points.
You would have to ask that question about professional referees to every top level referee in the world, this is not an England / PGMOL / FA specific issue.
Why should they explain their rationale? Do you explain the rationale for your decisions to any spectators that happen to be watching? Do players have to explain why they missed an unmissable open goal?
I very much doubt the observer, if there was one on that game (I lose track), would say anything at all about this. I would only be referencing it if the lack of action caused the match officials problems from that point in the game.
I suspect this is one of those where you'll get different opinions to those that have officiated in the NLS to those that haven't, which is fine, this is probably more of an expected offence at grass roots than it is at semi-pro level and above. Just as officials having different tolerance levels is fine, personally I'd be telling him here to shut up and just take the throw, probably reminding him he was on a caution.
A (minimum) second caution being issued here would have been praised beyond refereeing circles and demonstrated the various behaviour campaigns are not just empty words as far as the professional game is concerned.
For me this borderline cheating. Deliberately "ignoring" an offence to prevent a send-off.
It's blatant, loud, repeated and unacceptable.
Do you have a copy of these alternative LOTG being used here? Are you condoning this lack of action as you seem ok with it.
Read the room, I am by far from being the only one comfortable with it.
If those following are sheep there are more sheep than humans.
As I said, and I stand by it, this will divide opinions between those who have officiated in the NLS and those who haven't. You look at things from a very blinkered black and white viewpoint, once you go into senior level football you can't do that. It might not be right but it is absolutely factual. This one is probably an edge case, I don't think the AR would have been completely castigated for asking for a second caution, but equally I don't think many, if any, EFL assistants would have taken that course of action. On your logic they are all wrong and all "borderline cheats" (you said it), but clearly that isn't the case in the land of reality.
Russell Jones
RefChat Addict
They failed whom? If you believe they ‘failed’ grassroots refs then I can completely see your point … but it is fundamentally not their role to please that group of people. Did they fail the spectators in the ground or those watching on the TV .. not, in my opinion.
And if they are deemed by those who actually matter (the clubs, EFL, PGMO) to have erred, then they will face the consequences (taken in conjunction with their performances in the other 89 minutes and other games). I’m interested to find out what the ‘official’ verdict is … probably next Friday. And remember, to err is human!
Overall, until / unless you have been charged with safely delivering a game with 20K paying spectators in the ground and many more watching elsewhere, then you’ve no idea of the immense pressure involved and to ‘throw to the wolves’ fellow officials seems very harsh to me
I understand human error when you makea DOGSO decision or who fouled who but this error was one nearly all those professional referees choose to make. Week-in, week-out.
The real question is WHY? Who is laying down the alternative LOTG to the officials?
For me, there is a big difference between not knowing you've made an error (which is totally acceptable) as opposed to deliberately choosing not to apply LOTG, especially with language, because you have a group mindset "not to rock the boat".
I'm a little bit fed up with the attitude of trying to keep 22 players on the FOP at the expense of honesty. Surely that's important in a referee?
As usual disappointing to have referees in here not backing other referees, this behaviour needs to be stomped out. The player engages the chat with the Ar and as such the AR responds. The player responds to to this by abusing the referee and should have been sent off. The referee has let the AR down, to be treated like this would not be accepted anywhere else. But I can understand why it is as other referees seem to not care about this in their own games @Big Cat
Siri, define contradiction
If you defend the lack of sanctioning for a player screaming “**** off” in an ARs face because he’s “annoying” or whatever then you cannot pop up in here when it happens to a newly qualified 19 year old. Because the former feeds the latter and it’s a “man’s game” after all.
- Status