Paul Hayward

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

blah blah, b******s b******s

 

Respect for referees was always going to be a hard sell in a culture where civility has broken down, vituperation plagues the blogosphere and the streets seethe with random fury.

 

What chance a man with two cards and a whistle commanding the obedience of football folk, who are locked into a perma-state of tribal myopia? But there is a confusion at the heart of the recent kerfuffles over managers criticising match officials and it has to do with that word "respect". Good manners and consideration should not extend to meekly accepting decisions that are just plain wrong and then not being allowed to talk about them.

 

Allow me a personal reflection. I have always felt it right to defend the referee against a lynch mob, especially when attacks became a softening-up tool for clubs to protect their interests. There was always an imbalance between players and managers not admitting human error while officials were subjected to trial by television for decisions made at lightning speed and without the benefit of replays or multiple camera angles.

 

So far, so obvious. But over the past two weeks it has felt impossible to justify the performances of Martin Atkinson in the Chelsea-Manchester United Premier League match or Massimo Busacca in this week's Barcelona-Arsenal Champions League second leg. Atkinson's failure to send off Chelsea's David Luiz for a glaring second bookable offence and the dismissal of Arsenal's Robin van Persie for going through with a shot after the whistle had blown for offside were too grievous to dismiss with platitudes.

 

An aside about Van Persie's offence: time-wasting by booting a ball into the stands is virtually impossible at that level anyway because a young chap in a tracksuit just throws another ball on to the pitch while the first one is retrieved. It violates the spirit of the game, certainly, but there was sufficient doubt about whether Van Persie had heard the whistle for the referee not to inflict such a draconian punishment.

 

Which leads back to the "respect" agenda and whether officials should be protected by regulations that prevent managers criticising them after the match. Who else in society can retreat behind walls that stop others hurting their feelings with adverse comment? Not players, managers, journalists, doctors, politicians or artists.

 

Arsène Wenger's entertaining tirade against Uefa was partly an expression of frustration that a dubious decision that fundamentally alters the course of an epic Champions League encounter cannot be challenged without the one doing the challenging ending up in trouble. The manner of that challenge was intemperate, sure, but you don't have to shout and swear into the face of a man in Uefa livery to bring the thought police to your door.

 

Sir Alex Ferguson attracted official displeasure for calling Alan Wiley "unfit" and is now on trial for employing a word he corrected straight away. The word was "fair", which was leapt on with all the fervour of the John Cleese centurion at the stoning in The Life of Brian ("Fair! He said it again!") "You want a strong referee, anyway, and we didn't get that," Ferguson clarified. But it was already too late to stop the misconduct charge.

 

Most of us would draw a line at the ref having his honesty impugned. Yet there needs to be scope for legitimate complaint. Otherwise we infantilise match officials and the watching public. The manager appears in front of a microphone with unseemly haste and is expected in that moment to consider the feelings of the match official above all else, even if he has just been knocked out of the Champions League or is about to lose his job.

 

This is not "respect". This is conning the public and hypocritical, too, because any top referee will tell you the profession feels abandoned by its masters at the Premier League and Football Association. After the Atkinson affair it was said that refs who upset the big clubs fear they will be shunted off the biggest games for a month or four to placate the supposed victim. What kind of authority is that? This is how weak the system is.

 

When Wenger accused Uefa of being a "dictatorship" and said they need "more humility" he was rebelling against the stifling of dissent. It has become too easy to portray managers as serial moaners. On the occasions when refereeing is inept, as opposed to merely debatable, it shuts off the possibility of it ever getting better to deny managers (players, less so) the right to be heard.

 

In last week's Liverpool-Manchester United game, Phil Dowd failed in his duty to send off both Jamie Carragher and Rafael da Silva for wild tackles. When the system crashes three times in a week in three big games it is hard to avoid the conclusion that technology-phobic governing bodies simply refuse to see that refereeing football matches by the present means has become untenable.

 

For managers to earn the right to complain they would have to self-regulate and establish limits to what can be said. But this omertà is farcical. It is a distraction from the real problem of system breakdown.

[Stevie H]

i absolutely despise hayward's writing.

[John am Rhein]

just what makes the sh*te spouted by this c*nt worth posting?

[kop205]

So in summary:

 

- Even though refs have been s**** for years, it is only now that Manchester United have had a couple of decisions go against them in recent weeks that enough is enough and that the 'Respect' campaign should go out of the window. The dreadful decisions that they have benefitted from for as long as anyone can remember, and which have themselves been in evidence in recent weeks with the non-dismissal of Rooney, don't merit a mention.

 

- You can say whatever you want about a referee and their fairness (or otherwise) as long as you immediately make some half-arsed attempt to cover yourself. There is certainly no need to actually give a proper retraction or formal apology and even if this happens to be the 5th time in as many seasons that you've been charged for the same offence then it makes no difference (presumably as long as you don't make a joke about it on twitter of course, then you can expect a fine even if it is your first such offence).

 

What a c***.

[aka Dus]

i absolutely despise hayward's writing.

 

 

I used to quite like him when he wrote for the Telegraph. He was very humorous then.

 

 

 

[Stevie H]

I used to quite like him when he wrote for the Telegraph. He was very humorous then.

don't recall reading him at the telegraph but his mail column, whether through editorial policy or not, read like a footballing richard littlejohn effort.

[Cobs]

He's always been a massive c***

[Epic Swindle]

He's on Sunday Supplement now defending Ferguson and blaming the officials. Oliver Holt is having none of it.

 

Some of these officials are poor but I'd rather have it like Rugby where players and managers have to show them respect and are not allowed to question them instead of manipulating the system through the press.

