Living in London, one can occasionally see explosive rage when one least expects it, like the young guy on the tube the other week who nearly turned an old doddery type of fellow into a punching bag just for absentmindedly cutting in front of him. A lone member of the underground staff was able to referee and quickly defuse the situation.
It’s the memory of moments like that that are enough to have me on the side of the striking tube workers who are protesting against plans to leave many underground stations unstaffed.
I am, however, not often on the side of those who choose to strike and that I’m afraid goes for the Scottish referees this weekend. For a start, a histrionics-filled midfielder does not possess the same unbridled menace as a loose cannon in an unstaffed tube station, not that that is why refs are striking of course.
So why are they striking? Despite this being significant news in amongst Irish problems and NZ mine disasters, I’m still not really sure. My impression is that referees have objected to having their integrity called into question, as if that doesn’t happen every weekend from the stands. Should it really mean more just because the complaint is more formal? Is it enough to down tools and say enough is enough? I’m not convinced. I reckon the referees should put their whistles where their petted lips are and do what they do best; yes, awarding dodgy penalties and getting offside decisions incorrect. I mean, we can’t have stadia like Broadwood and McDiarmid Park sitting empty on a Saturday (Ed – they’re empty every Saturday!). (Yes, I’ll keep setting them up if you keep knocking them in…)
Not that Pete Wishart’s suggestion of refs revealing who they support will help matters. Surely the quick-witted Glaswegians will go with Partick Thistle, a neutralising ploy that works wonders when the oddly threatening question of ‘which team dae ye support?’ is proferred. I’ve personally used it before and I’m sure I have a better shaped nose for it, although referees already have their noses out of joint unnecessarily.
So, whether football gets played this weekend with Welsh and Irish referees or not, I can’t say I’m with the Scottish refs and I’m not sure if they can recognise the difference between going on a strike and going in a huff. The SFA should penalise them, change its mind and then let them off the hook. That’ll teach them.
#1 by Exiled Nat on November 23, 2010 - 9:45 am
The problem here is refs are unaccountable and until now protected in their silence.
If refs had to explain controversial decisions, even if they came out on occasion and said “I got it wrong”, but always tell us how the laws should have applied, fans, players and managers would have better understanding of controversial and hard to officiate incidents, and be far more tolerant of mistakes.
#2 by Jeff on November 23, 2010 - 11:31 am
I’d go along with that. While I think it best if managers continued to be barred from slagging off the referee after the game (at least until they can discuss flashpoints accurately), I do think everyone would benefit from a brief ref report on how he saw the game. This is already prepared so why not just make it public?
It could be aided and abetted by sensible use of video technology too which is long overdue.
#3 by richard on November 23, 2010 - 10:17 am
Jeff, it’s not just about “a histrionics-filled midfielder”; referees are trained to deal with such things. It’s about people not being able to leave football on the field. It’s about professional people being asked to officiate, and then not being afforded the respect necessary to do the job. It’s about those same professionals trying their best to carry out their job, as a function of a GAME (yes, it’s just a game!) and then receiving abuse, injury death-threats for their efforts.
Manual labourers maybe giving to striking in a hissy-fit, if whipped up by radical shop-stewards, but these guys are highly-trained, intelligent professionals, who are driven to strike purely because they have been left with no other option.
Yes, we can go around pointing fingers as to who actually is most to blame in provoking the referees to do this, but at the end of the day, the SFA, as the game’s governing authority, should show leadership in stamping out this anti-social behaviour. The government has had several high-profile campaigns in recent years to ensure that their employees are not subjected to such abuse, why should anyone else?
Unfortunately, I think that’s the first time that the words “SFA” and “leadership” have been used in the same sentence for quite some time.
#4 by Jeff on November 23, 2010 - 11:17 am
I know it’s not about a histrionics-fuelled midfielder, that’s why I said so in my post.
#5 by Despairing on November 23, 2010 - 11:04 am
Graham Spiers on Newsnicht last night hit the nail on the head – this is purely about Celtic smelling blood. The chip on their collective shoulder has taken over their brain and they see an opportunity to exact revenge on an institution which they think has done it wrong so many times over the years.
