Tales from the Ref Online

Match 19 - Willoughby Old Boys vs Cripps Old Boys

2009-06-17T01:09:00.000+01:00

I thought it was all over, but it wasn’t! Having proclaimed last Wednesday to be my last match, I subsequently got invited to referee another game today – between the Old Boys teams from Willoughby and Cripps.

There were plenty of players I recognised in both teams. With Luke on one line and a Willoughby substitute on the other, we kicked off. Within a minute, it was kick off time again, as Cripps rushed into an early lead. They added a second in the 33^rd minute – defenders claimed that the ball had gone out of play but the Willoughby linesman (to his credit) told me that it was definitely a goal. Anyway, the 2-0 score at the end of the 40-minute half really didn’t reflect the fact that the game had been quite even, with both teams having their share of possession and chances. As always, I kept out of the way where I could, and played one particularly good advantage for which I got praise as we left the field at half time.

With the score at 2-0, the next goal would likely prove crucial to which way the game swung. In the end, somewhat disappointingly, Cripps got it in the 45^th minute – they did take their chances better overall. Willoughby pulled one back five minutes later, but Cripps secured a 4-1 victory when they added a fourth in the 73^rd minute.

Talking points for me were relatively few; a couple of times I didn’t know which way the decision should go and Luke was quick to notice my uncertainty! I seemed to manage to get in the way of play a couple of times, notably when a Willoughby player’s shot deflected off my head and out of play for a goal kick (they claimed a corner, of course!). I let things go which I perhaps could have pulled up, but the players just got on with it for the most part. Cripps players do like to engage in a bit of backchat now and again, but I just played along. Luke was determined that I should send someone off in my final game but, as usual, I didn’t show a single yellow card. There were a couple of occasions on which I might have done so, but I let them pass.

Knowing that this would likely be my final game of my three years, I gave a suitably dramatic final whistle, only for the arriving Hugh Stewart Old Boys team to invite us to referee again. I offered Luke the opportunity to do the game, and he accepted when he found out that they only had the pitch for an hour. In the end, their game against Cripps Freshers was something of a non-event, as we played only 40 minutes with a short break in the middle. Hugh Stu ran out comfortable 5-0 winners – the quickest thrashing I have witnessed in my time here! I ran one of the lines (we only had one linesman) and gave a few offsides and a foul, but there was nothing controversial to worry about for either of us.

As I write now, I am rather tired once again, having struggled through two games, the first in searing heat, which didn’t make it easy for anyone. Still, for someone as well built as I am I still seem to fare rather better than some of the noticeably slimmer players (not that there was anyone fatter than me out there!); I have to mention Caesari, who started whinging about being tired about 10 minutes into the 80!

Altogether, I think I’m now finished! The chances of getting any more games in the last few days of term are fairly small, although I suppose you never know. The game this afternoon was a nice way to go out though, particularly with some of the Cripps players with whom my time refereeing has been inextricably linked. Assuming that is the case, my next note will be my end of season review, detailing all the games I’ve been involved in this year, and then I will pen a review of my three years, picking out some of the highlights, lowlights, and the bizarre and amusing moments. As someone once said - they think it’s all over…it (almost) is now!

Matches 17 & 18 - The Jubilee Cup and the Geography battle

2009-06-10T23:33:00.002+01:00

My busy week of football continued with two matches this afternoon! The second I had known about for several weeks but the first was thrust upon me only some 24 hours before. In this piece, I shall describe both, and they were somewhat different.

The first was the 'Jubilee Cup' game between Newark Hall and Southwell Hall. Like any neighbouring halls, they share something of a rivalry and this week a whole range of sporting events were taking place between them to contest the Jubilee Cup, with this afternoon's football match being one of them. The game also pitted the winners of the IMS Cup against the winners of the Plate, so both teams must surely have had good seasons.

Of course, that's not to say it would be an easy afternoon for me. Local derbies can be volatile, so I figured I might need my wits about me. Early on, things started pretty well though - some nice easy fouls and nothing controversial. The main moment of controversy came about 20 minutes in - with a pivotal decision. As a Southwell forward was heading into the area his shirt appeared to be pulled and he went down. He was bearing down on goal, so any foul should really lead to a sending off in that situation. I had to make an instant judgement, and went for the grass-cutter to wave the claim away. Why? Well, its a decision you see given sometimes, but equally you often don't. I went with my gut reaction - it certainly wasn't a stonewall penalty. Had it been on TV, some pundits would have lambasted me for not giving it - others would have been equally critical if I had. I don't think I could really win either way. The benefit of the doubt went to the defence, and I am happy with the decision. Southwell weren't though, and when I refused them a free kick on the edge of their own area some minutes later, after which Newark then hit the post, they weren't impressed. Newark did take the lead in the 32nd minute, and thats how it stayed at half-time.

The second half saw the game open up more, and as the half got going I sensed my interventions were being needed less and I was able to start playing advantage more. Newark went through a period midway through the half where they thought I wasn't giving them anything too, so I clearly wasn't being biased! In the end, they proved too strong for Southwell, adding a second in the 72nd minute with a looping header and then two further goals in the last five minutes to add a gloss to the scoreline which didn't really reflect a competitive game between two fairly well-matched teams. The difference was perhaps that Newark created more chances - the Newark keeper didn't really have a difficult save to make and, although Southwell hit the post in the second half, that was about it. The better team won.

The game could have been more difficult for me than it was. Opinion will be divided on the penalty claim - I'm happy with how I saw it - but putting that to one side I think that otherwise I did well. I probably got a few of the basic decisions wrong at times (there seemed a period in the second half where I made a few bizarre calls perhaps) but I kept the game under control without showing a card. I let the tackles come in, I let the players be physical and didn't make it stop-start, trying to keep it flowing, particularly in the second half where the game opened up more. You often sense how games change in mood when you referee them, and I sensed as the game wore on that I could take more chances and let things go a little more. Altogether, a good afternoon's work.

I then had just under an hour to relax before my next game. This one was between the Geography Society (students) and Geography lecturers. I gathered that this game is an annual fixture, and indeed the lecturers were resplendent in their own sky blue kit! They had some younger players (perhaps PhD students) but some of them were getting on, and so they were allowed to play with 12 men and the game was restricted to two 30-minute halves.

I wondered if I would run out of space for all the goals on my sheet, but it wasn't like that at all. Having had a debatable penalty decision in my first game, I then had an obvious one in this game as a GeogSoc forward was unceremoniously tripped by a defender in the area. The penalty was scored. However, the lecturers went almost straight up the other end and equalised! 1-1, and it was something of a surprise. The game was a far more relaxed affair than the previous one, with less tension, although some of the tackles weren't particularly well-timed. When another lecturer tripped a GeogSoc forward in the area before half time, I had no choice but to point to the spot again! This time, however, the penalty was hit against the post. 1-1 at half time then.

Into the second half, and the students gradually began to control the game. They went ahead thanks to a beautifully headed own goal in the 35th minute, added a third in the 47th (despite claims of offside - as I had no linesman I gave the goal even though the claims were probably justified), and later added another two. I then ruled out a goal for offside at the end, although apparently the ball came off a defender this time - although the forward was definitely in an offside position! It just shows how difficult it is to spot these things when you have no assistants - with so many players and so many things to watch you can't have you're eyes in that many places at once. The only other incident of note was a bad tackle by a lecturer who came right through poor Jamie. I should have booked him for it - perhaps I was sympathetic somehow to the 'age thing', but I gave him a yellow when he committed another foul later on - to the joy of both the students and his colleagues on the touchline!

In the end, the socreline of 5-1 to GeogSoc appears comfortable but it doesn't really tell the whole story. The better team clearly won, but it was closer than that for a long while - as the game wore on, tiredness got to the lecturers and they made more mistakes. The game was great fun to referee, and the lecturers claimed for the most ludicrous decisions at times! In the end, despite having been worried about potential problems in my earlier game, the only yellow card came in the second encounter!

And that may well be that. I don't now have any more matches left at this stage - whether I'll receive any more invitations over the course of the next week or so remains to be seen. But it could well be that I have now bowed out of refereeing football here at Nottingham. I won't get all emotional about that now though - I'll save that for my end-of-season review!

Match 16 - Willoughby First and Second Years

2009-06-08T13:48:00.002+01:00

Today's match at least ensured I got out of bed early! A 10.30 kick-off for this one after the Uni team had asked Willoughby to move the time of their first v second years game as they had a tournament taking place during the afternoon.

The first years, who I had refereed a couple of times during the year, had always struck me as a very good footballing side. They dominated possession for the first minute or so, and then promptly conceded a goal after a mix-up between the keeper and defender. 1-0 to the second years then. The first years had the lion's share of possession in the first half, and most of the play seemed to be in the half they were attacking. It took until two minutes before the break for them to snatch an equaliser. The half was one of the easiest I've refereed - I think there were only about three fouls for me to give! Along, of course, with the customary bits of advantage play.

Into the second half, and the first years struck the first blow in the 49th minute. There were muted claims that there had been a foul in the build up - I hadn't had a very clear view and Luke running the line gave nothing - he reckoned the defender fell over by himself. The half was much more even, and as it wore on began to flow from end to end with both teams having opportunities. However, the first years perhaps had the better of the chances, and extended their lead in the 68th minute despite claims of offside - Luke kept his flag down. An own goal in the 77th minute added a fourth goal for them and things were pretty comfortable. The second years scored with the last kick of the game but by then it was academic, and the first years completed a fairly comfortable 4-2 win.

It was not a testing game to referee - the most argument seemed to be over my lenient interpretation of handballs. The players generally just got on with it, and I tried to keep play flowing where I could. Altogether, an enjoyable morning's work. The right team won as well I think - the first years played some excellent passing football (although I won't deny the contribution the second year's made to the game).

Match 15 - Cripps vs Rutland

2009-05-16T17:59:00.002+01:00

Two freshers teams for me today, as Cripps had arranged a match against Rutland to take place just before exams began. I called a halt to my revision and headed down to University Park to referee it. I usually mention the weather in my reports - well in this game we had heavy downpours and bright sunshine all thrown in!

I thought Rutland had the better of the opening minutes, yet it was Cripps who took the lead. It came from the first free kick (some 9 minutes in) - the Cripps player took a shot, and the Rutland keeper parried it into the path of another Cripps player who had the simple task of scoring.

Rutland had a good side - in fact the two teams were pretty evenly matched. I tried to set a fairly low tolerance on fouls - getting all the late challenges but letting some of the more minor physical contact go. And of course I tried to keep the game flowing by playing advantage - as usual this worked better in some situations than in others. Cripps had a couple of penalty appeals but I turned them down.

We were limited to 40-minute halves, and the game continued apace after the turnaround. Rutland got their equaliser in the 54th minute, an audacious shot from the right hand edge of the penalty area - I'm not sure if it was intentional or not! The game passed without incident for the most part - of course I missed things and got things wrong, but not that influenced the outcome. I turned down virtually all the appeals for handball on the grounds that players were having the ball struck at them rather than deliberately handling it.

With a pretty frenetic 80 minutes coming to an end, and the scores level, there was, as ever, a decision to make. With no-one else coming to use the pitch, we settled on two ten-minute halves of extra-time, which were just as even and couldn't separate the teams. And so it was to penalties.

For the first six kicks, the two teams had an identical record. Rutland took first, and their first kick was saved, before the Cripps player blazed over. The next four each were all converted (some more easily than others!), taking us to sudden death. Rutland's player hit the bar with his kick, leaving Cripps with a great chance to secure the win, but the Rutland keeper managed to pull off the save. Rutland converted their seventh kick, and the keeper again came to their aid in saving the next Cripps kick, giving Rutland a 5-4 win on penalties.

Altogether, I enjoyed the match as ever, a pretty even encounter between two well-matched teams. I tried to let the game flow while clamping down on the worst of the challenges - and there were a few late tackles. However, the players were all quite happy with my handling of the game - I think they were happy just to have a referee! I was also amused by the Rutland player who was clearly more used to playing rugby - he is the first player in three years to have called me 'sir'! The game was a nice break from revision, and I'm sure there will be a couple more games to follow after exams.

Match 14 - Law Society vs Baker and McKenzie

2009-05-09T01:39:00.002+01:00

The games are coming thick and fast for me at the moment. My next task was to referee a Friday night friendly encounter between Law Society and the Law firm Baker and McKenzie. LawSoc have several players with whom I am familiar, notably a couple of Cripps stalwarts - its always nice to see some familiar faces when I take charge of a game. The day had been a mixed one weather wise, but the 3G pitch was bathed in sunshine as we kicked off early in the evening.

The start was frenetic, with everyone chasing the ball wherever it went! Both teams seemed to lack a formation as such! Now, I rarely manage to describe every goal in the games I referee, and this will be so much more true in this game - there were thirteen! I've just had a quick check back through my records as to the games with the most goals which I have previously refereed. I have twice refereed a game with 10 goals - Wednesday's game was one of them, as well as a game two years ago between Nightingale and Rutland in gale force winds! Today's thirteen beats that record comfortably. I did, however, run the line to Doug two years ago on a BUSA game between Nottingham seconds and De Montford seconds, which Nottingham won 10-5!

Anyway, to return to the record-breaking game. Baker took the lead 5 minutes in, largely thanks to their powerful but skilled forward who was clearly their best player. He reminded me of Dider Drogba, except without the diving and swearing at the TV camera. They held the lead for a good part of the half; we had a stoppage midway through the half as a Baker played was badly injured in a challenge, so both teams had a chance to regroup. Immediately afterwards, LawSoc equalised; two minutes later they took the lead, and in the 40th minute they made it 3-1 (which came from a throw-in which I had reversed due to a foul throw). And so it remained at half-time.

The start of the second half was most bizarre, as within seven minutes of the restart it had become 6-1. I must make mention of LawSoc sports sec Chris's effort, which caught everyone by surprise, beating the keeper and nestling in the net from a ridiculously narrow angle (I think it was the 4th goal). I had to think for a minute to make sure what I had seen had actually happened, but it was definitely a goal - fluke or otherwise! Baker made it 6-2 in the 58th minute, before the goals dried up for 14 minutes! They pulled another back to 6-3, before another quickfire set of three goals in six minutes brought LawSoc's lead to 9-3. One of the goals came when a LawSoc forward was almost certainly offside, but I had no linesman at that point and so had to give the benefit of the doubt to the attacker and allow the goal - it didn't exactly affect the result in any case!

Baker had a series of penalty claims in the second half. The first two came in quick succession - first the forward I mention earlier went down but I wasn't sure as to the contact among the tangle of legs so let play continue. Then another player went down rather dramatically, and I wasn't convinced either - it almost looked like a dive. I was more sure of waving this one away. The next was the most convincing - a handball claim. I am probably too soft on handballs, and doubtless other referees would have pointed to the spot. I wonder if I should have too. The defender's arm was out and it clearly struck him - I couldn't have been better positioned, but my instincts at the time suggested the ball was just hit at him. I was immediately likened to Tom Henning Ovrebo! In any case, Baker got their penalty in the 89th minute when Caesari comprehensively bundled over the Baker striker and this time I had no hesitation in pointing to the spot. I was finally convinced, and unlike Ovrebo I had given one of the four decisions! The penalty was scored by the same striker to complete the goalfest, and shortly afterwards I blew for time on a 9-4 win for LawSoc.

Altogether, a most satisfactory evening for me. The game wasn't particularly challenging, and I tried to keep play flowing by playing lots of advantages, and this was pretty successful. I ignored a few of the more minor offences at times, but it didn't matter and I got the major fouls right. That handball claim is perhaps an error - I went with my instinct at the time. The penalty at the end and one late tackle by Lee Battu were about the only significantly poor challenges, although I kept my cards in my pocket as always! The linesmen I had varied in their reliability, which didn't always help, and I was left without one at the crucial moment for the one LawSoc goal. I don't really think it matters though - the game was a bit of fun and I'm sure both teams enjoyed it. It certainly didn't lack goals or action!

My season is coming to an end now, although I'm hoping that there will still be a couple of matches left for me to referee after exams. My time at university is coming to an end too, and with it my refereeing. I'm really enjoying all the matches at the moment, so its good to be finishing on a high!

The Ovrebo Saga - Part 2

2009-05-08T12:57:00.002+01:00

Unsurprisingly, the fallout from Wednesday night's encounter at Stamford Bridge has been considerable. I want to put pen to paper now, giving my honest view on some of the reaction to it all.

