A&H

Should the Select Group talk to the media post-match?

M

Matthew

RefChat Addict
This has been long discussed, and I was wondering what you all thought?

The top refs have every single decision analysed in minute detail, and the average football fan often struggles to understand why a decision has been made. If a referee was allowed to do a brief interview explaining key decisions - along the lines of "I didn't send X off because he did not deny the scoring of an obvious goal scoring opportunity etc - maybe the public would better understand, even if they don't agree.

Refs get a lot of unfair stick, the ability to explain decisions and apologise when necessary might just help refs out a bit.

Properly regulated, I think it would help connect referees to the fans a but more. Look at the Collina master class, how many people are now in favour of the fifth and sixth officials after seeing how they work?

Obviously there could be problems, but I'd like to see it given a chance.
 
The Referee Store
If they are right in law and the pundits think not, then yes. Otherwise, unnecessary.
 
I don't think so. There are too many ways the media can manipulate things that a referee may say, and it can cause a lot of bad press for the officials. I think it is easier to just keep it as it is and stay safe that way, protecting the officials and the Premier League from any manipulation that may happen from the media.
 
What about like the RFL (Rugby League) do and do a 'ask the ref' session once a game week allowing people to ask questions, that might work.
 
Unfortunately, any system for post-match interviews would not be properly controlled.

Who do they give the interview to Sky, BBC, ITV, radio, newspapers, and both UK and foreign.

Who would control the questions?

Given the stick that managers get when they miss or if they walk out. Referees would be in an impossible position as the questioners would have studied any videos of incidents, but the referees may not have seen them.

Imagine if Mariner had to do after sending off the wrong player...

Disaster.

However Aleds suggestion could work.
 
Rather than do an interview, I reckon they should release a statement a day or two after a game - that would give them enough time to make sure they know what they want to say and gives them a chance to see the replays for themselves etc
 
I would imagine that the only reason that this works in Rugby is because of the respect everyone has for officials. I could imagine a rugby one going something like this:

Questioner: 'So, sir, could you please talk us through that decision that you made?'

And the football one going something like this:

Questioner: 'So, b*sted, why the f*ck did you not get that decision right you utter n*bhead?!'

I just can't see it working tbh...
 
Maybe do like Rugby and Hockey where the comms between officials can be broadcast for key decisions in particular so the public can see why these split-second decisions are made given the views of the officials at the time?
 
Steve C said:
Maybe do like Rugby and Hockey where the comms between officials can be broadcast for key decisions in particular so the public can see why these split-second decisions are made given the views of the officials at the time?
Click to expand...

They tried that with David Elleray in an Arsenal match - needless to say it didn't work! He was abused on television for the whole game and was called a cheat by Tony Adams at one point.
 
Spoke to a few referees and they are more than happy to speak to the media if they are told what questions they are going to be asked but it was when the media started asking extra questions they stopped!
 
Steve C said:
Maybe do like Rugby and Hockey where the comms between officials can be broadcast for key decisions in particular so the public can see why these split-second decisions are made given the views of the officials at the time?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't work in football, because a lot of the public wouldn't understand the terminology used by officials and the stuff that a referee says between his team should be private IMO. He/she should be able to speak freely without the thought in the back of their mind of disciplinary action against anything wrong that they say :)
 
Some good points, both for and against it.

Perhaps it could work if it was heavily regulated. Maybe give the refs about 30 minutes after the game to look at the questions and prepare an answer, along with no follow up questions.

Any way of doing it would surely have to be regulated to protect the refs as much as possible.
 
Hmm I suppose Tom Hendo and HullRef, I quite like that idea Matthew, kind of like a Q&A type thing, people ask the questions, the refs pick some and then prepare answers to read out and then no follow ups, not a bad idea to be honest!
 
Of course they should.....

They should have the courage to defend their decisions, good and bad, rather than just hide behind the FA and PGMOL when they have had a mare.
 
If ref communication was broadcast it would possibly make a massive difference to understanding the laws of the game for the tv watching public and demystify some of what is going on.
 
Or maybe they could follow a referee for a day and do a documentary where we get to follow the referee, hear their team talk, hear their convos over the comms. maybe even give them refcam like they do in rugby. Something like that would be good, would give people an idea of what a referee has to go through.
 
Aled said:
Or maybe they could follow a referee for a day and do a documentary where we get to follow the referee, hear their team talk, hear their convos over the comms. maybe even give them refcam like they do in rugby. Something like that would be good, would give people an idea of what a referee has to go through.
Click to expand...
It would leave the professional game with a destroyed image when it is revealed how the highly paid prima donnas speak to the refs......and how the refs allow them to get away with it because it's more than their jobs worth to send off a Rooney for OFFINABUS.....

The clubs, and the PL, don't want their £100k a week darlings sat out for 3 games just because they abused an official.
 
I think what the Colina program showed is that there is definitely a gap for a referee "pundit" within television broadcasts. Similar to when broadcasters have ex players or managers on their panel there may also be benefit in having a space for an ex referee on standby for when some decisions should be cleared up.

This is a concept which could be explored, otherwise, having referees do active interviews on games may be counterproductive in terms of intensifying the amount of scrutiny on a referee not only on the pitch during the game, but afterwards, which could have dangerous repercussions if some comments made do not lie in line with association protocol or (more likely) a lack of common sense shown in the heat of the moment of a live interview.
 
Padfoot said:
It would leave the professional game with a destroyed image when it is revealed how the highly paid prima donnas speak to the refs......and how the refs allow them to get away with it because it's more than their jobs worth to send off a Rooney for OFFINABUS.....

The clubs, and the PL, don't want their £100k a week darlings sat out for 3 games just because they abused an official.
Click to expand...

That annoys me tho tbh, if he is guilty of a red by the LoTG then it happens, its there in black and white so why shouldnt it be followed?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top