A&H

Wigan v Cardiff

Anubis

Anubis

RefChat Addict
Surprised nobody posted re this, so given I only just reading about it, I will

Seems the away team coaches noticed a 2inch difference in the goal height, referee was alterted, and was informed it would take two hours to fix.

So the solution agreed was to simply play, game starting 7 mins late.

Only gripe seems to be from the home manager, who, as we could predict, lost a goal to a shot which initially hit the bar.

Its not something we would really notice at grass roots and hopefully if it happened, we would consult both teams and try to agree to play.

not sure I agree with a pro game going ahead with clear illegal dimensions...
 
The Referee Store
Anubis said:
Surprised nobody posted re this, so given I only just reading about it, I will

Seems the away team coahes noticed a 2inch difference in the goal height, referee was alterted, and was informed it would take two hours to fix.

So the solution agreed was to simply play, game starting 7 mins late.

Only gripe seems to be from the home manager, who, as we could predict, lost a goal to a shot which initially hit the bar.

Its not something we would really notice at grass roots and hopefully if it happened, we would consult both teams and try to agree to play.

not sure I agree with a pro game going ahead with clear illegal dimensions...
Click to expand...
No and I suspect the referee might be in a spot of bother too.
At that level, the game gets delayed, surely.
I think the issue with time was GLT calibration. All the same... It's on the home club.
 
JamesL said:
No and I suspect the referee might be in a spot of bother too.
At that level, the game gets delayed, surely.
I think the issue with time was GLT calibration. All the same... It's on the home club.
Click to expand...

Given the away team won, I doubt we need a replay as yes, regardless of who owns the home ground, what else its used for, its for the home team to ensure its suitable for the match, and yes, I would expect the referee to be in hot water,

raises the question also....you are AR or 4th.....you are aware the pitch is illegal....do you go along with it?
its not like a referees discretion on a wet pitch, its factually opposing the requirements of the lotg
 
Last edited:
I'd almost have the opposite expectation to be honest.

Minor equipment issues are routinely ignored at the top level - we've all seen things that in our games would be considered kit clashes, unacceptable jewellery, tiny paper-thin shinpads. The sock-cutting trend started at the top and filtered down. Performance tracking equipment under the kit is specifically permitted in law now, but was a legal grey area for years, and it was only high-level teams that were pushing for that.

Thousands of fans in the ground, TV companies putting pressure on - this is exactly the kind of thing where I think the expectation would be to just get the game played and deal with it post-game via fines and other later sanctions. Certainly would feel harsh to sanction the referee, given I doubt he's been given a clear list of "laws that we can just ignore" vs "laws that actually matter" and so has obviously had to guess what is the best course of action.
 
GraemeS said:
I'd almost have the opposite expectation to be honest.

Minor equipment issues are routinely ignored at the top level - we've all seen things that in our games would be considered kit clashes, unacceptable jewellery, tiny paper-thin shinpads. The sock-cutting trend started at the top and filtered down. Performance tracking equipment under the kit is specifically permitted in law now, but was a legal grey area for years, and it was only high-level teams that were pushing for that.

Thousands of fans in the ground, TV companies putting pressure on - this is exactly the kind of thing where I think the expectation would be to just get the game played and deal with it post-game via fines and other later sanctions. Certainly would feel harsh to sanction the referee, given I doubt he's been given a clear list of "laws that we can just ignore" vs "laws that actually matter" and so has obviously had to guess what is the best course of action.
Click to expand...
I'd expect at minimum call to the league for direction. Sounds like ref and managers have made the decision themselves when in fact the referee start point should be, no game. The laws would allow this for grassroots, but pro game... Nah.
None of the above call into question the integrity of the game. A goal has been scored that may very well not have been had the nets been the required size. What if the league is the defined on GD?
Where do you draw the line...(no pun intended 😏) Unequal halves? 17 yard PA one end and 18 at the other?
 