There seem to be various theories being banded about regarding Wednesday night's game. The first is that Ovrebo was the wrong choice to referee this game, or that he was too inexperienced. Wrong on both counts for me. The 42-year old psychologist from Oslo has been a FIFA referee for 15 years. England's most experienced International referee, Mike Riley, has been on the list for only 10 years. Ovrebo has racked up more experience than any of our English officials. He has been voted Norweigan referee of the year five times. He was refereed their Cup final twice. He has taken charge of over 20 Champions League encounters. Could he have been better prepared for Wednesday night? Not much. It was the first game he has refereed at such a late stage in the Champions League, but if he is ruled out because he hasn't done such a game before, then eventually we would run out of possible officials! Everyone has to be refereeing such a game for the first time at some point. From what I have seen, Ovrebo is a calm referee who doesn't make a fuss of things and gets on with the job. He has the imposing physical presence which should command respect. Altogether, a good choice for a match like this, as far as I'm concerned.

The next theory is that UEFA didn't want an all-English final again. That may be true, but did it translate to events on the pitch on Wednesday night? Of course not. If UEFA had told Ovrebo to make Barcelona win, then why would he have sent off Abidal when, even if he thought it was a foul, it could be argued that a yellow card would have sufficed? Frankly, whenever there is a suggestion that a referee has acted with any partiality during a game, I would be the first to dismiss it. As someone who referees, the idea that you should go out to referee with the aim of influencing the outcome of the match is just odd. There are probably officials who do that (as corruption cases in Italy and other places show) but for such officials to get to this level is inconceivable. There may be subconcious things which influence your decisions (such as a manager's comments pre-match) but they are exactly that - subconcious.

So, for me, Ovrebo was the right choice for this match, and his decisions are not the result of some UEFA instruction to ensure Barcelona made the final. Ovrebo simply had a bad game at a bad time. And with a bad team too - that team being Chelsea. The reaction of Chelsea players to things going against them has, time and again, been ridiculous.

And I think the blame lies with one man - a man who is currently celebrating winning Serie A. Until Jose Mourinho arrived at Chelsea, they as a team were no worse than any other in terms of their attitude to referees. Every team will have arguments, quarrels and give out criticisms - it happens at times - and Chelsea were no different. The likes of John Terry just got on with the game. Mourinho introduced a different culture - he made it acceptable for the Chelsea players to berate referees. He stirred things up in the press, before and after matches. He physically went mad during games. And the players at the time saw this, and followed the example of their coach. The likes of Terry, Drogba and Ballack changed their way of thinking. After Mourinho left, none of his successors (Grant, Scolari or Hiddink) have had such a mentality. But the culture change has stayed with the players, who still think Mourinho's behaviour to be acceptable. Now it is Hiddink's comments which are fairly moderate, while his players are ranting and raving to the press. If action had been taken while Mourinho was at Chelsea, action which made it quite evident that such behaviour is unacceptable, then maybe, just maybe, the events of Wednesday night would not have unfolded in the same way.

The Chelsea press machine has swung into action now, as they furiously attempt to restrain the criticism and turn their backs on some of the shameful events of Wednesday. UEFA are looking into what has happened - Drogba and Ballack will undoubtedly and deservedly receive some personal sanction (even if Drogba has since apologised), while comments by Bosingwa that Ovrebo was a 'thief' will demand some investigation too. John Terry's outspoken comments have apparently provoked investigations too.

And of course, with the players harranging the referee, certain other individuals (so called 'fans') take it upon themselves to do the same. That Ovrebo had to be smuggled out of the UK and is currently receiving police protection following death threats is a shameful indictment on our society. It has all happened before of course - remember Anders Frisk and Urs Meier, both driven to retirement. Perhaps the British aren't so polite and well-mannered after all. At the end of the day, what happened on Wednesday was a game of football. It was a hugely high-profile and important game, but it was still a game. Sadly, Bill Shankly's saying seems to ring true for some people - football is more important than life and death. Of course it isn't. Both the players involved and those fans who take things too far need to realise this. Ovrebo doesn't deserve any of what has happened to him so far. If UEFA choose to punish him with demotion, then maybe that is justified, but the personal attacks? No-one deserves that at all.

The buck is now in UEFA's court. We have seen this sort of thing happen before after high-profile errors by referees. And UEFA didn't do enough, so it has happened again. They now need to make it clear through the action they take that what has happened in the past two days, both during and after the match, is totally unacceptable. If they do that, and can set a precedent, then that will be at least one positive thing to emerge from this mess. If, however, they deal weakly with those involved, then the implication is simple - this sort of thing is acceptable, and can happen again. And it will.

Should Ovrebo referee again? I hope he will. I hope he won't retire, and I hope he will still referee international matches, as I still believe he is a good referee. You don't become a bad referee after one game. Would I blame him if he gave it up? Of course not - not after what he has been through. If he does, then that is three top officials who have been lost because of an over-reaction to their honest decisions. How many more will follow? If we keep losing officials like this, the end result will only be that the quality of officials at the top level will go down, as more junior officials are sought to replace those who quit.

I await UEFA's actions with interest. As the story continues to develop next week, lets see if they are strong and take the action they should. I'm not holding my breath.

The woes of Rosetti and Øvrebø

2009-05-07T01:24:00.003+01:00

I haven't written about events in high-profile football matches for a while. Even Howard Webb's penalty shocker at Old Trafford didn't cause me to pick up my pen, but this week's Champions League semi-final second legs have.

For the record, I think the refereeing in the Champions League knockout stages has been very good so far. We have seen several big games go by with the referees barely noticed. Last week, in the first legs of the semi-finals, I thought both officials did well. At the Nou Camp, Wolfgang Stark tried (amidst the pettiness and stupidity of a Barca vs Chelsea game) to give the game some flow. Credit to him, he could have ended up racking up a load of bookings and giving countless free kicks, but he refereed with common sense. Claus Bo Larsen at Old Trafford last Wednesday had a far easier task, but blended beautifully into the background and had a superb game (not for the first time this year - he did the same in the first leg of Liverpool v Chelsea). So, all good. Until this week.

Both of the appointed referees this week are referees that I like and rate. Italian Roberto Rosetti usually performs with common sense, something for which some Italian referees are not known. He isn't usually fussy, and the Euro 2008 final is evidence that he is trusted with big games. He did the second leg semi of Chelsea vs Liverpool last year, and was excellent. I've also been a fan of Norway's Tom Henning Øvrebø for some time. He just does the job - no histronics - and was dreadfully unlucky to be sent home early from Euro 2008, with the mediocre Herbert Fandel staying on ahead of him.

To the Emirates on Tuesday then. The game itself wasn't a great spectacle - Manchester United saw to that in the first 11 minutes (credit to them - they outplayed Arsenal completely). Rosetti didn't exactly help the spectacle either though - he was unusually fussy, giving a multitude of soft decisions, most of which seemed to favour Manchester United. His foul recognition was poor all night. Thankfully, these were mostly minor decisions. For 75 minutes. Then the one big decision goes against Manchester United, and its a wrong one. Darren Fletcher's tackle was perfectly executed. To bring in the referee's viewpoint (and some referees will support the decision of a foul here, even if I don't) - the referee can only consider that a foul if he considers the challenge to be made in a 'careless' manner. Any tackle that is consider careless, reckless or dangerous is penalised, no matter if the ball is won. To add to that definition, from the Laws:
"Careless” means that the player has shown a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or that he acted without precaution.
Do I think Fletcher was careless? I think he could hardly have done any more to take care. He can't really have taken any more precaution or shown any more consideration for his opponent. He won the ball fair and square, and the fact that his trailing leg brought the player down is irrelevant - the sort of contact that happens all the time in football. A poor decision from a top referee. Incidentally, the red card which follows the foul is academic - it is only the foul itself I have a problem with. The fact that the decision can't be overturned is ludicrous, and a point to which I shall return shortly. Overall, a poor night for Rosetti, both in general play and on the big decision.

To Stamford Bridge. Rosetti had a poor night on Tuesday. Øvrebø, of whom I am also a fan, was worse on Wednesday. He was nothing short of utterly dreadful. Now, this wasn't an easy game to referee, and the players didn't help him one iota, but he was hopeless. Lets go through this extraordinary encounter blow by blow.

The four Chelsea penalty appeals first of all. The first - on Malouda - I believe he has given the foul for the challenge which was actually made in the area. He could clearly see this, so why he hasn't pointed to the spot I don't know. The foul outside the area was minor. He was perfectly positioned. Dreadful decision. Abidal on Drogba - thats also a penalty for me, and probably a red card to follow. The Pique handball - I'll offer a little leeway on this, as the ball was hit straight at him, although the position of his arm makes it hard to ignore. The one at the end which Ballack was so furious about - never in a million years. So of the four - two definites, one maybe, one never. In my opinion of course.

The red card. Once again, the sending off is correct but the foul which leads to it is not. Its not a foul, and was symptomatic of Øvrebø's poor foul detection all night. He never got to grips with what was and wasn't a genuine offence, with players dropping to the turf likes flies. Anelka clipped his own heels. Like I said, I do think the position rightly leads to a sending off, but the foul decision is a poor one.

So a dreadful game all round from Øvrebø, by far the worst showing I have ever seen from him, and the worst showing in a Champions League match in some time. But unfortunately the teams come out of it with little credit either. I thought Barcelona were whingers. They surrounded the referee frequently, whenever a decision went against them. They played their part in turning the game into the petty squabble that it was. Poor from them. But Chelsea come out of it with less credit. Ballack should have been sent off for chasing and man-handling the referee after that last penalty appeal. Øvrebø should have stopped play and sent him down the tunnel - what he did was totally unacceptable. As for Drogba, the man was out of control. The yellow card at the end was a kind of token gesture. UEFA will deal with his actions, and rightly so, because no matter how bad Øvrebø was, that is no way to behave, especially in the public eye. The example that it sets is terrible. Players can get frustrated, but to that extent it is quite simply ridiculous. Chelsea, yet again, have major issues with controlling their players and respecting officials. It can't go on.

The one man who I can find some time for in all this is Guus Hiddink. He comes across to me as a very decent person. He will struggle not to criticise the referee, but the way in which he does so will I'm sure be done in his calm, assured manner. Imagine the chaos if Mourinho had been Chelsea manager during this game! Unthinkable. Hiddink kept his calm at the end when everything else was going off around him, and he strikes me as someone who just gets on with his own game and doesn't indulge in petty squabbles or personal criticism, towards both referees and opponents. The Premier League needs more managers like him, and its a shame he isn't staying on at Chelsea next year.

I referred earlier to the injustice of the lack of appeal on decisions. We have seen this amply demonstrated in the cases of both Fletcher and Abidal, both of whom will now miss the final. It is frankly ludicrous that they will do so on the basis of such obvious errors, and I feel sorry for both of them. I don't believe the appeals system in this country does its job properly, but at least it has a chance of overturning some wrong decisions. UEFA need to look at this, as players should not be missing these big occasions on account of wrong decisions.

There are so many emotions mixed in with all of this. The media will have their circus, and the two referees will be villified in the papers. The pressure is on whoever does the final now, given what has gone before. To this point, we have had strong performances throughout the knockout stages, but Rosetti and Øvrebø were dreadful. Was it wrong to appoint them? Not at all - they're both perfectly capable referees - they just had bad games. Hopefully, they'll recover, although they'll always be tarnished by the memory of these games.

But finally, to bring just the slightest note of positivity amidst all this criticism, just maybe tonight reminded me why I love football. No matter what you're expecting, football just throws something completely different at you. You think you've seen everything, and then along comes a game like tonight's. It has been an extraordinary evening - one that will live long in the memory for all the wrong reasons - and the repurcussions will last for some days. But its part of what makes the game so interesting and so fascinating, and that's just why we love it, and is why I'll be out refereeing again on Friday.

Match 13 - Notts Uni XI vs IMS All-stars

2009-05-06T16:51:00.002+01:00

For the second year running I was invited to take charge of this encounter, which pits a selection of players from the university teams against a selection of players from the intra-mural leagues. Last year, the game was a very relaxed affair, with the university team running out 7-1 winners.

This year's game seemed far more serious. Mike Round, the IMS football officer, had amassed a large squad of players from many of the IMS teams. I recognised several players from the Cripps, Newark, Nightingale and Broadgate Park freshers teams. They had something like 20-25 players, so finding people to run the line from them would prove no problem! I've no idea how many of the Uni team players were first-teamers, although I did recognise Mike Morenas, an ex-Nightingaler.

The IMS All-Stars started well. They competed for everything, and it was immediately obvious that it wouldn't be the walkover it was last year. In fact, it was IMS who took the lead in the 20th minute, and doubled it two minutes later as a free kick was cleared out to a player on the far side, who finished it very nicely. By the half-hour, it was 3-0! This was a real surprise, as I too had expected the Uni team to run out comfortable winners again. The IMS players had gelled really well and were working hard, even if some of the defending from the Uni team left a lot to be desired. However, by half-time the lead had been reduced to 3-2, with goals in the 35th and 41st minutes, the second shortly after we had had a break following a clash of heads - I don't think the IMS players had woken up after the stoppage! I didn't have a lot to do - perhaps I called a couple of things wrongly, but no major issues in the first half.

Mike decided that the only way to give everyone a game for IMS was to send out a completely different eleven for the second half. Whether they didn't perform quite as well or whether the Uni team improved dramatically I don't know, but it was 3-3 within 5 minutes. The Uni team had found their rhythm, and I have to admit it was a joy to watch. They weren't hoofing it up in the air - they were passing it along the ground, looking for space, constructing some nice moves, perhaps the 'beautiful game' at its best. Thats not to say the IMS players didn't contribute - they also gave a good account of themselves in a half of football which flowed from end-to-end virtually without stoppages. In terms of quality, it was one of the best I have refereed. I gave about half a dozen free kicks, but also tried to make my contribution to allowing a flowing game, and I could sit back and let the players do the talking. It was a great half of football to referee. The Uni team took the lead for the first time in the 63rd minute, and added their fifth in the 80th minute. There were hopes of an IMS comeback as they pulled one back to make it 5-4 with two minutes to go, but the two-goal advantage was restored shortly afterwards, and thats how things finished. The only incident of note as far as I was concerned was when a Uni player hit a shot, which the keeper tipped onto the crossbar and which then bounced down. The linesman wasn't in line to make any judgement, and I had no idea whether it had crossed the line, so I could only wave play on. We had had virtually no stoppages in the whole half, so I played just a minute of added time and then brought a most entertaining game of football to an end.

The game was one of the most straightforward I have refereed in my time at Nottingham. The players must take some credit for just getting on with the game - there were no arguments, no backchat and no confrontations. I would also like my share of the credit too(!) - for giving the game every opportunity to flow. The football was excellent, in particular in the second half, where I thought I got everything just about spot on. I whistled the clear fouls, and let everything else go. The assistants also contributed and helped me, with their interventions being just when necessary. While I suppose some might consider the game boring to referee because there is virtually nothing to do, I personally think that the referee should enjoy these kinds of games - I love football, and to see a good quality, flowing game is great. It balances out all the more difficult games anyhow! I'll be back in action again on Friday, and will return with another report then.

Match 12 - Cripps First and Second Years

2009-04-30T01:27:00.002+01:00

This week has seen me involved in two games between a freshers' and second years' team. On Sunday, I assisted Luke as Nightingale's second years beat their freshers team 3-2. Today roles were reversed as I refereed the corresponding game between the Cripps teams.

We were on the astro pitch, in weather conditions which weren't exactly ideal. It was warm and sunny - but too warm really. I predicted some exhaustion to follow. As we only had the pitch for a limited time (although as it was no-one turned up at the end) we were limited to two 40-minute halves.

The opening period of the game had a nice flow to it, although it lacked clearcut chances. It was frenetic, but unproductive. I recall only one intervention from me in the early stages, and indeed I was merely a passenger for most of the first half, with minimal interventions - which suited me just fine. The second years took the lead in the 25th minute. It was a rather scrappy goal, coming from a corner, from which defender and goalkeeper collided, leaving the rather surprised forward with the simple task of slotting the ball home. The freshers complained that the ball was rolling as the corner was taken, which it probably was, but it was difficult to keep it still on the sloping pitch and I had let this go on several other occasions. They were merely finding something to moan about. In any case, they equalised in the 31st minute after a splendid breakaway goal and a neat exchange of passes. Half-time arrived, with the score at 1-1 and the teams evenly matched.