As for the refs, this is more than a huff. There can’t be many people who are prepared to put up with death threats just for officiating a game that they love. Rugby referees get respect, why not football referees? Are the fans taking their cue from the players who surround a referee at every decision that doesn’t go their way? Is it time players were given a yellow card if they even talk to a referee?
Even the title of this post refers to a chant that paints the ref in a bad light, thereby assuming that the blog readers have no respect for them.
I’m with the strikers on this one. Club officials, of whatever club, should not be whipping up a storm just to further their own cause, when that storm causes harm to others.
#6 by Jeff on November 23, 2010 - 11:16 am
While no-one wants to hear about death threats in any place of work, if referees are holding out for every bampot football fan to be set straight before they’ll go back to work then they’ll be striking for a very long time and with damaging consequences. Many football clubs are on the line financially and working capital is planned on a weekly basis, losing a couple Saturday’s worth of home gate receipts could be the difference between being a going concern and not.
And don’t read too much into the blog title. I can assure you that on the rare occasions that I do get to a football match I spend the lion’s share of the time feeling sorry for the embattled ref as opposed to joining in with the abuse. Guess what though, it’s a global problem, I don’t see how a short-term Scottish strike is going to reverse the long-term issue at hand. It’s FIFA or UEFA that can fix the problems that referees face, not George Peat or Gordon Smith (or whoever is in charge these days)
I do agree with you that players should be booked for remonstrating with the ref, moving towards the rugby equivalent. Thankfully when I watch my nephew play the kids somehow have the utmost respect for the coaches who ref; they didn’t get that example from watching Scotsport or Match of the Day, so good on them.
And what team does Graham Speirs support? We deserve to know! (that’s a joke, sort of)
#7 by Craig on November 23, 2010 - 11:26 am
There were never any death threats. Craven said that himself, that lie has to be put to bed.
#8 by Craig on November 23, 2010 - 11:37 am
Also, Spiers is a Rangers fan and was a season ticket holder – he’s stated that previously.
#9 by Sean on November 23, 2010 - 12:48 pm
Referees are striking because their integrity has been called into question. The same group of referees who are protecting one of their own ranks who has admitted to lying to the face of an SPL manager. The group of referees who are headed by a man who went on national radio to lie in order to protect the aforementioned referee.
Their integrity has been called into question. Good.
They have no integrity.
#10 by Doug Daniel on November 23, 2010 - 3:56 pm
I’ll sympathise with referees the day Aberdeen get a penalty at Ibrox… Seriously though, I agree that referees need to start receiving the same respect they do in rugby. I’ve yet to see football players succeed in making a referee change his mind when they crowd round him, so why do they do it? We should have a couple of seasons of zero-tolerance, see if people start respecting them a bit more when the yellow cards start piling up.
Of course, it helps that rugby uses technology to help the referees, meaning contentious decisions are properly scrutinised at the time of play, rather than after the event. Although technology hasn’t stopped tennis players having a pop at umpires…
#11 by richard on November 23, 2010 - 4:38 pm
As someone who has spent years studying and training for a professional qualification, I expect my judgement to carry a certain amount of weight and, though I have to be accountable at every step, I don’t expect every decision I ever make to be called into question. The same applies to referees. They must be allowed the freedom to carry out their job.
The referees are in a classic lose/lose situation, they’re criticised by one side for going too far, and by their opponents for not going far enough. If they judge it somewhere in the middle, they cop it from both sides. Yes there are large sums of money involved, but I still think that too many people lose sight of the fact that it is a game, which exists for entertainment; entertainment that will be severely impaired if the game has to stop every 5 minutes while a team of experts spend 10 minutes looking at video replays (OK, I exaggerate).
Bottom line: if the SFA can’t get their act together (possibly with help from UEFA/FIFA), people will stop watching, then the large sums of money will dry up and all clubs will go to the wall.
As #10 says, even technology can’t stop passionate players/fans. It’s about respect.