Would Wimbledon start with a net 2 inch too high?
Snooker at Crucible if pockets were too small?

not a hope, there is millions of pounds at stake here, the incorrect dimensions reflect awfully on the sponsors and so on



Its not even a debate, this game should not have started as it did,
 
JamesL said:
I'd expect at minimum call to the league for direction. Sounds like ref and managers have made the decision themselves when in fact the referee start point should be, no game. The laws would allow this for grassroots, but pro game... Nah.
None of the above call into question the integrity of the game. A goal has been scored that may very well not have been had the nets been the required size. What if the league is the defined on GD?
Where do you draw the line...(no pun intended 😏) Unequal halves? 17 yard PA one end and 18 at the other?
Click to expand...
Well I mean that last line is exactly my point. I can justify everything I wrote down as potentially having a game-changing effect:

Kit clashes: what if a goal is scored because a defender thinks their keeper is coming for the ball but it's actually an opponent wearing the same colour socks?
Unacceptable jewellery: Literally a safety issue, but if we're exclusive worried about sporting integrity, how about some jewellery causing an injury that forces off a star player? Or any player when a team has already used all their subs?
Tiny paper-thin shinpads: ditto the above really.

These are all laws that it's accepted can just be ignored in favour of getting the game played. And all your examples are covered by the same response - we change ends at half time. If one goal/PA/half is bigger, each team gets 45 minutes of defending it and 45 minutes of attacking it. It's not ideal, it should result in a fine and I agree, the ref should have covered his own back by checking with the league first. But I'm not particularly convinced it's unfair.

I've had issue with high-profile suspensions before, where referees have chosen the wrong law to ignore, in the same game where they've also ignored multiple incidences of GK's holding the ball too long, dissent, players stopping free kicks, managers leaving their TA etc... Either the list of non-breakable laws is being made up on a case-by-case basis (in which case, how can he have known which category this falls into?) or it exists on paper somewhere, but isn't being distributed. Neither of those feels like a consistent or fair solution.
 
Wigan supporter here. APPARENTLTY there was talk that re-setting the goalposts and then calibrating Hawkeye(or whatever GLT it is) would take in excess of two hours.

I’m 99% certain that a phone call to EFL would have been made, in consultation with police, ground and security staff that effectively boiled down to “just get on with it”.

Did enjoy the irony of their third just after we’d had a good spell to try make it 2-2.
 
Max2 said:
Wigan supporter here. APPARENTLTY there was talk that re-setting the goalposts and then calibrating Hawkeye(or whatever GLT it is) would take in excess of two hours.

I’m 99% certain that a phone call to EFL would have been made, in consultation with police, ground and security staff that effectively boiled down to “just get on with it”.

Did enjoy the irony of their third just after we’d had a good spell to try make it 2-2.
Click to expand...

I be 99% shocked if that was the case. And disgusted,

its no diff to a sudden downpour in the lead up to ko and game being called off despite crowd being in,

You simply cannot play a top level pro game knowing the basic requirements are not met, should the ball burst do they just chuck on a medicine ball ?
 
Despite the purist instincts some of us have, the money from the TV broadcasts and the fans in the stands are going to mean that at 2" vs a two hour delay, the game is going to go forward. I'm not at all surprised.
 
How does Hawkeye get calibrated and not notice the dimensions are wrong?
I'm sure there's a portable goal somewhere in the stadium.
Take down the goal and forget about GLT.

20 minute delay the other day for referee communication kit issues...
 
If the referee didn't clear this with HQ he is going to be in hot water I suspect. The issue, as has been suggested, is that GLT recalibrations would have taken at least two hours. Not withstanding the question of how this issue wasn't spotted in the pre-match checks, there's no way the police would allow a two hour delay, so you are talking three solutions. Postpone, play with everyone knowing the issue, or fix the issue and play without GLT. I'd be leaning towards the latter, postponement is really bad given everyone is in the ground or on the way, and if you play as is you can pretty much guarantee a shot will either go in off the bar or hit the bar and stay out. Although sod's law also dictates if you turn off GLT there will be a tight goal line decision.
 
bester said:
How does Hawkeye get calibrated and not notice the dimensions are wrong?
I'm sure there's a portable goal somewhere in the stadium.
Take down the goal and forget about GLT.