The second years started the second half poorly and were behind within two minutes. It was again from a corner, although this time it was perhaps the marking at fault, although the delivery and header were both excellent. The freshers held a 2-1 lead. The second years took a while to respond, but gradually improved as the half wore on. I had kept in the background until the second years had a penalty appeal. Their forward was attacking on the left hand side and got the ball off the defender - I considered giving a foul but let it pass. As he headed into the area, there was some shirt-pulling going on, but I thought both parties were engaging in a bit (even if the defender was more at fault) and that it wasn't enough for me to give a penalty. I was surprised to find his shirt had ripped. I didn't think there had been that much in the incident at all. I went with my gut reaction at the time, and I'm still slightly mystified as to how quite so much damage was done.

Throughout the second half, players were falling down at regular intervals with cramp, and there had been plenty of substitutions. With no-one coming to use the pitch, I elected to play five minutes of stoppage time, which was obviously better received by one team than the other! About a minute in, I stopped play for an offside against the freshers (in fact they kept the ball and I could have played on, but never mind), and some time after the whistle had blown one of the freshers kicked the ball over the fence out of the court. Given the time that had elapsed since the whistle, I booked him for delaying the restart. It took the best part of two minutes for the ball to be fetched, but when we restarted there were still four minutes to play.

Yet it wasn't over. The second years got the equaliser they so desperately wanted, and it came from an unlikely source - a beautiful header by a fresher. Own goals are always painful, but as an equaliser in the depths of injury time they are even more so. Plenty of opportunities for some banter there! Soon after, I blew the final whistle, sparking a huge debate as to whether we should play extra-time or go straight to penalties. I thought that the teams should decide - I'm not a dictator on such matters! Eventually, we settled on two 10-minute halves of extra time.

The second half had to be cancelled when another group turned up to take over the court. The first half was notable for only two reasons from my point of view - a claim that I should book a second year after he had had the ball kicked at him whilst retreating from a free kick. I merely ordered a retake - I don't want players getting others booked purposely. The other was when a fresher thought he had been fouled and immediately chopped down an opponent - a senseless thing to do as the decision was my fault, not his opponent's! Perhaps I should have booked him for his stupidity.

As the second half was cancelled, we then went straight to penalties, still having one half of the pitch free to ourselves. The penalty shootout was close - both teams missed their first penalty (including a spectacular blaze over from Caesari), with both then scoring each of their next three. 3-3, with one take each before sudden death. As the second year tucked his away confidently, the fresher came up and I reminded him he needed to score, to which I got a sarcastic response! He couldn't though. Neither keeper actually made a save - the three takers who failed to score all missed the target. To clarify, the second years then who triumphed 4-3 on penalties.

Altogether, it was an entertaining match which had a nice flow to it. I felt I did my job - there may be arguments about the penalty I didn't give but my instincts at the time told me not to. I can't change it now, and I'm not unhappy with the decision. I think it is the first time I have booked a player for a technical offence, but it was certainly a deserved one! Overall, I enjoyed the game and hope that the players did too!

Match 11 - Raleigh Park vs Faraday (Loughborough)

2009-03-18T16:25:00.002Z

Today, it was another of those days which you look out for in the intra-mural calendar - the IMS Varsity. Once again, Loughborough's finest intra-mural teams played Nottingham's, and this year it was Nottingham's turn to host it. Nottingham don't have a very good record in these encounters - I refereed two years ago when both Nottingham teams lost on their home ground, and last year I went down to Loughborough to run the line for both games, and again Loughborough completed a clean sweep in the football. This year, it was Cripps Old Boys and Raleigh Park freshers who were Nottingham's representatives. The Cripps game was refereed by the SU's Education Officer, Craig Cox, who is a Level 4 referee, leaving me to do Raleigh Park's encounter against Faraday from Loughborough.

The first half was far from my greatest half of football. Raleigh took an early lead 3 minutes in, but the game was quite physical and I sensed I wasn't totally on top of it. As always, I wanted to try and give the game some flow, but the tackles were coming in rather at times and I probably wasn't judging them correctly. That said, it never looked like spiralling out of control, so I did enough. The first half was a half of few chances too; neither team could really create many clearcut opportunities. I was perhaps penalising some soft fouls while missing some more obvious ones, but I was relieved to get through to half-time with no cards and no major hassle.

In the second half, things seemed to settle down rather more. Immediately, I got into my rhythm and the players seemed far more accepting of what I was giving. In the 54th minute, I gave one of the easiest penalty decisions I'll ever have to give - I was looking straight at play as a Raleigh defender inexplicably stuck up his hand and palmed the ball away. Why he did it I don't know, but the appeal was loud and I instantly pointed to the spot. With the penalty being scored (just!) Faraday were back on level terms.

They then proceeded to dominate most of the rest of the half, and once again Loughborough's sporting prowess showed through. They had much the better of play, with some very good chances, notably at set pieces. I turned down a penalty appeal soon after as the ball was crossed in and two players collided - I couldn't really see who instigated the contact so it was best just to let play go on. However, they added further goals in the 72nd and 77th minutes, and I think Raleigh had rather run out of steam by then. Raleigh contended that I was giving Faraday all the decisions - I was simply calling it as I saw it. The decisions were mostly only corners and throw-ins anyway, so nothing major, and the only real big decision I gave was the penalty, which was clear as day. The contest was all but over, and Faraday won 3-1.

Overall, not my greatest game ever, particularly in the first half, but I got through it and got the big decisions right. Once again, Loughborough completed a clean sweep in the football as Cripps Old Boys also lost out, this time 3-0. It is always a tough ask for the Nottingham teams, and I thought Raleigh equitted themselves pretty well, but in the end Loughborough had the class to overcome them. Thats the end of football for the term now - whether there will be any other games left for me to handle after Easter remains to be seen.

Match 10 - The IMS Cup Final

2009-03-11T17:16:00.002Z

IMS Finals day is always a day I look out for in the intra-mural football calendar. Two years ago, we had an absolute goal fest in both the Cup and Plate finals - you can read about this in Tale No. 32 on Facebook (and I'm now on No. 161!). That day Broadgate Park beat Cripps 4-2 in the Plate Final, which I refereed, while Doug handled an even more dramatic Cup final, in which Sherwood beat Derby 7-3. Last year, it was completely different - I once again refereed the Plate Final, which saw Sherwood beat Raleigh Park in one of the worst games in my time at Nottingham (see Tale No. 94 for that). With the Cup final also finishing 1-0, it wasn't a great day of football!

So, what would this year bring? At the third time of asking, I got the opportunity to referee the Cup final between Broadgate Park and Newark, while Luke did the Plate final between Southwell and Lenton & Wortley. Which way would today's games go - to the drama of two years ago or the mundane affairs of last year?

We started late, and it was my fault - I forgot my boots! Realising with 15 minutes to spare, I rushed home to get them, with the result that both games started some 10 minutes late. There was a healthy crowd on the sidelines, with both teams having a good number of supporters for the big occasion. I must admit I quite enjoy the theatre of all the shouts and screams at me - it doesn't make a blind bit of difference to what I give! Anyway, we got underway, and it was soon obvious that the two teams were fairly evenly matched. I started off well enough - there was some argument over a few challenges which I was letting go but I was trying to give the game some flow. In many ways, the first half was the hardest part of the game in that respect, and by the time we reached half-time the players had worked out my tolerance level and adjusted appropriately. Both teams had opportunities, but it was Newark who took the lead thanks to a 25th minute own goal. In fact, Broadgate were trying to commit defensive suicide at times. I had tried to play advantage where I could, and although there had been some late tackles I was trying to give warnings rather than showing cards. At the same time, I was making myself hoarse with all the shouting I was doing! Half-time arrived, with the score still 1-0.

The first half had provided little clue of what a rollercoaster ride lay ahead of us in the second half. Broadgate were out of the traps quickest, although there was a bit of good fortune about their equaliser, as a free kick sailed straight through everyone into the net. Within a minute, it was 2-1, as Newark committed defensive suicide as well, and the Broadgate forward nipped in to score. Newark were shell-shocked, and Broadgate then went on to add two more goals in the 63rd and 67th minutes, giving them a 4-1 lead. The game looked all but over.

But you just never know sometimes! Within 5 minutes Newark had pulled it back to 4-3. Set pieces were proving very effective for them, and this was the case on one of the two they scored. Game back on, and there were still 18 minutes to go! My involvement in the closing stages was limited - the players were busy getting on with playing football for the most part. There were the usual controversies on offsides, but I felt I was getting most things right. Newark plugged away (although Broadgate also kept attacking) - this part of the game itself passed me by as I was concentrating completely on what I was giving. There had been several substitutions and a couple of injuries, and Broadgate were starting to time waste on goal kicks, so I knew I would have to add on 4 or 5 minutes.

Newark were getting desperate by now, but sometimes the scrappiest of goals can decide things. In the 5th minute of added time, a corner was floated in and they bundled it home to equalise and make it 4-4 - at the death! I watched carefully for any infringements but there was nothing wrong. There was a mass pitch invasion - it was like they had won the Cup! I didn't finish the game there and then because I didn't want it to seem like I had just waited for Newark to score - but a minute or so later I did blow for full time on an extraordinary second half. Lying ahead of us was extra time!

Luke came over at that point as the Plate final had finished - with Southwell the victors by 3 goals to 2. Luke had disallowed 2 Lenton & Wortley goals, so probably wasn't flavour of the month with them!

I got extra time underway, and the collections of supporters on the side remained to cheer on their sides. Having some kind of atmosphere at the game made it more enjoyable for me. Extra time was scrappy - at least the first half was anyway. Neither team could really take control of the game and little had changed by the time we switched round after 15 minutes. The second half though was more interesting. Both teams did try to go for it, with attacks at both ends, and it wasn't totally defensive. Meanwhile, there had been a succession of late tackles through the game which I had been letting go, but the worst came in the 112th minute as a Newark player caught a Broadgate player with a high and late challenge. It wasn't far off being a red card, but I settled with yellow (to ironic cheers from the sidelines). There could have been an advantage for Broadgate, but I took the safe option of blowing straight away. Five minutes later, a second Newark player joined him in the book after bringing down a Broadgate attacker on the wing with a tired challenge - he held his hands up in acceptance of the decision. Newark also had a couple of penalty appeals - the first I waved away swiftly; the second was more vociferous, but their player had been challenged and had then slowly brought himself to the ground. It was nowhere near convincing me, and may not even have been a foul - the defender might have got some of the ball. However, there could still have been a dramatic late twist - in the final minutes of added time Newark had a great chance to win the game as the ball was crossed in and neither of two players could get a header on target. A short while later, I blew for time on what had been an epic 120 minutes.

Luke commented that the pressure was now off me and firmly on the players as we headed for penalties. He stood on the goalline to check that the goalkeepers stayed on their lines. In keeping with the rest of the game, the shootout proved to be suitably dramatic! Newark missed their second attempt, but the next Broadgate kick was also missed, before the scores were levelled at 2-2. With Broadgate then scoring, Newark missed their next one, giving Broadgate an opportunity to win the game - which they couldn't take. With Newark then scoring, it was 3-3, and sudden death! The first two kicks (one each) were both scored, but Broadgate then missed. It was now Newark's opportunity to win it, but their captain couldn't take it, so the scores remained 4-4. When the next Broadgate kick was skied, Newark again had an opportunity to win, and this time their taker made no mistake, giving them a dramatic 5-4 penalties win. Both keepers had made some good saves in the shootout, so as always I felt sorry for the losing goalkeeper - he couldn't have done much more. Newark's win completed a double for the two Jubilee campus halls - with Southwell having won the Plate.

How do I sum that up then? Well, it has to be up there as one of the best games I have refereed in my time in Nottingham. It was unpredictable, between two closely matched teams, with a real sense of occasion created by the crowd on the touchline. It hadn't been totally straightforward to referee, although by half time I sensed I had done the work necessary to get the players on my side and it became somewhat easier. Certainly, it never felt out of control. Tackles did fly in, although as is often the case the two yellow cards came late on in the game. I didn't get everything right - and indeed I ignored plenty which I could have penalised. However, I did this both ways, and tried to ensure that we got a game, not a stop-start whistle-fest. My decisions didn't have an undue bearing on the result, and the game won't be remembered because of my contribution to it. In fact, I will look back upon it as a game which I enjoyed hugely and from which I can be hugely satisfied with my performance.

Indeed, it was another of those games which explains why I referee. I have just controlled probably the most important match in the IMS calendar, and helped to make it an entertaining game. If you want to get involved in football, then why not referee? The sense of satisfaction you get from controlling 22 players with only a whistle, two bits of plastic and your own character is great. It won't always be easy, it won't always go well, and you won't always enjoy it - but for me the good experiences far outweigh the bad ones and make it one of the most worthwhile things I have done in my time in Nottingham. Bring on the next game!

Match 9 - Biz Soc vs Cripps Old Boys

2009-03-07T16:24:00.002Z

Today I had a top of the table encounter to take charge of. Both Biz Soc and Cripps were unbeaten so far this term, so this was a significant game. Luke assisted me by running one of the lines. The Cripps players arrived late, and so we didn't start until 2.15. Crucially, Cripps won the toss and chose to play with the wind behind them in the first half, a decision which was to prove crucial.

To say Cripps dominated the opening 15 minutes is an understatement! With the wind behind them, they were swarming all over Biz Soc. The Cripps players want name checks for all their goals, but I'll be blown if I can remember who scored them all! They took the lead in the 3rd minute, and doubled it on 6 minutes as I waved down an offside flag from the Biz Soc linesman, who wasn't exactly reliable or impartial in his decision making. In the 15th minute it became three, and again there was a hint of controversy, as the ball struck an arm in the build up. Enzo was jumping for the ball with his arms out, so I ruled it accidental when it hit his elbow and allowed the goal. Again, the linesman's flag was up but I had made my decision and stuck to it. I tried to keep this consistency, and when a similar incident occured with the ball hitting a Biz Soc player's hand, I again let play go on (although this time it was in the centre circle). Luke agreed that it wasn't handball too.

The start of the game was quite tetchy, and soon after the third goal a Biz Soc player took out a Cripps player completely after the ball had gone. The ball fell to a forward so I allowed the advantage, and then decided to have a word with him rather than showing a yellow card. It was perhaps risky to do so, but he caused me no further trouble later in the game, so I was perhaps justified in the end. The tension was palpable and I knew I'd have to keep a fairly close grip on proceedings, but I didn't want to stifle the game completely. Its a delicate balance but the game seemed to settle down as we headed towards half-time, with Cripps adding two further goals, making full use of having the wind behind them. For Biz Soc it was damage limitation, and the half-time score of 5-0 reflected Cripps' dominance.

The big question, of course, was whether Biz Soc could then get back into the game with the wind behind them. They started to have much more of play, but were unable to create any real clearcut chances until it was too late. The second half was a bit easier to referee, although there were still some arguments going on around the pitch, and the players sometimes thought I wasn't giving free kicks where I should have done. I didn't want to make the game too stop-start, and still tried to play advantage where I could. I gather that one Cripps player indulged in a retaliatory kick out after the ball had gone when he had been fouled, but Luke chose not to bring it to my attention - I might have shown a yellow card, although by that stage the game had settled down. The Cripps players were also pretty mouthy, making their feelings known to me, and towards the end I was contemplating showing a yellow card or two for dissent. In the end, at the point where I contemplated showing a card they kept their mouths shut. The Biz Soc linesman didn't help, although they also chose to abuse Luke as well, but I was confident in his decisions.

In terms of the scoring, the second half finished 1-1, with Cripps adding a sixth before Biz Soc finally got one back with six minutes to go. Both teams had chances to add to the scores - Cripps managed to fluff a couple of great opportunities while Biz Soc lacked real threat in front of goal, and couldn't make the most of the chances they had. The scoreline of 6-1 was perhaps a little harsh, although it can't be denied that Cripps were the better team and deserved their win.

I was happy with my performance. The game had been under control but had some flow to it. Once again, I had been communicating with the players throughout the match and during the second half I felt very comfortable with my control. Of course there were decisions I perhaps didn't get right, but for the most part I felt happy with what I had given. The game was more difficult than those I've done in previous weeks, but I still felt I handled the match well. I was surprised I didn't end up showing a yellow card, but with the job done I'm happy that I didn't need to do so in the end.

I'm on a good run of matches at the moment, although with Easter on the horizon I'll soon have a break. Nonetheless, its good that I'm enjoying my refereeing more than ever and think I am performing at my best at the end of my three years here in Nottingham. Lets hope I continue to do so on Wednesday!