Edited March 13, 2011 by Epic Swindle

[Swipe]

He's always been a massive c***

 

Yup. A brilliant fit for that Sunday Supplement s****.

[Rimbeux]

He's on Sunday Supplement now defending Ferguson and blaming the officials. Oliver Holt is having none of it.

Some of these officials are poor but I'd rather have it like Rugby where players and managers have to show them respect and are not allowed to question them instead of manipulating the system through the press.

 

It's a different/deeper thing though, it isn't just about respect for the ref, it's the attitude to the game itself, it's not a buzz word from a governing body, it's a fundamental idea about taking responsibility.

 

In Rugby there is plenty of chat and discussion about each ref and their interpretation of the laws and finding angles to gain advantage and pretty much cheat, but there is minimal disputing the decisions actually made on the field. There are players who are dangerous and dirty cheats, but it's not widespread and is dealt with severely with long bans.

 

In football, near everyone looks for excuses, admitting fault is either a sign of weakness or a betrayal of the team, and the ref is a favourite place to park responsibility, along with injury and luck. Unless honesty becomes part of the game, part of the communication, respect for officials wont improve. So long has it been standard practice to blame the ref for the result that every single decision is jumped on and disputed as if the outcome of the match depended on it.

[Jarg Armani]

Football in Britain is a microcosm of Britain itself. Crying t***s everywhere, not enough grown ups. Not including Ferguson in that by the way, he knows what he's doing.

[Stevie H]

Football in Britain is a microcosm of Britain itself. Crying t***s everywhere, not enough grown ups. Not including Ferguson in that by the way, he knows what he's doing.

i'd say it's slightly more than that, nobody who is supposed to be in charge takes genuine responsibility for anything. they pass the buck every opportunity and put the blame on the little people. ferguson's just another tory c*nt in this instance.

[D.Boon]

In football, near everyone looks for excuses, admitting fault is either a sign of weakness or a betrayal of the team, and the ref is a favourite place to park responsibility, along with injury and luck. Unless honesty becomes part of the game, part of the communication, respect for officials wont improve. So long has it been standard practice to blame the ref for the result that every single decision is jumped on and disputed as if the outcome of the match depended on it.

 

Spot on Rimbeux. Wenger and Ferguson being the two prime movers. Is this situation repeated in other countries?

[Rimbeux]

Spot on Rimbeux. Wenger and Ferguson being the two prime movers. Is this situation repeated in other countries?

 

 

It looks worldwide to me, Wenger didn't learn it here, nor Mourinho. The fact that television is so huge would seem to me to spread The Way of harassing the officials even more. But let's face it, whilst the money keeps pouring in, nobody in charge really cares and there might even be the Keys and Grey effect with bigwigs believing it's part of what people tune in for and try and pass it off as passion and drama.

[Stevie H]

meanwhile, at a time when fifa could be either supporting referees through action against players and managers, or alternatively introducing measures to make a ref's job easier through technology, they are taking the vital step of banning snoods. pure evasion of responsibility from the people supposed to be the game's 'custodians'.

[DanielS]

As a kid I played cricket, rugby and football at club level. During football matches the parents and kids questioned every decision and there was a lot of negative comments aimed at the oppostion. During cricket and rugby there was not a peep about the ref and mostly encouraging noises aimed at the kids. Same parents at all the sports. Its just the way football is.

 

That said, I've seen the same kind of nastiness about the officials at Softball games from kids and parents who'd never say a thing about a rugby ref. Different sports just have different cultural attitudes surrounding them.

[Earl Hafler]

Yup. A brilliant fit for that Sunday Supplement s****.

 

He was considered a genius on there.

 

 

 

s*** article.

 

Football in Britain is a microcosm of Britain itself. Crying t***s everywhere, not enough grown ups. Not including Ferguson in that by the way, he knows what he's doing.

 

August 1997.

[Jarg Armani]

August 1997.

 

Diana? My 15th Birthday? Something else?

[Earl Hafler]

Diana? My 15th Birthday? Something else?

 

Diana. On the back of ' New ' Labour.

[Jarg Armani]

Diana. On the back of ' New ' Labour.

 

Interesting.

[Rimbeux]

As a kid I played cricket, rugby and football at club level. During football matches the parents and kids questioned every decision and there was a lot of negative comments aimed at the oppostion. During cricket and rugby there was not a peep about the ref and mostly encouraging noises aimed at the kids. Same parents at all the sports. Its just the way football is.

 

That said, I've seen the same kind of nastiness about the officials at Softball games from kids and parents who'd never say a thing about a rugby ref. Different sports just have different cultural attitudes surrounding them.

 

 

I can echo that, my school played rugby and quite a few of us played sunday football for the same team and our attitude and parents attitude were completely different. As an adult I really couldn't be arsed with park football, it was just an excuse for a load of a******s to get some aggression out before, during and after the game, no enjoyment, no craic, just s*** football and aggro.

[Bailo]

On what basis have they banned snoods?

[Chili Palmer]

On what basis have they banned snoods?

 

 

H&S, and I agree to an extent as if I was playing against a few mancs wearing them I would definately try to strangle the f*****s.

[Boca]

On what basis have they banned snoods?

 

 

FIFA president Sepp Blatter said: 'A Snood is not part of the equipment and it can be dangerous, even like hanging somebody. The decision was unanimous. There was not even a discussion because this is not part of the uniform.

'I was a player in both winter and summer weather and I never wore a Snood. We must pay attention to the laws of the game. It was rejected unanimously not only by the board today but, before, by all the technical staff and by the secretary-generals. It's a non-issue.'

Edited March 14, 2011 by Boca

[Bailo]

Haha. FIFA: clamping down on the hard-hitting issues.