ladbroke8745
RefChat Addict
Saw this and thought this is probably a fair assessment.
Copied and pasted, so not my own writing.
I read something recently, and wish I kept the link, that a match was analysed (apparently watched several times for accuracy) and a referee made approximately 400 decisions (that is whether to give a foul or not to give a foul, to caution/send off or not to card at all, how to restart play with direction of throw in, corner or goal kick etc)
He got about 5 wrong, in the opinion of the viewer.
But the media jumped on 2 of those 5 wrong. 1 was a penalty that should have been awarded. It seems the referees angle was not better than a tv angle.
Apparently a keeper made about 100 judgements in that game (and they included whether he should have come out for the ball or stayed in his area, releasing ball slowly or quickly, over hitting/throwing a ball released, fouling (that penalty not given) and whether the keeper should have caught or punched/palm the ball away).The viewer said the keeper made about 40 wrong decisions. But they were never picked up on by the media, despite one that should have been a penalty, and one goal being scored because of a poor clearance by the keeper.
The referee was ridiculed for not giving a penalty but the keeper was not talked about for his clumsiness to commit the foul in the first place. The referee made about 1.25% decisions wrong. The keeper made 40% decisions wrong.
Again this is just the view of the person who analysed it.
But the referee hit the media and not the keeper (player).
Players make much more wrong decisions in the heat of the moment than a referee does.
What are your thoughts on this?
Copied and pasted, so not my own writing.
I read something recently, and wish I kept the link, that a match was analysed (apparently watched several times for accuracy) and a referee made approximately 400 decisions (that is whether to give a foul or not to give a foul, to caution/send off or not to card at all, how to restart play with direction of throw in, corner or goal kick etc)
He got about 5 wrong, in the opinion of the viewer.
But the media jumped on 2 of those 5 wrong. 1 was a penalty that should have been awarded. It seems the referees angle was not better than a tv angle.
Apparently a keeper made about 100 judgements in that game (and they included whether he should have come out for the ball or stayed in his area, releasing ball slowly or quickly, over hitting/throwing a ball released, fouling (that penalty not given) and whether the keeper should have caught or punched/palm the ball away).The viewer said the keeper made about 40 wrong decisions. But they were never picked up on by the media, despite one that should have been a penalty, and one goal being scored because of a poor clearance by the keeper.
The referee was ridiculed for not giving a penalty but the keeper was not talked about for his clumsiness to commit the foul in the first place. The referee made about 1.25% decisions wrong. The keeper made 40% decisions wrong.
Again this is just the view of the person who analysed it.
But the referee hit the media and not the keeper (player).
Players make much more wrong decisions in the heat of the moment than a referee does.
What are your thoughts on this?