Match 8 - Broadgate Park vs Lenton & Wortley

2009-03-04T17:07:00.002Z

The Broadgate Park captain invited me to referee their game today, so I was in the unusual situation of heading down to Grove Farm knowing which match I'd be doing! Their opponents were Lenton & Wortley; Luke meanwhile went off to referee Cripps vs Ancaster, which Ancaster went on to win 3-2.

The game was pretty unremarkable to be fair. The first half was scrappy, and devoid of quality and chances - a dogged midfield battle for the most part. I didn't have a lot to do, my only real intervention of note being to penalise the Lenton goalkeeper for handling outside his area in the early stages. He lost control of the ball and grabbed it from over the line - it was a free kick and no more. As Lenton lined up a corner just before half-time, I reflected on how the game needed a goal. It duly got one, as the ball was cleared and then swung back across to be met by a volley at the far post. It was a rare moment of quality two minutes before the break. The score remained 1-0 as I blew for half-time a couple of minutes later.

Broadgate's heads seemed to drop a little, and defence wasn't their strongpoint. About 10 minutes after the restart, the defender left it for the keeper who wasn't near enough to it, and a Lenton forward stole in and slotted it home to make their lead 2-0. Although Broadgate had some pressure throughout the remainder of the second half, including some set pieces, Lenton's defence kept them out and they never really looked like getting back into the game. This was disappointing, as they had played so well in the Cup games at the end of last term, seeing them through to the final which I believe is next week. In the end, Lenton added a third goal in the last 10 minutes to seal a fairly routine and well deserved win.

It wasn't the most testing of games from my perspective, nor the most exciting, and I just tried to do the job as efficiently as I could. I did make a few errors, but there were no real big decisions to make, and the game passed off without any real controversy. I tried to communicate with the players, keep my interventions to a minimum and let them get on with it as usual, and I think I was pretty successful in doing so. I am probably refereeing as well as I have done throughout my time here in Nottingham, and I'm glad I have felt I've been improving over time. As I carry on through to the end of the season, I hope my good run of form can continue!

Match 7 - Theology Society vs Chemical Engineering

2009-02-28T16:33:00.002Z

The situation was as normal at Grove Farm today - the lottery of which teams would turn up! Luc invited me to referee ChemEng and they eventually decided to play against TheoSoc, as neither team's opponents had turned up. It was very much a friendly, and played in the manner of such a game. The atmosphere was relaxed, and this made it very enjoyable for me.

ChemEng dominated the start of the game. In fact, the first half was incredibly one-sided. Before I had even given a free kick for a foul, they were 3-0 up (the third goal going in 24 minutes in)! There were early penalty appeals for ChemEng, as their forward got a shot away but was then clattered by the keeper. I didn't give it - you don't see such decisions normally given - the most recent example was in the Old Firm Derby a couple of weeks ago when Calum Murray did exactly what I did. There were a few murmurs, but no major arguments. Other than calling a foul throw against Will Booth for a pretty camp attempt at a throw-in, I had nothing to do. The first foul came in the 29th minute, and by half-time I had only given two more; the game was flowing nicely. ChemEng, meanwhile, were all over TheoSoc and could have had six or seven by half-time, with some poor finishing not matching some excellent approach play. The through ball was working really well for them. It had been a hugely enjoyable 45 minutes for me, anyway.

TheoSoc came out with renewed energy and drive in the second half, and the game became much more even. I continued to enjoy it immensely. I played several good advantages, blew for fouls where I had to, and tried to limit my interventions. The main controversies surrounded offsides as ever - I went with the assistants in most cases, although that may not always have been right. Moreover, I was communicating with the players regularly, something which I don't always do. I felt relaxed and in control.

10 minutes from the end, I had a rare moment - a yellow card! TheoSoc were running through ahead of the defence, and one of the ChemEng defenders (who judging by his linesmanship was more used to playing rugby!) attempted to bring the forward down (in the classic 'Pro Evo' style). I was able to play the advantage, and the ball was then passed across the box and the linesman gave offside (perhaps a bit dodgy) although they were prevented from scoring by a last-ditch tackle anyway. As play stopped, I showed the defender the yellow card for his cynicism - my first yellow card in some while!

I was surprised that there were not more goals in the second half, but in the end ChemEng were able to add two more to their tally right at the end - both in the 90th minute. The first was a spectacular volley from Aaron, the second rather more scrappy from a throw-in, after which I brought proceedings to an end. The throw in had come after a rather late (but not malicious) tackle near the halfway line for which I played advantage, and I could perhaps have shown another yellow card but the game was all but over. ChemEng finished winners by 5 goals to 0.

Overall, this was another hugely enjoyable match for me to referee. It was relaxed, and I can't have given more than 10 fouls all game (and probably kept play going by playing advantage on about as many others). The yellow card was certainly deserved, if not necessary for my control of the match, although I have decided that I need to be more pro-active at times in showing cards where they are deserved. It doesn't, however, ruin a thoroughly enjoyable afternoon.

Luke was refereeing on a neighbouring pitch, and his match was abandoned after a Real Politik player went down and broke his leg early in the second half while they were drawing 2-2 with Physics. Apparently he was at least in good humour throughout the episode, but it really is a most unfortunate occurance - I recall the game in which I assisted Doug up at Hucknall Town where the player hit the perimeter wall and play had to be stopped. The match is never the same after such an injury, and obviously I hope the Politics player will get better and be back playing football as soon as possible!

Match 6 - Cripps Freshers vs Cripps Old Boys

2009-02-25T16:29:00.002Z

I was flying solo today at Grove Farm with Luke otherwise engaged, and as I arrived saw one of the Cripps players from last year who said that the freshers' match had been cancelled and so they were having an old boys game. When they met last term, we had a dramatic match with extra time, eight goals, a hatful of yellow cards and a sending off with a penalty shootout to decide it all. Today, the Old Boys had only just got a team together and played with 10 men for much of the match (and not because Doug was sending them off again!). They even borrowed freshers' players on a couple of occasions.

This game was rather more relaxed than the previous one, but didn't lack the drama. The Old Boys made a very lacklustre start and found themselves 2-0 down after two strikes in one minute. In both cases, the keeper didn't help their cause with his feeble attempts to stop the shots going in. However, they managed to pull one back in the 24th minute and were soon back to full strength, and the game became a much more even contest. The Old Boys thought they had levelled soon after but one of the freshers running the line (presumably injured and unable to play) put his flag up. Even though he wasn't in line with play, I thought it was probably right so gave the offside before the ball was put into the net. There was then controversy at the opposite end, with a fresher claiming he was fouled from behind as he entered the area. My view was obstructed, and in any case, the ball fell to another forward who toe-poked it towards goal, only for the keeper to deflect it agonisingly off the post and out for a corner. It may have been a foul, but I didn't have a clear view of it so couldn't give it. Shortly afterwards, it was half time.

The Old Boys started the half with a one-man disadvantage once again, and they only got back to full strength with about 20 minutes to go. The pace of the game was slow in the extreme at the start, but once it got going it actually became quite end-to-end. The Old Boys eventually got themselves an equaliser in the 59th minute after a nice exchange of passes. The freshers responded 10 minutes later to take a 3-2 lead. Totally unexpectedly, it was 3-3 a matter of seconds later with a looping shot from the Old Boys forward - some might say it was a fluke, I cannot comment! There were claims of a foul in the build-up, but I waved them away swiftly.

There were a couple of flashpoints, notably involving that same forward who thought he was fouled and kicked out in retaliation. I limited myself to having a word with him, but kept a close eye out for any confrontations in the minutes to come. I played some quite successful advantages through this phase of play, which the players gradually began to appreciate as the pace of the game picked up.

In the end, the Old Boys had the momentum, and took the lead with 9 minutes to go, making it 4-3. The freshers couldn't force their way back into it, and although there were claims of handball in the build up to their fifth I thought it had hit the shoulder at the very top of the arm so again let play continue. The Old Boys then had another attack as we entered stoppage time, but were fairly obviously offside so I called it despite not having a linesman. A couple of minutes later, their forward was through again but this time I waved play on and he beat the helpless goalkeeper to round off the win, and I immediately blew the final whistle.

This game wasn't quite as dramatic as the previous one, but did have more goals. Overall though, entertainment certainly wasn't lacking and I enjoyed refereeing it, a game in which there were few flashpoints or arguments of note. I tried to let the players play, and erred on the side of not giving fouls which means that, while I may have missed a few things here and there, the game flowed nicely. It was perhaps one of the more unusual games I have refereed - almost pedestrian at times yet end-to-end at others - but I enjoyed it all the same.

Match 5 - Cripps vs Willoughby

2009-02-18T16:26:00.002Z

The weather hasn't been kind to us here in Nottingham in the past few weeks, and so we've had a succession of cancellations in the world of intra-mural football. Today, finally, football returned with the first round of halls matches this term being played.

Luke was with me today, and the Cripps players invited us to referee their game against Willoughby. With no other invitations to referee (some teams clearly hadn't turned up), we tossed a coin and I got the honour of refereeing, with Luke running one line and a Cripps sub running the other.

To say the pitch was muddy is perhaps an understatement. It was pretty wet underfoot, and so the players would probably be sliding about rather a lot. This doesn't make it any easier for the referee of course, but it rather depends on how the players behave.

There were a few minor squabbles (including a highly educative debate in which two players told each other to "shut up" in sequence!), but generally things started well. Having refereed Willoughby last term, I remembered their positive attitude to playing football and that returned today, as they tried to pass the ball on the very dodgy surface, and they had the better of the opening period. It was therefore a surprise when Cripps took a 15th minute lead after a defensive error. Willoughby's weak point is undoubtedly in defence, and set pieces caused them some trouble all match.

Willoughby kept plugging away, however, and got their reward with a 37th minute equaliser. It was shrouded in some controversy, however, as there were claims of offside. The ball was played forward, and the Cripps defenders pulled out, but too late to play the striker offside (in my view anyway). He couldn't put the ball in himself, but it fell to one of his teammates who eventually bundled it home. I wasn't sure whether the second player was offside - the linesman kept his flag down (sadly it wasn't Luke on that side!) - but I went over to check with him. He thought the first player might have been offside - but I was sure he wasn't - but confirmed that the second was onside, so on that basis I gave the goal. There wasn't any real complaint, so I think it was the right decision.

Cripps then went down to the other end and scored again just five minutes later. One defender did go down in the build-up but I thought he just slipped over (given the conditions - not a surprise!), a view confirmed by Luke when I blew for half-time a couple of minutes later. Once again, there was no complaint. I was satisfied with my contribution to the first half - I had generally dealt with everything well.

That theme continued into the second half, with Willoughby having the better of play (albeit marginally) - but struggling to find the back of the net. They did manage to equalise though in the 57th minute, again a rather scrappy goal, but they all count! The rest of the game was end-to-end, with both teams fighting for the winner through the last half-hour. Both teams had chances. My contribution was minimal - the players just got on with it. It was a real pleasure to referee. The question was - could anyone find a winner?

The goal - when it came - was unsurprisingly scrappy - in keeping with the previous goals. It was scored by Willoughby in the 90th minute after a free kick was floated in, and there was an almighty scramble. I was sure there were no fouls - and once again no Cripps players complained - they were just shattered and fell on the floor in disbelief. I played about three minutes of stoppage time, but Cripps couldn't force an equaliser - in fact they couldn't even create a clear chance on goal. I then brought to an end an entertaining encounter where the outcome was never certain - but I think the better team won in the end.

The most notable feature of the second half was that players kept going down with cramp. This was probably partly down to it being the first game back after Christmas, but mostly due to the boggy nature of the pitch - the centre circle was completely covered in mud. I'm delighted to say I never pulled up at all - which must say something for my fitness! Undoubtedly, I had a good game, and I don't think there was one player who didn't shake my hand at the end. Not every decision was right, but I kept my interventions to a minimum and let the players play. There was no real controversy - an ideal first game back after a couple of weeks break.

When I go to referee, that is the sort of game I want - where the players get on with the game and I can let them do so. There was virtually no dissent, unlike the previous night when I went to see a Nottingham Senior Cup match between Wollaton and Arnold Town. Wollaton finished with nine men after totally losing their discipline in the second half and picking up a string of yellow cards. I don't think the referee did hugely well, but he had no choice in dealing with their complaints with cards. Fortunately, in my match today, I didn't have to.

The Life of Riley

2009-02-02T16:52:00.002Z

It won't take a genius to work out that yesterday probably wasn't the greatest day two of our top referees have ever had. Both Howard Webb and Mike Riley hit the headlines for their involvement in the two televised games, and for the wrong reasons.

Webb gave Newcastle a penalty which definitely wasn't a penalty. I don't think its even soft, its worse than that, as Malbranque barely touched Steven Taylor (who is not immune to practicing his theatrics on the pitch!). Given that Webb made a great call in turning down an earlier appeal where Damien Duff dived and was then cautioned, it was a disappointment. Otherwise, he had a good game, but you make your reputation on these big incidents and Webb fell down yesterday. Joe Kinnear must have been about the only one who agreed with the decision - how he could keep a straight face as he said that Malbranque "took Taylor's legs away" I'll never know!

But most of the headlines revolve around another Yorkshireman's involvement in the top of the table clash at Anfield between Liverpool and Chelsea. Mike Riley managed to eclipse Webb by making several notable errors. The sending off of Frank Lampard for being fouled by Alonso was a poor decision, although it is a little more understandable when you see the angle from which Riley was looking at the incident. However, it doesn't make the decision any better. Having sent off Lampard for being fouled, Riley's next contribution (along with assistant Mo Matadar) is to give Bosingwa a free kick for an assault (no other word describes it) on Benayoun. A kung-fu kick to the lower back surely consitutes serious foul play and deserves a red card. At least Chelsea manager Scolari was more honest than Kinnear about the decisions - saying that he disagreed with the Lampard decision but would have had no complaints about a red card for Bosingwa. Lets hope the FA do justice and rescind Lampard's card while giving Bosingwa the suspension he deserves.

Riley didn't have a good afternoon. I'm not a fan of his, mostly because his games tend to turn into stop-start affairs where there is little flow and too many unnecessary cards. Coupled with getting the big decisions wrong, yesterday will be an afternoon he will want to forget but we all have bad games, and it is how you bounce back in the next game that is crucial. Meanwhile, its time for someone other than Webb or Riley to be given a shot at one of the big games. Well, I live in hope...

Match 4 - Real Politik vs Florence Boot Old Boys

2009-01-31T18:50:00.002Z

I've decided to start refereeing some Saturday games in the Intra-Mural leagues at Grove Farm, starting today. The game I got myself assigned to was the Politics society (inventively called Real Politik) against the old boys team from Florence Boot. FB were a little late arriving, and started with 10 men as we were already running late.

I thought Politics had the better of the opening 10 minutes. They seemed to be controlling play, although there wasn't a lot in it. FB were playing on the break up to their lone centre-forward, with reasonable effect. In fact it was from one such incident that the game turned in the 11th minute. The forward was running through and was unceremoniously fouled by the Politics goalkeeper. My immediate reaction was that it had taken place inside the area, and so I gave a penalty - I think it probably was, as the only complaints seemed to be some rather desperate ones from the Politics defenders, not borne out of any sense of real injustice. The penalty was scored.

FB then proceeded to control the rest of the first half. They added a second goal in the 35th minute, and there wasn't a lot for me to do - just the odd free kick here and there and I had to run the rule over throw ins (with there being no linesmen). Half-time came briefly, but no-one wanted to stand around in the freezing cold for too long!

With FB 2-0 up, the next goal was always going to be crucial. Unfortunately, I played a role in it too - one of the FB players played a cross-field pass which hit me as I was trying to dodge out of the way. I always try to predict where play will be going, but sometimes you are inevitably unsuccessful. Of course, having intercepted the ball, it fell to a Politics player and they went forward and scored! It happened to Howard Webb in an FA Cup game a few weeks ago, so it happens to the best of us!

The goal really came against the run of play. In the end it didn't prove crucial, as FB continued to control the game, adding a third in the 78th minute. Their fourth in the 87th minute completed their captain's hatrick - there was probably a push on a defender in the build-up, but I didn't see the contact and so played on, but by that stage it didn't matter. The heads of the Politics players had dropped, and FB added a fifth with the very last kick of the game to complete a 5-1 victory.