20 minute delay the other day for referee communication kit issues...
Click to expand...
Because Hawkeye isn't checking the height of the goal posts, the calibration is just making sure that if a ball crosses the goal line it detects it. Why would it have any interest in the height?
 
I did once run the line with a pitch where the halfway line was at an angle (other than 90 degrees) across the pitch. One player could be in an offside position and his teammate could be nearer the opponents' goal line and be onside!
 
GraemeS said:
Well I mean that last line is exactly my point. I can justify everything I wrote down as potentially having a game-changing effect:

Kit clashes: what if a goal is scored because a defender thinks their keeper is coming for the ball but it's actually an opponent wearing the same colour socks?
Unacceptable jewellery: Literally a safety issue, but if we're exclusive worried about sporting integrity, how about some jewellery causing an injury that forces off a star player? Or any player when a team has already used all their subs?
Tiny paper-thin shinpads: ditto the above really.

These are all laws that it's accepted can just be ignored in favour of getting the game played. And all your examples are covered by the same response - we change ends at half time. If one goal/PA/half is bigger, each team gets 45 minutes of defending it and 45 minutes of attacking it. It's not ideal, it should result in a fine and I agree, the ref should have covered his own back by checking with the league first. But I'm not particularly convinced it's unfair.

I've had issue with high-profile suspensions before, where referees have chosen the wrong law to ignore, in the same game where they've also ignored multiple incidences of GK's holding the ball too long, dissent, players stopping free kicks, managers leaving their TA etc... Either the list of non-breakable laws is being made up on a case-by-case basis (in which case, how can he have known which category this falls into?) or it exists on paper somewhere, but isn't being distributed. Neither of those feels like a consistent or fair solution.
Click to expand...
You are talking there about grass roots, not a professional league, widely regarded as the best 2nd tier in the world. A huge amount of money would have been bet on this game, it isn't the Dog & Duck against the Frog & Parrot. One goalpost being a different size to the other is a huge problem at this level.
 
RustyRef said:
You are talking there about grass roots, not a professional league, widely regarded as the best 2nd tier in the world. A huge amount of money would have been bet on this game, it isn't the Dog & Duck against the Frog & Parrot. One goalpost being a different size to the other is a huge problem at this level.
Click to expand...
But like I say, where's the guidance on that?

He will have refereed hundreds of games routinely ignoring or stretching some laws all the way up the pyramid. Type "dissent" into the "As seen on TV" forum searchbar on here and you'll find hundreds of threads complaining that clear dissent is routinely ignored at the top levels. People can bet on yellow cards given during a match - so a referee choosing to ignore a clear dissent could affect betting payouts in the same way.

So again, who decides that dissent is a law that can be ignored or broken at will at the very top levels, and a slight variation on goalpost height is despicable and suspension-worthy? And if a referee runs into this issue for the first time, how are they supposed to know which category it falls into?
 
the goal is the entire point of the game though. how can one shot at one end be a goal and the identical shot at the other not be?

having a bigger or smaller goal at one end and the game isn't 'fair' to the teams, it's a factual thing that we have control over while dissent/fouls and misconduct are generally subjective calls.

I don't think you can compare one to the other in this way
 
Given certainly the EPL ( someone else will need clarify on championship) has legal grass length, which of course is separate to the factual lotg, its just farcical to play ( this game) with illegal goal dimensions
 
es1 said:
the goal is the entire point of the game though. how can one shot at one end be a goal and the identical shot at the other not be?

having a bigger or smaller goal at one end and the game isn't 'fair' to the teams, it's a factual thing that we have control over while dissent/fouls and misconduct are generally subjective calls.

I don't think you can compare one to the other in this way
Click to expand...
I don't dispute that there is such a thing as a subjective dissent call - I do dispute that All dissent calls are subjective.

And fine, forget dissent. 6 seconds in a GK's hands is a requirement that is set out in law, and there is nothing subjective about how long 6 seconds are. So why don't we routinely see referees suspended for ignoring this law?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top