The Ref Stop

Mac Allister ban overturned


This is the problem about the ambiguous ‘clear & obvious’ errors, as this is open to interpretation, as Mike Dean, not clear and obvious decision was based on him not wanting ‘to sent his mate to VAR and get him into trouble’. I am sure Paul Tierney’s decision was more valid, but would really help if we could hear the conversation.
 
The Ref Stop
Tim Punter said:

This is the problem about the ambiguous ‘clear & obvious’ errors, as this is open to interpretation, as Mike Dean, not clear and obvious decision was based on him not wanting ‘to sent his mate to VAR and get him into trouble’. I am sure Paul Tierney’s decision was more valid, but would really help if we could hear the conversation.
Click to expand...
That is a very damaging comment and questions MD’s credibility over a long and successful career. I can’t see many referees making match decisions based on their referee colleague being a mate, bonkers.
 
DJIC said:
That is a very damaging comment and questions MD’s credibility over a long and successful career. I can’t see many referees making match decisions based on their referee colleague being a mate, bonkers.
Click to expand...
I had to read it a couple of times to make sure it wasn't a spoof or a joke site. Mike Dean obviously has something to sell or a career to further by making these comments but does referees no favours at all. However, I still don't think the 'clear & obvious' error rule is watertight and needs more transparency, to avoid all this 'corruption' nonsense.
 
Behind a pay wall so can't read the actual article. I take all comments from retired referees with a pinch of salt though, especially those that have left PGMOL completely. They've spent decades of having to tow the party line, now they have free speech and let it all out at once. Mark Halsey a case in point, he made comments after retiring that he then had to qualify at a later date.
 
RustyRef said:
And on the flip side Mike Dean, who isn't representing PGMOL, said he thought it was a red card. I'd have been happy with yellow or red, but I think the appeal commissions overturn things far too easily without really understanding the law that the sending off was based on. We'll have to wait for the written reasons to be published, but I suspect it will contain nonsense like "it was an accidental challenge" or "there was no intent", neither of which the referee can take into account when making the decision on the day.

I don't care whatever anyone says to the contrary, I will never be able to comprehend a system where people with zero qualifications in the laws are able to overturn decisions made by active and qualified referees. It just makes no sense.
Click to expand...
Ironically in my normal job we are crying out to get ex participants into the offices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top