Overall, not on of my best games, but there you go - its often difficult returning after a long break. I'm convinced the penalty decision was right, and the best team won in the end - the Politics team had a lot of huff and puff but didn't really create any clearcut chances, while FB were well organised, led well by their captain and were dangerous in attack. I tried to let the players play and let the game flow, and was pretty successful in that respect.

So I'm back in the swing of things now then, and look forward to the next match on Wednesday!

Webb's big match blues

2009-01-11T19:59:00.002Z

Today we had another of the encounters between two of the so-called 'big four' clubs - Manchester United vs Chelsea. And, yet again, it was refereed by Howard Webb. This is the seventh such encounter so far this season, and the fifth which Webb has refereed. The two exceptions are the reverse of today's fixture, which was whistled to extinction by Mike Riley, and Chelsea vs Arsenal, which Mike Dean handled well. Now, Webb is definitely our best referee at the moment, but for him to have such a monopoly over the big games can't be good. It implies that no-one else is capable of doing them, and should Webb get injured or something similar, then the authorities would have a bit of a problem. Over-reliance on one referee to do the games can be dangerous. Furthermore, there must be other referees who deserve a shot at refereeing one of these games. What must others think they have to do to receive such an appointment?

More of that later, and to the match itself. The first half undoubtedly contained the most action, and several talking points. Webb set an early marker with a harsh yellow card to Frank Lampard for a tackle which was wildly overexaggerated by Cristiano Ronaldo. The game was quite tense, which probably necessitated frequent interruptions, although Webb could have let things flow a little more, and missed several advantage opportunities. However, Webb then had a couple of big calls to make, both of which would have sent out a message to the rest of the footballing world. And he didn't make them.

Rewind seven months. Austria vs Poland, Euro 2008. An English referee by the name of Webb gave a late penalty for the offence of holding by a defender at a set piece. Fast forward again. So why didn't the same referee give a penalty today, when Carvalho clearly impeded Ronaldo at a Manchester United free kick? I don't know. The offence committed by Carvalho far surpassed any committed by Ronaldo, who was penalised for something - I don't know what. Both then received rather unnecessary yellow cards for a minor altercation. I fail to see that Ronaldo did anything wrong (and I am not a fan of his at all!). Here was a chance to give a high-profile penalty award for such an offence, but Webb wasn't brave enough.

Worse was to follow. Bosingwa was doing a good job of shepherding the ball out of play near his own goalline, when Rooney came in and hacked at him. Foul, and Webb gave the free kick. Possibly a yellow card for the foul, but perhaps not. But Rooney then decided he didn't like the decision, and in one of the worst shows of dissent we have seen all season, berated Webb. Webb tried to pacify him, and eventually Rooney calmed down, but only at about the fourth attempt. Respect? There was none from Rooney. He is a great footballer, but his temper gets the better of him all too frequently. The only way he will learn is if he is disciplined for it, which means yellow and red cards. I know Webb was trying to manage him, but it was clearly failing, so he should just have given up and showed him yellow. Later in the same half, following an incident which I will discuss shortly, Rooney dissented in a similar way and received no sanction - he could have been receiving a second yellow at that point. If Rooney's dissent is seen to be acceptable, then players on parks all across the country will do the same in their next game, giving grief to all those referees at grass roots level. This was exactly what the Respect campaign was designed to sort out, but here Webb has missed a big opportunity to enforce it, in a game watched by millions across the world.

The later incident I referred to above is the rather bizarre one which occured just before half-time. Manchester United tried to play a clever trick from a corner, by letting Rooney take it short, and then waiting before Giggs took up the ball. It is best seen on video. The officials disallowed the goal which was then scored from Giggs' cross, as the corner was deemed not to have been taken properly. It had been, but I understand that Darren Cann, the assistant referee, thought it hadn't been. Had Rooney informed him that he was taking it early, then the problem would have been solved. I would probably have done the same as Cann in the situation, although what United did was legal. In the end, they scored from the retake anyway, so it matters little.

The second half was much less eventful, albeit littered with yellow cards. Apart from the Ronaldo penalty and the corner incident, I felt United got the rub of the green (as they often do at Old Trafford). I think some of the cards Webb gave were avoidable, and he missed some opportunities to let it flow. United deserved their win over a lacklustre Chelsea.

In one word, I'd describe Webb's performance as "safe". His attitude to the game, the early yellow card, and his unwillingness to make the bigger calls described above were all "safe". And by that I don't mean good. Our top referee should be making those calls. And herein lies the problem with the appointments situation. They say that familiarity breeds contempt, and I think Webb is too familiar with handling these big games in a safe way. He errs on the side of caution all the time - if he doesn't do them all, then he might be less afraid to make some of the bigger calls. He doesn't want to upset the clubs involved as he knows he'll meet them again soon. Its time for some fresh blood on these big games - a fresh approach, and someone who will make the big calls. Today, Webb didn't do that. He shouldn't be excluded from getting these games, but they should certainly be shared around a lot more.

The Magic of the FA Cup

2009-01-05T00:43:00.002Z

Yes, its cliche time again! FA Cup third round weekend is one of the most anticipated in the football calendar, and with a good draw this weekend didn't disappoint.

Controversy was virtually non-existent on Saturday, with plenty of goals, excitement and surprises. On Sunday, however, the two games saw the officials thrust into the spotlight.

First off was League Two side Gillingham's encounter with Premier League Aston Villa. This was a terrific cup tie, with Gillingham equitting themselves very well, but eventually losing out to Villa. I thought Keith Stroud had a great game. There are theorists who suggest that the big sides get the rub of the green in these games, but I thought he refereed it fairly, used good man management, and kept control while not stifling the game.

The controversy has centred around the penalty which ultimately decided the game. I'm rather surprised at the amount of debate about it. Granted, Ashley Young was probably looking for it, but Adam Miller has made clear contact with him and bodychecked him, and Keith Stroud had a good view of this. I think anyone's instinctive reaction in his position would be to give a penalty, so I'm fully supporting his decision here. Stroud hasn't really had a good run in the Premier League yet but on this evidence I think he deserves a chance.

The second game of the day was Southampton against Manchester United. Mike Riley was in charge, and there were three incidents of note. The first two require little discussion. Danny Welbeck was offside for Manchester United's first goal - albeit pretty marginally; this isn't the worst decision ever but Simon Beck will be disappointed that he didn't flag. The red card to Patterson was correct for me - a tackle which endangered the safety of an opponent - even though he probably meant to play the ball. But a good decision from Mike Riley there.

Less good was the penalty he gave to Manchester United. While David McGoldrick jumps up as the free kick comes in, there is some doubt as to whether the ball hits his hand or the back of his head, never mind whether it was intentional. How sure was Mike Riley that it definitely hit his hand? I think he must have used some guesswork, and I don't like the idea of using guesswork on penalties, which are important decisions. If there are doubts, then its not a penalty. It was an honest decision I'm sure, but not a good one for me. At least Keith Stroud had a clear view of the contact for the penalty he gave in the early game.

Its a shame that the officials have taken centre-stage in Sunday's games, as it has slightly marred a great cup weekend. Nonetheless, controversy is part of football so I guess it all adds to the fun!

New Year...but the same old favouritism?

2009-01-02T18:00:00.002Z

I haven't written an article for a while; Christmas has seen the usual array of activities as well as plenty of football. There was a lot of discussion about the "penalty" which Steve Bennett rescinded on Tuesday in the Hull vs Aston Villa game, but the crucial thing here was that the correct decision was reached (in the end!). It may not have looked good, but the decision being correct is what is important.

The beginning of a new calendar year sees a selection of promotions among the international rankings of referees. Among them, Englishman Mike Dean has been elevated to UEFA's "Premier" category of referees. This is the second tier of European officials (behind the "Elite" list, which includes Howard Webb and Mike Riley). This should put him in line for some decent UEFA Cup games and some early stage Champions League encounters - just reward for the good season he is having domestically. Dean is undoubtedly one of our top three officials at the moment.

Webb, Riley and Dean are our top three European officials. Martin Atkinson is in the "Premier Development" category, so may well make the Elite list in the not too distant future. We have three other officials on the list - Rob Styles, Steve Tanner and Mark Clattenburg (whose future seems somewhat doubtful, given he hasn't refereed a game in some six months - clearly investigations are ongoing with regard to his personal situation).

That gives us seven continuing International officials, out of a potential ten, so January has seen two promotions onto the International list, bringing our total up to nine. First to go on has been Andre Marriner. I am delighted for Marriner. At 37, he was almost at the point where it wouldn't have been possible for him to make the International list. He has been a Premier League referee for almost four years now, but after injury problems at the start has settled down well. He will never be our 'top' referee (a Webb or a Poll) but in terms of doing a quiet, efficient job on some of the lower-profile games he is doing really well. The only moment of controversy for him so far this season was the second yellow card he gave to Wigan's Emerson Boyce at Newcastle back in November, a decision which he subsequently admitted was the wrong one. Back when he was refereeing in the Conference, he was always a safe pair of hands and did several of the higher profile games. Indeed, last Sunday he took charge of the West London derby at Craven Cottage, and again the game passed without incident. Based on performances, he deserves to be on.

The second promotion, however, is a more contentious one. When Stuart Attwell was appointed to the Premier League group of referees at the age of 25, there were murmurings. He has not had a good time since then, with the phantom goal at Watford and the chaotic end to the East Midands derby. He turned down an obvious penalty for Fulham in a Premier League game at Stoke a few weeks ago, and even in the lower leagues hasn't always made the big calls correctly. His confidence has been shot to pieces, and quite how the problem is to be solved I don't know.

Whether appointing him to the International list is a solution is doubtful. In fact, all it suggests is that the New Year signals only a continuation of the favouritism towards certain officials. Attwell is undoubtedly a good official, but whether he is one of our top 20, or now (as his International appointment suggests) one of our top 10, is very much open to question. All he will get internationally for the first year or two will be Intertoto Cup games and the like - he won't be shooting to Champions League fame - but the question is whether he deserves it. I think there are more deserving officials out there who might be doing better than he is, with the benefit of a little more experience. It is no reflection on him - more a reflection on the insistence of the powers that be to promote him quickly. His first match wearing the FIFA badge will be on Saturday, at Stamford Bridge, for his first visit as referee to Chelsea.

So, will the New Year be a new start for referees? I don't think a lot is going to change. Certainly those who are in charge have indicated that their relentless push of one poor young man from Nuneaton is unceasing - do they really believe that he is ready for what they are throwing at him, or is it now becoming blatant favouritsm? I'll let you be the judge of that.

Cup semi-final day

2008-12-03T16:47:00.002Z

I have used a lot of common football cliches in these notes lately. "The game which had everything" and "a great cup tie" have both cropped up in the last few games in which I've been involved. For today's game I'm going to apply perhaps the most commonly used cliche of all - "the game of two halves".

More on that later. As Luke had assisted me last week, I agreed to run the line for him while he refereed this week. It would be the first time I had seen him referee, although he has seen me referee on several occasions. While I was busy putting in my contact lenses, he found us a game - and it was the Broadgate Park players from last week who recognised him and, being the home team, offered him the game which he duly accepted. When we got over to the pitch, the Hugh Stu manager seemed to want to referee half of the match, but was persuaded otherwise. In any case, Broadgate were the home team and Luke and I were both neutral. Broadgate's former sports sec was running the other line, and he has usually done a good job when he has done so in the past for me.

I said to Luke beforehand that cup semi-finals are often the most difficult games to referee. The final of the cup is within touching distance and to fall at the last hurdle is devastating. No-one remembers the semi-finalists, only the finalists.

Broadgate had had a good, hard fought win last week against Cripps. What kind of challenge would Hugh Stu present them? The Hugh Stu coaches were certainly psyching the players up for the game. I had never seen so much encouragement being offered, in terms of saying how much they should want to win and so on. It would be an interesting game.

It was apparent fairly early on that the two sides had completely contrasting styles of play. Broadgate were trying to pass the ball and release the two forwards who had done so well last week. Hugh Stu were a bigger, more physical side, with several taller players who would compete in the air, notably their captain. Rallied on by the large crowd on the touchline, they started much the better. In fact Broadgate seemed totally overwhelmed. It was a goalkeeping error which gave Hugh Stu their 9th minute lead - he let it go once but regained it before it was kicked in. Luke was well positioned and was sure that no foul had taken place - the keeper had not had two hands on the ball. Hugh Stu continued to dominate play.

It was midway through the first half that I felt Broadgate were starting to come back into the game. Even so, I couldn't really see Hugh Stu conceding, as they looked very firm defensively. Broadgate were creating a few openings, but without success until the 44th minute. It was a crucial goal at a crucial time, and a good finish meant they went in level rather than a goal down. They had perhaps not merited it, but it was a vital goal. Luke, for his part, had been trying to let the game flow, but the clash of contrasting styles was proving quite challenging. I thought he was doing a really good job, clamping down where necessary but trying to let the game flow. There had been no massively nasty tackles, Hugh Stu had had a penalty appeal but Luke turned it down. The Hugh Stu players and supporters were appealing for everything, even ridiculous decisions, but Luke was keeping his composure and doing well, even though he wasn't totally happy himself! I guess you get a different view from on the side to the one you get from in the middle.

The second half began quickly. Broadgate started much the better, and were rewarded almost immediately, taking the lead within three minutes of the restart. Indeed, they came out revitalised. This demonstrated the importance of that equalising goal before half time, which had changed the game. Hugh Stu were now falling apart defensively, and Broadgate's forwards were at last having some joy. The Hugh Stu defenders didn't know how to handle them, and this was demonstrated when the left back chopped one of them down cynically in the 54th minute. It was just in front of me, and I signalled the foul and tapped my chest to indicate that I thought a yellow card should follow, and it duly did (Luke had probably decided to book him anyway). It was a good clear yellow card at a good time, and probably helped calm things down somewhat. Things were looking good for Broadgate.

But one moment you're up, the next you're down in football. Just two minutes later, Luke was pointing to the penalty spot, and it was for a Hugh Stu penalty. Despite it being far away from me, I could see the clear foul, no question, although I wasn't aware it had been committed in the area. Luke was well positioned and the penalty was scored straight down the middle. 2-2, and game on.

Yet the penalty really didn't change things. It was still Broadgate who looked more lively, and within three minutes they were back in the lead. The goals Hugh Stu conceded were dreadful - typically mix-ups between the keeper and defence, and Broadgate were indeed having some one-on-ones which they couldn't convert, and the score could have increased still further. The game settled down for a little while, but you got the feeling Broadgate were going to score again. The trouble they caused the defence was demonstrated by the yellow card Luke gave to one of the centre-backs in the 73rd minute. The Broadgate forward had been hacked at twice already, with Luke playing the advantage, and by the time he was brought down by the third hack, he was on the edge of the Hugh Stu area. After checking with me on who the player was, Luke gave him a deserved yellow card. He was followed into the book by "Craig David" - the Broadgate number 2 who had been at the centre of things last week (but was noticeably quieter this week) for a late tackle, again correctly.

But Broadgate were not to be denied, and two quick goals followed in the 77th and 80th minutes, one of which involved their forward running through from his own half and taking the ball round the keeper to score. Sandwiched in between was the game's fourth yellow card, to a Broadgate midfielder for a late tackle. With the score now at 5-2 and only 10 minutes to go, it was now game over, and Hugh Stu were beaten and knew it. They could have conceded more in that last ten minutes.

In that time came one of the two amusing moments of the game. I had been running the line for the Hugh Stu defence all game, and had given only two offsides. Hugh Stu defenders were taking goal kicks (rather than the keeper), and weren't always clearing them well or moving back up the pitch quickly. From one such kick, Broadgate picked up the ball and passed it forward. The Hugh Stu central defender then appealed for offside against the forward running towards him! Astonishingly, so did some of his teammates! Simply bizarre! The other amusing moment had come in the first half, when one of the Hugh Stu coaches told his player to "stop flirting with the ref"!

Luke didn't bother to play any injury time, and with the score at 5-2 ended the classic "game of two halves". Hugh Stu's physical style had dominated the first half, but Broadgate's equaliser just before half time was crucial and they went on to have much the better of the second half in which Hugh Stu were nothing short of dreadful. I was pleased to see Broadgate win, because they were trying to play the better football, and when they did Hugh Stu either conceded a goal or just fouled them. A deserved win for me.

I thought Luke had a really good game. The clash of styles didn't make things easy, and nor did the constant shouts from the touchlines. He called things as he saw them, kept a lid on the game and tried to let it flow. He wasn't always successful, but that was down to the players and not to him. He got the big decisions right for me too. It wasn't an easy game, and the four yellow cards were probably needed to keep control. Overall, I thought this was a great performance.

The other pertinent question then - was he better than I had been the previous week?! Possibly (an economist never says yes or no to a question like that!). The games were different - this one was more challenging throughout the game whereas I had a couple of specific incidents to deal with towards the end. I think both of us can be happy with a job well done, handling the game we had in front of us as well as we could.

That is it then for IMS football until the New Year. I haven't been there as much as I intended to this term, but when I have I have enjoyed my refereeing once again. I think I'm approaching the more challenging moments with more confidence, and keeping control much better - I always used to be rather afraid of confrontation, whereas I felt happy with my handling of last week's incident. I am yet to show a yellow card this year, perhaps I should have done last week but I was happy with how I handled things. Altogether, it has been a welcome distraction from my studies and a really enjoyable way to spend my Wednesday afternoons. The League games will return in January following the exams. Bring on the next game!

Match 3 - Broadgate Park vs Cripps

2008-11-26T16:51:00.002Z

I finally returned to refereeing action today after over a month since I was last in the middle. Doug's visit two weeks ago had given me the enthusiasm once again, and to top it all it was Cup quarter-final day. I find that one-off cup games are usually among the most entertaining, and this was no exception.

Luke was very upset that he had been turned down by Hugh Stu for their match with Derby. So we turned to Cripps' game, and they all recognised us both because of Doug's cardfest two weeks ago(!). I refereed and Luke was invited to run the line, and he couldn't be bothered to find his own match to referee and so he stayed with me. With a Broadgate sub running the other line, the Cup tie was underway.

After some early Cripps pressure, it was Broadgate who took the initiative. They took a 12th minute lead with a headed goal; there were muted claims that the ball had gone out of play but Luke was up with it and happy. Early goals are usually helpful, and can help play to settle down.

Cripps' reply was an equaliser within seven minutes. Now, if you ask them they will probably say it was a deliberate shot from the right hand side. I'll say it was more likely a cross which floated over the goalkeeper and into the net! Either way, the scores were level.

It was Broadgate, shooting uphill, who were having the better of play. Controversial moments were relatively few, with the only issues being around two challenges by Broadgate forwards who led with their foot up. They caught the Cripps goalkeeper and then a defender in the process, but I was happy that they were going for the ball and took no further action against either of them. I did, however, make a big call on the half-hour mark when I awarded Broadgate a penalty. It is unusual to say that a penalty was "coming", but it was in this game. Broadgate had two excellent forwards whose pace, ball control and passing were excellent, and I could see the tackles coming in and there being every possibility of them having their heels clipped and going down. In the end, the challenge was more blatant than that, with the Cripps goalkeeper taking out one of the forwards pretty unceremoniously. The attacker wasn't even going anywhere, so I didn't yellow card the keeper, although Luke thought I perhaps could have done. My instant reaction was penalty, and the ball didn't change course confirming that the keeper had got nowhere near it. The penalty was converted, and Broadgate led 2-1, and that was still the score 15 minutes later when I blew for half-time.

Things were going well, and I felt on top of things. Luke warned me of an ongoing confrontation between the Broadgate No. 2 and the Cripps central defender. They had just generally been on at each other through the first half. I said I'd keep an eye on it, although in the end Cripps switched markers to leave a different player marking him in the second half. The No. 2 was a good player, the tallest in that area of the pitch and winning most of the balls in the air. He also liked to talk, although most of it was harmless. He would be at the centre of things later on.

The second half got underway. Surprisingly, Broadgate started much the better, despite Cripps being 2-1 down. Cripps only got going towards the last 15 minutes. I felt I was firmly in control of things. I found myself talking to the players a lot more than I usually do, and this helped things. A joke here and there, a word in someone's ear, it was all good and I felt things were going really well. Cripps finally got going towards the end and it was becoming a great end-to-end cup tie.

Three incidents of note lay ahead of me. The first involved one of the Broadgate forwards. Luke flagged offside, and I was a little late noticing it, so he carried on running. The Cripps central defender then performed what Luke termed a 'pro evo tackle' on him, completely chopping him down. Had the ball been live at that point, it would have been a certain red card, with the attacker through on goal. As it was, I didn't have to send him off, although I wonder if I should still have booked him for the challenge. Both players were happy and we carried on.

Broadgate were a constant threat up front. They left one attacker up to chase after the clearances hoofed out of defence, and this proved very effective, keeping Cripps on the backfoot. From one such attack, the ball was blasted across the box and one of the Cripps players on the goalline stuck out a hand to it. For the first time in IMS I awarded a second penalty in one game. I thought Luke had shaken his head and wondered if I had made an error, but there was no complaint whatsoever from the defenders - my eyes hadn't deceived me! I did wonder if he should have received a card, but I'm not convinced he prevented a goal and the penalty was punishment enough. That said, the spot kick was saved by the Cripps keeper (although it wasn't a good penalty).

Things certainly got very tense towards the end as the verbal slanging escalated a little. It all started at one standard free kick in the Broadgate defence. The No. 2 who I mentioned earlier shouted something to his goalkeeper, clearly naming him, before a Cripps player (No. 7 I think) said to him "shut up, Craig David". The No. 2 did bear a passing resemblance to Craig David, but not massively so. He didn't seem overly bothered, so I let it pass. I didn't think it was particularly racist - perhaps others might have. I should maybe have booked the No. 7, but I let it go. Perhaps this was a mistake, as things then kicked off at a Cripps corner some minutes later, just as we entered stoppage time. I don't know exactly what started it, but the pair decided to start hurling insults at each other again. I was right on the spot and thought I would be able to keep a lid on it until one Cripps player came running back to get involved. I just blew my whistle continually and waited for it all to calm down. No blows had been struck, it had been pushing and shouting only, and so I decided to let it all calm down, and talk to all the players involved. When we eventually restarted with the corner, the penalty area was loaded with players, including the Cripps goalkeeper. Nothing came of it all, but I was still wary about making sure nothing started off during the stoppage time which remained.

I had intended to play four of five minutes of added time before this incident started. I figured it had taken at least two minutes to sort out, so in the end I played over seven. There had been a fair few stoppages through the half, and I think what I did in the end was a fair reflection of that. Cripps didn't really create any more chances and Broadgate had another penalty appeal which I turned down, before I brought the match to a conclusion, with Broadgate advancing with a 2-1 win.

In the end, after a fairly slow first half, I thought the match turned into a great cup tie with two fully committed teams. Conditions weren't ideal, but I think I allowed for this. I certainly gave the match as much of a chance as possible, and this probably helped it become an entertaining game. I felt it was always under control, but bubbling nicely with neither team lacking commitment. I thought I managed the game as well as I had any in my two and a bit years in Nottingham. The incidents at the end were regrettable, but I think I dealt with them as well as I could. You may realise that I could have ended up with at least six yellow cards for various offences in this game, but that is not my style and in the end I was consistent and did enough to keep the game under control. Aim achieved for me.

Altogether, a thoroughly enjoyable afternoon. A great cup tie, and I thought I gave a performance as good as I have in my time so far at Nottingham. The game wasn't the easiest, but I got through everything well. Broadgate were the better team on the day and deserved their victory, and will go through to the Cup semi-final, where I think they will play Hugh Stu.

Before I finish, I must mention one dreadful incident which occured in an East Midlands Counties League Game on Saturday. Referee Andy Parker was assaulted five minutes from the end of the game between St Andrews and Gedling Miners Welfare. He was given a full on punch by one of the St Andrews players - the full story can be found here. Suffice to say it was a horrible incident, and as can be seen we may now lose another referee thanks to the incident. Referee recruitment is difficult as it is, so we don't need things like this happening. While I may have enjoyed my game today, Mr Parker may never referee again. Players need to think about their actions at times like these, because the game badly needs referees.

Back to grass roots

2008-11-20T00:46:00.002Z

After reading this some of you will probably think I'm a bit of a sad case. Maybe I am. But I am simply a football fan and like to see football at all levels. To be a referee, I think you need to be a bit mad and a football fan really!

So, on Tuesday night, I drove across Nottingham city centre to Carlton Town FC. The game I went to see was between Arnold Town (currently unable to play at their own ground, hence the different location) and Hallam FC. The game was in the Kool Sports Northern Counties East Premier Division. To put that into context, it is the 9th tier of English football. Get to the Conference, go down through Conference North, the Unibond Northern Premier League, Division One, and you might find yourself in the Northern Counties East League. So this is football really back at its roots.

The contrast is stark. I was in a crowd of 88 at Carlton's rather odd ground, which has a stand behind one goal and very little other shelter (save for the clubhouse!). Yes, it was quiet. I could hear the players, I could hear the referee (who I thought communicated well and had a good match), I could hear what was shouted from the benches, and I could hear all the comments the fans made. It is a totally different experience to anything you'll find even as high as the Conference.

In terms of the match, it was nothing special. Arnold won 1-0 thanks to a 14th minute goal from their forward Chris Freestone who rounded the keeper and slotted it home. Hallam persevered, but couldn't find an equaliser, and Arnold could have added to their lead too. The win takes them up to fourth in the Premier division. But what matters is that I felt part of the action, and that is what made it all enjoyable. I wasn't some distant figure in a crowd, I was by the edge of the pitch following all the action.

Top level football is often thought expensive. Not so here. I paid £5 to get in, £1.50 for an informative matchday programme, and got myself a half-time tray of chips for £1. I could have had them with a pie and gravy for just £2.50. That's ridiculously cheap really! I would barely get a cup of tea for that price at the New Wembley.

In my opinion, you don't need to go to high level football to enjoy watching it. Going down the non-league pyramid may not be everyone's cup of tea, but its a welcome break for me from the hugely commercial world of top flight football. This is the players' hobby, which they put everything into, something which I am not convinced some of the overpaid prima donnas at the top do.

As far as I can see, every level of football has its advantages. For skill, excitement and quality you can't beat the Premier League. For professional football of a good standard and a good atmosphere you can't beat the Football League. But for value for money and being part of the action, you can't beat a trip down to one of those little local football clubs who survive on a shoestring. None of them should be dismissed as having nothing to offer.

I'm going to try to get round some more of the local clubs in Nottingham over the remainder of the academic year, as I believe this is where you can find the true spirit of football. I'd encourage you to do the same - don't be afraid to take a trip to your local non-league clubs. It won't cost you much, and it will give you a different perspective of what football is like.

So, am I a sad case? Possibly. Or maybe I'm just trying to get a different perspective on the world of football. I'll leave you to judge that one!

The return of the 'Little Asian'

2008-11-15T17:29:00.002Z

Today saw Doug's second intra-mural game during his visit from Malaysia. Once again, Luke and I ran the line for him as we took charge of the game between Physics Society and Chemical Engineering Society.

I said at the end of Wednesday's note that this game surely couldn't be as exciting as Wednesday's. And so it proved. The game wasn't totally devoid of action, but it was tense and at times a little scrappy (not helped by the wet conditions). The teams were clearly well-matched and that made it quite tight.

In terms of the first half, there is really very little to discuss. Doug didn't give a free kick until 27 minutes in, played advantage where he could and got most things right. He penalised foul throws consistently too. I got the usual abuse for giving correct offside decisions. No problems for any of us.

The second half continued in the same vein. Doug tried to keep the game flowing. I thought he should have got in there a bit more quickly when there was a little flare-up after one tackle although a player separated the two people involved and nothing came of it. Luke and I assisted him where we could.

0-0s are very rare, and I thought it typical that it was a penalty which separated the teams. It went to Chem Eng Soc, as a player was brought down from behind with 20 minutes to go. It looked a little soft, but I had a decent view and there was a definite foul. The offender was cautioned for dissent and the penalty scored.

Physics Soc tried to find an equaliser, and it was the 90th minute before they did so. There was a minor controversy as a ball from another game was kicked onto the pitch in the build-up, but in an IMS game I think it is best to let it go and that is what Doug did. A few minutes later, Doug brought the 1-1 draw to a conclusion.

Overall, I didn't think it was an exciting game, but for the officials it went well. No major errors or problems and just the one yellow card from Doug today. The conditions weren't difficult but for the most part the players just got on with the game and that made it easier for the three of us. An enjoyable afternoon's football, and what could turn out to be Doug's last ever game. Surely not?

The game that had everything

2008-11-12T18:24:00.004Z

We commonly see this phrase used in match reports to describe epic encounters - "this game had everything". The game I was involved with this afternoon at Grove Farm was one such encounter. On this occasion, I wasn't in the middle, as former Nottingham student Douglas Tan returned once again from Malaysia and took charge of the match. Luke was also with us, and we decided to concentrate on one game and provide a full team of a referee and two neutral assistants. We searched for a game and eventually found Cripps freshers (whose opponents hadn't turned up) who were set instead for an encounter with the Cripps second years team (who I had refereed several times last year).

These old boys matches are usually good fun. It is worth remembering that Doug's last match was between the Nightingale first and second years last June. In that game there were seven goals and a sending off on a very eventful afternoon. Surely that kind of match couldn't happen again? Could it?

The opening period was no indicator of events to come. It wasn't massively exciting, with the 2nd years taking a 4th minute lead and doubling it on 20 minutes. The freshers weren't playing well defensively. Doug tried to let the game flow and play some good advantages. I got the impression the freshers weren't particularly warming to his performance. This was particularly true when he cautioned one of them for kicking the ball away, although it was actually a mix-up over a throw in which Luke had signalled first the wrong way and had then corrected. The ball was definitely kicked away, but the whole incident didn't look brilliant.

I got a bit of stick for making three correct offside decisions against the freshers' attack. The 2nd years had an annoying habit of changing goalkeepers at regular intervals, sometimes when the ball was in play and definitely without the permission of the referee. Doug clamped down on this, although technically the correct punishment is an indirect free kick and a yellow card. Doug did show one further yellow card to a Cripps defender for a late tackle.

But the incident which probably turned the game and made it into the encounter it was was the goal scored by the freshers four minutes before half-time. It wasn't controversial, but it got them back into the game. Half-time came, and there had been no major problems for the officials.

The second half started a little slowly. There was an early booking to a second year for dissent. First blood in terms of scoring went to the second years, who pulled away to 3-1 with a goal 10 minutes after the restart, but that gain was immediately cancelled out by a reply from the freshers two minutes later. The game was getting more and more interesting. The card was out again on the hour mark to a fresher for an act of persistent dissent. Doug chooses to clamp down on this early, clearly out to enforce the FA's Respect campaign with a vengeance!

It was anyone's game now, and both teams had chances. The freshers got back on level terms with 15 minutes to go, and could well have won the game, but for a good chance missed and a brilliant goal-saving tackle by a second years' defender. The freshers thought the second years were getting some soft free kicks from Doug, with the player booked earlier in the half choosing to roll around on the floor to demonstrate the perceived softness of the decisions. Most of them were correct anyway. He was joined in the book by two further freshers for late tackles as the game wore on. But no-one could break the deadlock, and with 90 minutes up it was 3-3. There were six names in Doug's book.

The general feeling was that people wanted extra time, which was restricted to 10 minutes halves because of the fading light. The first half of extra time was uneventful, but two minutes into the second half the freshers scored. They had taken a 4-3 lead, and secured the goal which could see them win the match. But the controversy started when two of the freshers decided to take their shirts off when celebrating their goal. Both received a yellow card from Doug for doing so - a silly act. But here is where the confusion started. Players had been changing shirts throughout the game, and we had been noting down the numbers of the cautioned players. Here, one appeared to have been booked twice. Doug confirmed that this was not the case, and the second years claimed he had bottled a sending off. The defender who had made the goal-saving tackle then received a second yellow card for dissent (as his first had been too), and the second years were now a goal down and down to ten men. He tried to swap with the goalkeeper and come back on, but Luke and I both noticed. The players claimed we should just get on with it, but you can't let the rules be broken like that!

The second years were up against it now - a man down and with eight minutes to save the game. They were, however, given a huge helping hand. One of the freshers' defenders made a stupid tackle and conceded a penalty, of which both Doug and I had a clear view. He realised it was a silly and unnecessary challenge. The penalty was scored. 4-4!

A couple of minutes later, Doug brought matters to a conclusion. The game had been an extraordinary one, with eight goals, a penalty, a sending off and eight yellow cards. But of course it was not over as the match would now have to be settled by a penalty shootout.

Both teams scored their first two penalties with some ease. The next two were then missed, leaving the score still at 2-2. The freshers scored their next one, before the second years' next taker missed, leaving the freshers one kick away from winning the game. The penalty was duly dispatched to seal a 4-2 win on penalties.

Like I said, it was one of those games which had everything! I have probably not covered every incident or given enough detail, but the basics are there. Doug takes a stricter line on dissent than I do, and I have to admit that I wouldn't have handed out as many cards. However, he was consistent in his approach and thats all you can ask. If the players saw him giving out yellow cards for dissent, then they should have adopted a different attitude. There were no major match-changing decisions which were wrong either. I don't think his performance was that warmly received, particularly by the freshers. Their left back commented to me just before the end of extra time "can't you go on and referee, this guy's a pillock!" Respect, laddy, respect!

Altogether, a great game of football and I thoroughly enjoyed the afternoon. Doug promises to referee again on Saturday, and Luke and I will again assist him. It surely won't be as eventful as that game - will it?

Attwell hits the headlines again...

2008-11-06T00:13:00.002Z

Sunday's Championship encounter between Derby County and Nottingham Forest was significant for a number of reasons. First of all, it was a local derby, with the clubs having a fierce rivalry. It was the first time this rivalry had be fought out competitively for some 3 years. Brian Clough is inextriccably linked with both clubs, and the A52 road which separates the cities is named "Brian Clough Way". Suffice to say, it was a big occasion.

It was also a big and important day for the referee, who was Stuart Attwell. Yes, that's the one who didn't manage to tell that the ball hadn't gone into the net at Vicarage Road, even though his assistant said so. Oh yes, him, the Premier League's youngest ever referee, controlling his first live TV game since the Watford vs Reading debacle. The pressure and spotlight would once again be on the young man to see how he responded to all the criticism he has faced.

For most of the game, he refereed it well. He clamped down where necessary, controlled all the major flashpoints and, although there were a lot of bookings, most were warranted and necessary for his control. The first half was dull and tetchy, but things livened up after the break as Forest took the lead thanks to an own goal from Emanuel Villa. 11 minutes later, the same man drew Derby level (albeit from an offside position, something not noticed by assistant referee Shaun Procter-Green). But the big incidents were still to come.

The first came in the 74th minute, as Lewis McGugan lunged into a tackle on Paul Green. As soon as I saw it, I thought it would be a red card, and Attwell duly obliged. It was serious foul play, a dangerous tackle even if the ball might have been won. Its the sort of thing which is being clamped down on strongly. Attwell was passing the test.

The board went up to signal three minutes of stoppage time, with Derby pressing for a winner. They thought they'd scored it too, as the ball was headed in. Attwell had other ideas. He gave them a penalty instead, and a harsh one at that for a handball by Luke Chambers. The advantage would have been nice, but its not an easy one to call. Nacer Barazite's penalty was saved by lifelong Derby fan Lee Camp, in goal for Forest. Derby had suffered a cruel blow. Attwell had ruled out their goal to give them a dubious penalty which they then missed. If only Barazite had scored, then the next controversy wouldn't have happened.

But a couple of corners later, things got worse for Attwell. Miles Addison headed in Barazite's corner, but Attwell had spotted a foul. He was the only one. I could see absolutely nothing wrong with the whole thing. There had been no noticeable infringement. Players surrounded him, and the young referee who had controlled the match so well for the opening 85 minutes looked like a rabbit in the headlights, and he had frankly lost the plot. When the full-time whistle blew a couple of minutes later, everyone was staggered by what had happened. 1-1 it finished.

Would Derby manager Paul Jewell be sympathetic? Nope. And he had some justification to be annoyed. His opposite number Colin Calderwood was relieved to have escaped. He rightly pointed out that the sending off was correct, but Jewell would not be appeased. Attwell had made a total mess of those last few minutes.

For a referee to hit the headlines with the regularity with which Attwell has is not good for the individual or for refereeing as a whole. Only Rob Styles could possibly have eclipsed him this season. Having been involved in one of the worst decisions of all time at Watford, he has now made a mess of the end to a game which, for the most part, he had controlled well. It wasn't an easy game, but he seemed to be coping. Was he the right man for the job? I'm tempted to say not. He lacked the experience and authority at the end, and looked lost and out of control. Everyone can give wrong decisions, but the manner in which those last minutes unfolded suggests that these were more than just mere mistakes.

I have always thought that Attwell was promoted to the Premier League too early. He has had a very rapid rise through the ranks, and while he is undoubtedly a good referee, I don't think he is yet ready for the big time. He has failed on big incidents twice so far this season, and one wonders where he goes from here. He needs support from the bosses to rebuild his confidence - his career won't (and shouldn't) end here. What he needs now is a spell out of the limelight where he can regain the type of performances which got him to where he is now.

Unfortunately, referees are remembered only for their mistakes. Attwell is now remembered for two matches, and ones which he'll undoubtedly wish to forget. Sadly, I don't think he will ever be able to.

From Sincil Bank to Old Trafford...

2008-10-30T01:44:00.003Z

After a fairly uneventful weekend's action from a refereeing perspective, I've been to see two football matches in the past two evenings. One was a League Two fixture played in front of 4,000 odd people on a cold Tuesday night. The other was a Premier League game played in front of 75,000 people. Which left me feeling happier afterwards? You may be surprised.

The Nightingale Hall 'League Two Fan Club' of me (Dagenham fan), Andy (Bradford) and Luke (Gillingham) set out for Lincoln last night to see their encounter with Gillingham. The game wasn't massively exciting but I still enjoyed watching it. I'm used to lower league football and so don't mind if the standard isn't quite what you see at the top level. Lincoln beat a poor Gillingham side 2-0, and there was a good feeling round the ground and a good atmosphere, particularly from the away contingent. Andy and I both had a good evening, with our respective clubs winning elsewhere, while Luke perhaps didn't enjoy it quite so much.

Tonight's game was a total contrast in so many ways. My friend Nathan offered me a ticket for Manchester United vs West Ham United at Old Trafford, and I thought this would be a great (and rare) opportunity to visit the Theatre of Dreams and see the English Champions in action. They beat West Ham comfortably, with the sense that they were always capable of scoring more goals if they needed to. The game wasn't exciting. Referee Peter Walton didn't completely convince me, but made no major howlers.

Yet the whole experience left me feeling a bit empty inside. I was in the away section, and the West Ham fans to their credit sung their hearts out for the whole 90 minutes. But in the breaks between their singing a deathly hush descended on the stadium - a stadium with a full house of 75,000 people inside it. I've seen it compared to a library before, and I can see why. The Theatre of Dreams simply lacked any atmosphere whatsoever. Maybe its just that I'm used to the passion and hurly-burly of the lower leagues, but for a top level football match there was just something missing.

I've seen matches across each of the top five divisions in the past few years, and in every other game there has been some kind of passion and atmosphere evident. When I go to see Nottingham Forest play, I always enjoy a good afternoon or evening out - the football is of a decent standard and the atmosphere good. Down in League Two, everyone gets behind their teams and enjoys themselves. The West Ham fans did this - but they were the only ones at Old Trafford tonight as far as I could tell. One of the BBC correspondents wrote in his blog about finding the 'soul of football' after a game at Dagenham earlier this month, and I now see exactly what he means.

Don't get me wrong - I'm glad I went to experience a game at Old Trafford tonight, and I'm delighted I had the opportunity to do so. But as for whether I'd do it again - not for a while. I can see a good match with two committed teams, a good atmosphere and get that feeling that I'm involved in the action down in the lower leagues, and for a third of the price.

Premier League football is good - the standard is excellent, it is possibly the best League in the world and games like tonight's North London derby prove as much. But if you want a good time and a bit of a laugh, then don't neglect the lower leagues - you might just find that you enjoy it more!

Styles to retire?

2008-10-24T18:32:00.002+01:00

I don't normally write a note at this time of the week, but I feel compelled to discuss three significant developments in the world of refereeing. The second two are more international, but the first is very close to home.

Following the FA's decision to overturn the red card he gave Habib Beye in Monday night's Newcastle vs Man City game, Rob Styles is reported to be considering retirement. He clearly feels that he has received a lack of support from the FA. He is in 'emotional turmoil' apparently. I have seen no more than a brief replay of Monday night's incident. From what I gather, its not a clearcut decision either way, and perhaps there was sufficient doubt so as not to overturn the decision. But of course this comes on the back of numerous other controversies involving Styles, most recently the penalty he gave at Old Trafford. I think its an accumulation of these incidents that has made him think its time to go. He has received a lot of stick for all these decisions and it must be getting to him. His decisions have filled these notes for some time, and it has to be said that these numerous mistakes do suggest that he is not cut out for refereeing at the top level. That said, I still have misgivings about someone retiring, but if his heart is not in it, then he should step aside and let someone more motivated take his place. I'm not sure he'll be missed, perceived to be arrogant, card-happy and unreliable, but we'll see what happens and whether he actually does retire, as there has been no official confirmation yet, but I expect that now its been announced publicly he will go.

His is not the only retirement reported either. The list of referee candidates for the 2010 World Cup was scaled down to 38 this week, and one notable name is missing from the UEFA section. That name is Lubos Michel, the Slovakian who is arguably the World's best referee. Correction - he arguably was the World's best referee, as he has called it a day. He has been suffering with an achilles tendon injury, and it seems to have got too bad for him, so he has decided to bow out for 'personal and health reasons'. His performances have gone noticeably downhill in the past couple of years (perhaps in part due to the injury), with the highpoint of his career being the 2006 World Cup, when he was in his prime. He finally got the Champions League final he deserved earlier this year, but he still had six or seven years left on the International list, and I still think he could have gone far at the 2010 tournament. Anyway, he is a big loss to the world of refereeing.

Those left on the list includes England's Howard Webb, who I expect will make it to South Africa without any problems. The list contains a mixture of familiar and not so familiar names, and will be whittled down to around 20-25 for the tournament itself. I'm sure the major countries will be represented, and I will report on the list when its confirmed in due course.

Moving on, a busy weekend lies ahead of us, so lets enjoy the action again!

Match 2 - Ancaster vs Willoughby

2008-10-22T16:56:00.002+01:00

After a break from refereeing last week, I returned to Grove Farm this week (as did Luke). After a bit of teasing him about watching and assessing him, I was given the Ancaster vs Willoughby game to take charge of.

The most noticeable feature of the game as a whole (as I saw it at least) was the contrasting styles of the two sides. Willoughby tried to play the ball on the ground as much as possible, while Ancaster had a more physical and more direct style. The clash of these two approaches made it quite a tense encounter.

It was Willoughby who had much the better of the first half. They took the lead in the 12th minute, and proceeded to have several other excellent opportunities to extend that lead. They were on top of the Ancaster side who just couldn't handle their football. From my point of view, the opening period was trouble-free, although the players were not shying out of any tackles so I sensed I might need to be on my guard in case there was a flare-up. There was one late challenge, and I tried to keep the game flowing by playing advantage as ever.

Things changed in the 40th minute when Ancaster equalised. Willoughby had two complaints about the goal. The first was that there had been a foul when Ancaster had won the ball back from them in their own half of the pitch. This claim might have been legitimate, although I can't say there was any massive fuss at the time - only once the goal had been scored were there any real complaints. The second complaint was that an Ancaster forward was offside. He was in an offside position, but was coming back and was not "interfering with play" (that is interfering with play as far as the laws are concerned, whether in reality he was is another matter). The ball ran onto another forward and it was soon in the back of the net. I waved away offside complaints, and made no comment on the possible foul - maybe it had been, maybe it hadn't. Half-time followed with the scores still level, and Ancaster in the ascendency following their equaliser.

I thought Ancaster had the better of the second half too, although Willoughby had their chances. As before, the players didn't shirk the tackles, but they were largely fair as far as I could tell. I tried to make my interventions as infrequent as possible, without compromising my control. One Willoughby player made a late challenge, but he was going for the ball and a word of warning sufficed.

There were a series of claims throughout that second half for handball, including one in each penalty area. I turned nearly all of them down, as I was looking only for cases where the handball had definitely been deliberate. The players weren't clear on the rules, claiming "it doesn't matter if it was accidental, it was in the area...". I made it clear that it was down to my interpretation of what was deliberate. Some of them I perhaps should have given. In terms of the two penalty appeals, Ancaster's appeal came as a defender was turning and the ball struck his elbow. As far as I could tell his elbow was in a perfectly natural position. Willoughby's appeal came later on, as the ball was struck at a defender from no more than 3 yards away, and although it did strike his arm, his arm was in front of his chest. Given the proximity of the defender, and that it didn't look intentional, I waved the appeal away. Whatever you say about these decisions, you can say I was consistent in my interpretation, as an Ancaster player was heard pointing out after that second appeal.

Neither side could break the deadlock, despite chances at both ends, and the game finished 1-1. It hadn't been my best performance by any stretch of the imagination, and I doubt either team were particularly impressed. They probably felt I didn't give them enough decisions, and I probably did miss some fouls. However, I'm not there to please the teams, and the game was certainly not out of control - there were no major flashpoints and everyone got on with things for the most part. I wasn't massively helped by the linesmen today, and both sides kept changing their linesman, with some of them being particularly lazy. At the times where I did have to guess a bit, I got most of the things right. Overall, I'm fairly happy with my performance, even if it wasn't my best.

Luke had another entertaining game, with Nightingale losing 5-2 against Rutland in another keenly contested game. Both of us felt pretty tired afterwards - I can't be that unfit! I still enjoyed it though, which is the main thing. On to tonight's Champions League action!

An Eventful weekend!

2008-10-20T00:23:00.002+01:00

We've had everything this weekend I think! Controversies, sendings off, crowd trouble, its all been there, and some. I'll try to keep my discussion of each incident brief, so I can get through everything I want to say.

Starting on Saturday then. Two sendings off in the Premier League - for Valencia of Wigan and Davis of Portsmouth. Davis I don't think can have any complaints really. Valencia probably feels a little hard done by on his first booking but he had been warned. On the subject of the Villa game, the unsavoury incident at the end will hopefully be dealt with strongly, and the individual who threw the coin (be it at Harry Redknapp or Phil Sharp) will hopefully be banned. Villa have spoken out strongly against it so hopefully they will deal with it as appropriate.

Disallowed goals at Old Trafford and Craven Cottage. Mark Halsey disallowed Wayne Rooney's first half effort for Manchester United. While the foul may have seemed soft, Rooney's hands do go up and from Mark Halsey's less than ideal view he sees this, the defender going down, and draws the logical conclusion. A perfectly understandable decision for me. Keith Stroud hit the headlines for ruling out Kieran Richardson's free kick for pushing in the wall. Its the sort of things which probably happens week in week out but goes unpunished all the time. Stroud was probably right, but its not consistent with the general approach.

But my main focus of discussion will be Sunday's games. One incident at Hull - that being Ilunga's "goal" for West Ham being chalked off. While nicking the ball off the keeper while he drop kicks it is clever, it is not sporting. There was a similar incident last season involving Solskjaer of Manchester United, and the situation hasn't changed - indirect free kick and yellow card is the correct outcome. Chris Foy got this spot on, as the keeper is deemed to be "in possession" of the ball while he drop kicks it.

An extraordinary game at the Britannia, with Lee Mason in the middle for Stoke against Tottenham. Mason has yet to prove himself at Premier League level after two full seasons, but this performance should do him no harm. He had four key decisions to make and got all four spot on. Bale's foul and subsequent sending off were both correct, the foul being just inside the area and denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity. The second penalty was a clear cut trip by Woodgate. Dawson's challenge in the 11 minutes of stoppage time was a poor one, and even if he got a little of the ball, contact like that, with studs into ankle, is very dangerous and a definite red card. Mason was on the spot. The only downside for the refereeing team is that Tottenham's goal was scored by Bent from an offside position, something not picked up by the assistant. But Mason should see himself pick up another appointment next week following a good showing here on a day when everything went wrong for Tottenham.

Finally, I don't usually comment on games from outside the Premier League, but I will do on this occasion. At lunchtime, I watched a fantastic Steel City derby between Sheffield Wednesday and Sheffield United. A hugely entertaining game, full of incident and controversy. Premier League referee Mike Dean was at the helm. In the first half, he sent off United's Kilgallon for a challenge where he went in with a high boot. It was a mistimed challenge, although the contact of studs on shoulder persuaded Dean to show a red card. It wasn't malicious, but lets not dismiss it as clearly not a red card. Theres a clear argument for endangering safety, although perhaps less so for excessive force, but depending on interpretation you could quite easily see it as a sending off, meeting both these criteria. This incident changed the game, and Wednesday took the lead shortly afterwards.

Into the second half, and Wednesday get a clear cut penalty for a trip by Gary Speed. United keeper Paddy Kenny saves it, but moves forward off his line in doing so. Dean didn't order a retake, but frankly I don't blame him. This rule is applied with so much inconsistency that to let it go (unless a ridiculous movement) is fair enough. Its also a little unfair on the keeper - how they will save a penalty without some forward movement I don't know. Anyway, next, Wednesday's Jermaine Johnson catches a United player late with a flailing arm and picks up a booking. Arguments for a red card here, but I'd go yellow. He is then substituted and, in frustration, kicks a water bottle which goes flying into the crowd. After a pause and a bit of faffing around, Dean (in consultation with fourth official Stuart Attwell) gives Johnson a second yellow card. He is quite entitled to do this - players can be given cards while on the bench. It is the correct decision (arguably again it could be a straight red) - the bottle could have injured someone in the crowd - a stupid thing for Johnson to do. Finally, at the end, we have Wednesday keeper Grant holding onto the ball for too long, and so Dean correctly gives United an indirect free kick in the area. Pushing and shoving abounds in the wall, and theres some handbags which Dean deals with.

Wednesday won 1-0, but my description doesn't begin to go through the many chances both teams had. I actually thought Mike Dean handled the match well, letting play flow as much as he dared in a tense atmosphere. I know these views are at odds with those of the teams involved (and especially United fans) but that is how I saw it. The one decision I'd perhaps take issue with would be the first sending off - but even thats not black and white and, if it happened in Spain (for example), Kilgallon would have walked, and there would have been no argument. It just goes to show how incidents are viewed differently in this country. But a hugely enjoyable, incident-packed game, and I think neither team deserved to lose.

Pause for breath here! We've seen the best and worst of football this weekend. Chelsea and Manchester United turned on the style and played some great stuff in their comfortable wins. Sunday's two lives games saw all manner of extraordinary incidents, and were both very entertaining. But then we have coin-throwing fans, poor tackles and, inevitably, some wrong decisions. The weekend certainly hasn't been boring, and with European football again this week it seems that it won't be a boring week either!

Match 1 - Derby vs Broadgate Park

2008-10-08T16:56:00.002+01:00

I turned up at Grove Farm Playing Fields today with not a clue who I would be refereeing! In the end, while Luke went off to do Nightingale's game against Cavendish (more on that later) I strolled around and, after chatting with the guys running the Derby Hall team, was given their match against Broadgate Park.

As games go, it was a good one to start with. After a couple of early handballs (one signalled by a linesman), play settled down and I wasn't called upon to even give a foul in the first 25 minutes or so, although I played a couple of advantages. Broadgate seemed to think Derby were pushing, climbing and being overly physical, although I didn't see anything wrong. I let the minor bumps and pushes go, aiming to clamp down on the more major ones. Derby opened the scoring in the 13th minute, adding a second six minutes later. They had a penalty appeal as defender and attacker went in for the ball together, but I wasn't convinced so waved it away. They added to their tally again in the 37th minute. Broadgate's goalkeeper didn't seem totally confident, and while Broadgate had been playing some nice stuff going forward, they weren't well organised in defence. Then came my favourite moment - one of those advantages which paid off and led to a goal! One of the Derby players was pulled back but they carried on forward and added a fourth goal a minute before the break.

I thought to myself at half-time that a comeback would be pretty unlikely. Broadgate came out all guns blazing for the second half, and to their credit they had much the better of proceedings. However, a solitary 57th minute consolation was all they to show for it. A couple of other minor penalty appeals were waved away, I refused to give handball unless I felt it was deliberate, and I tried to keep the game flowing at every opportunity. There were a couple of pretty long waits before I brought play back, which bemused the players slightly, but I made it clear that I was trying to let the game flow, and wasn't simply responding to the opposition's appeals. The only time I thought about showing a card was to a Derby player whose handball broke up a promising Broadgate attack. I called him over to me, but reckoned it was more instinct than any malicious attempt to stop the attack, so I let him off with a word that the next such offence would definitely lead to a yellow card. With the score settled, I didn't need to play any added time and brought to a close a convincing 4-1 win for Derby.

Overall, as I said, a good game to get my season going. There were no particularly challenging moments, no yellow cards, and there was no animosity between the teams. I sat back, let it flow, and interfered only when I needed to - an enjoyable game and I was happy with my performance. The linesman were also helpful today - not being flag-happy and generally providing me with the decisions I needed at the right moments.

As the game finished in good time, I wandered over to see the closing moments of Nightingale's encounter with Cavendish. With five minutes to go, Nightingale were leading 5-4, having come back from 3-0 down. Luke had given Nightingale a clear penalty, and turned down a Cavendish appeal. There were two yellows cards, one late on after Luke had played an advantage (so bonus points for him there!). Nightingale held on, and Pat was pleased to see them pick up their first points. Cavendish seemed to be using it as a trial, so had a huge squad and were making constant substitutions, which probably didn't help their cause. I gather Luke did well, and he enjoyed it which is the main thing. One thing though - I will be giving him a proper whistle, as the one he was using was barely audible from the opposite side of the pitch! Timekeeping on his mobile phone doesn't look particularly professional either! But for his first outing, I think he'll be quite happy with a good performance in a competitive derby match between the neighbouring halls.

So, we're off and running then - another intra-mural season gets going. I'm looking forward to everything it has to offer, and lets hope everyone enjoys themselves!

My season begins

2008-10-07T22:53:00.003+01:00

Well, before I look forward to my own refereeing season beginning tomorrow, I'll make some brief (but belated) comments on the weekend's Premier League action. It was a much better weekend this weekend, with only three controversial incidents. Arsenal should have had a goal when the assistant flagged the ball out of play incorrectly in their match at Sunderland. Steve Bennett should have disallowed Manchester United's first goal at Blackburn for a foul by Nemanja Vidic on Jason Brown. Peter Walton correctly sent off Zabaleta at Manchester City vs Liverpool, but missed a bad challenge by Skrtel on Jo. Otherwise, a good weekend.

Tomorrow, the intra-mural football season here at Nottingham starts once again. The halls teams will all look forward to taking part in the largest such competition in the country, with the League, Cup and Plate once again up for grabs. I'm looking forward to it, unlike last year when I didn't really find much enthusiasm for the job. I guess its a matter of confidence as much as anything else, and confidence is something you certainly need as a referee. No doubt there will be controversy this year (as in the past two years), but I will simply do my best. I will, as always, try to keep a low profile, let the game flow, and clamp down only when things get dirty. I don't want to make myself the centre of attention - it is about the players and not me. I think this attitude is the only one you can adopt at this level - players get frustrated by an interfering referee. It is one which has, for the most part, been pretty successful during the past two years, and I think I am improving in my refereeing, so lets hope that this year I can continue to do so. In 15 hours, it'll all be underway once again - lets hope everyone enjoys the new season!

Picking up the pieces...

2008-09-28T23:56:00.002+01:00

Well - thats Keith Hackett's job after a disastrous weekend for referees in the Premier League, and on the back of the Watford v Reading controversy too. Matches were riddled with errors, several of them match-changing. Hackett's own position could be called into question. But first, lets analyse the key incidents.

Firstly, the Merseyside derby. I thought Mike Riley did a little better than the previous week, although at times he still stifled the flow of the game rather. Liverpool had a third goal harshly disallowed for a pretty insignificant foul. But the big controversy is Tim Cahill's red card. He dived in to the challenge, wound up by an earlier altercation with Arbeloa, though I don't think he expected the red card. Many think its harsh. That said, I can see why it was given. Cahill dives in with a lot of force and aggression - arguably "excessive force". His legs wrap around the opponent as he tackles in a scissors movement, arguably "endangering safety". Those two make it serious foul play, and a red card. Personally, I'd go with yellow, but its certainly not a totally incorrect decision by Riley - perhaps a harsh one.

Now - Mr Styles. What can I say? He has history, but yet again he's made a terrible blunder, a perfectly timed tackle punished with a penalty at a crucial time in the game. Styles had the perfect view, he couldn't have been better placed - the decision defies belief. Given the history Styles has with poor penalty decisions, maybe its time to consider his position on the Select Group of Premier League referees. Consistent errors like this can't be tolerated. More on that later.

Steve Bennett at Wigan. The penalty he gave wasn't as bad a decision as Styles' call, and Bennett didn't have quite such a good view. That said, it is the softest of penalties, and there is barely any contact. City also had a couple of good penalty claims turned down - in both cases Wigan got the free kick, rather bizarrely. The usually reliable Bennett seems to be going downhill rapidly.

Chris Foy should have given Middlesbrough a penalty. Steve Tanner should have sent off Ryan Nelson. Tottenham should have had a penalty for handball by Diarra, although Mike Dean was probably unsighted so that one is a little more understandable. But six matches with pivotal decisions wrong is not a good average, and a couple of them are inexplicable errors.

Where do we go from here then? How does Keith Hackett pick up the pieces after this weekend? I've been following this blog on the BBC website, which contains all sorts of suggestions as to how to make things better, including the use of technology, sacking Mr Styles, cross-examining referees and demoting about half the Select Group.

As I said last time, the whole culture within the Select Group seems to be wrong. There is favouritism. There is random punishment and demotion. There is public rebuking of referees which can do their confidence no good. And there is a total lack of support when mistakes are made. How can we claim that the Select Group of Professional referees has improved standards when Styles gives a decision like that? What future is there for professional referees?

What we need is some distinction between mistakes. Hackett needs to strike a balance between supporting referees and making them accountable. I have four suggestions:

Accept mistakes will be made by referees, and don't relegate people simply for odd picky things, especially if they aren't Hackett's favourites. No discrimination!
Look to see if the mistake made was avoidable. This weekend, Styles and Dean made wrong decisions. Styles had a perfect view, so it was inexplicable. Dean's view was blocked, so the mistake is understandable. If you're going to punish, do it for avoidable mistakes.
Look at the long-term view. If someone is consistently making avoidable mistakes, do something about it! (Some of you might get who I'm subtly referring to here.) The idea is to improve standards. Alan Wiley had a bad game at Stoke the other week, but its a drop in the ocean of good showings. Styles has been making bad errors for several years (see two ridiculous penalties last season). Don't demote someone for one mistake (as happened with Andy D'Urso and Matt Messias several years ago), but consider the positions of the consistently bad performers.
Bring new referees through. The Select Group is rather closed off at the moment, with few people joining. The barriers need to be broken down, giving more opportunities for the best Football League referees to make the step up. Competition is healthy! When they do make the step up, make sure they've got the experience to do it, and don't rush them (as with Stuart Attwell). Then we can see some new promising talent succeeding on the Premier League.

Does that sound implausible? Its certainly not how I see it happening at the moment. Combined with support for officials following mistakes, which I rather suspect they don't get, this should ensure some kind of decent future for refereeing in this country.

On the other hand, perhaps we need a total change of direction - with new management. Perhaps the Select Group should be abolished. Either way, if something isn't done, then I can see weekends like this happening more often in the future, which means everyone is talking about the referees and not the football.

Bannister blamed, Attwell escapes

2008-09-23T23:13:00.002+01:00

Not surprisingly, the saga of Saturday's bizarre incident in the Watford vs Reading game, where referee Stuart Attwell awarded a goal (on the advice of assistant Nigel Bannister) when the ball clearly went nowhere near the goal, rolls on. Firstly, the game will not be replayed, and the decision stands. Fairly obvious I guess - you can't change history.

But the big question now - what will happen to Attwell and Bannister? It appears that the blame is being placed firmly at the door of the assistant referee. This doesn't surprise me at all. Stuart Attwell is the rising star of refereeing, the youngest ever Premier League referee, who the PGMO (Professional Game Match Officials Ltd) have made a special effort to fast-track to the top. They clearly believe he has the ability to do really well and have a long and successful career. Here is a chance to show how a young referee is succeeding at the top level of the game. The international list beckons for Attwell in January, the next step in his rise.

It was all going to plan. Attwell had handled two Premier League games, and didn't hit the headlines. And then comes Saturday, and Bannister's intervention. The plans are in ruins. The rising star has fallen, being involved in making one of the worst ever decisions.

The argument that Attwell isn't at fault doesn't wash with me. He is the referee, and takes ultimate responsibility for any decision made during the match. Yes, to ignore the advice of an experienced assistant like Bannister would be unusual, but shouldn't be discounted. Could Attwell really not see that the ball didn't go into the goal, especially when it was so far away from it? Did the reaction (or not) of the players not arouse some suspicions in his mind? Like it or not, Attwell must take his share of the blame, be it smaller than Bannister's.

But he isn't being blamed. The PGMO don't want their plan for Attwell ruined - all the effort they have put in. Attwell's face fits, he is their future of refereeing, and they don't want to ruin it all over one decision. So they'll hide him away, and he'll come back, like nothing has happened. As for Bannister, who knows what will become of him. As it is, Attwell has an appointment for Saturday, albeit as fourth official as Middlesbrough, but its more than Bannister has.

If someone like Lee Mason or Phil Dowd had made that decision, then would the outcome have been different? I reckon so. They are referees who aren't really among the favoured ones in the Select Group, and they might be considered expendable. But not Attwell. I have nothing against him, and its not his fault that he is being favoured, but if standards are being applied consistently then he should be facing some punishment, like it appears Bannister will.

But this gives rise to a bigger question - why are we seeking someone to blame? Why this need to apportion blame and punish referees? Dermot Gallagher has made an interesting point:
"What we need to do is counsel him (Bannister). He's been on the league list for 10 years and a knee-jerk reaction of kicking him out will do him no good and do the game no good. He's made a mistake towards the end of his career but we need to look at how this occurred. We need to get his confidence back. He must be at rock bottom after the hammering he's had.''

Kicking someone while he is down does no-one any good. But the culture of the PGMO seems to be that when a mistake is made, someone has to be blamed and punished. The blame culture seems to be the way Keith Hackett runs his organisation. Now, some would say that referees need to be accountable for their mistakes, and they do. But to take this to the extreme level it seems to be at now just puts more pressure on individuals, worried about surviving on the Premier League list. It could be that Hackett is being pressured to use this culture of blaming individuals because of the perception that refereeing standards are low. Either way, the blame culture of finding someone and punishing them is, in my opinion, not the best strategy.

Problems of this sort have been around for some time. We see the same referees getting the big games, the ones who are favoured. We see referees who make high profile mistakes kicked into the gutter until everyone is happy they have suffered enough. Here we have, in one high profile incident, evidence of both of these problems. The saga will continue to run.

Clash of the Titans

2008-09-22T01:39:00.002+01:00

It was billed as the biggest game of the season so far - the top two clubs in Europe meeting at Stamford Bridge. Indeed that match was just one of the key fixtures of an eventful weekend, which also saw one of the worst gaffes yet witnessed in the world of refereeing.

But lets start at Stamford Bridge. England's most experienced top level referee, Mike Riley, was in charge as Chelsea met Manchester United. The game itself was a bit of a disappointment. Although it had its moments, it was stop-start and rather scrappy. Unfortunately Riley didn't really help it as a spectacle either.

He elected to employ, from start to finish, safe refereeing, penalising every minor infringement in order to retain control of proceedings. In terms of retaining control, this succeeded, and there were no major flashpoints. However, in terms of allowing a free flowing game of football, this approach was stifling. At various points I was shaking my head at the softness of the decisions Riley was giving, and doubtless the players were frustrated too. It appears to be Riley's style - he handles things in a way more often seen on the continent, and in Spain and Italy that sort of performance would be the norm. But in England, players and fans like to see an open, free-flowing game, and Riley's style is not suited to this.

Another advantage of the safe approach is that it should reduce the number of cards needed to keep control. Yet Riley showed eight yellows, including seven to Manchester United. Some of these were undoubtedly harsh, and it could possibly be said that if he was totally consistent in his approach he would have reached double figures. Some of them I agreed with - Ronaldo's booking, for example, for actions which showed a blatant lack of respect, as he appears an arrogant know-it-all who is far from perfect, taking at least one clear dive earlier in the game. However, the game didn't really have many bad tackles, and so for it to end up with eight yellow cards you have to feel that something has gone wrong somewhere.

At least the one big decision Riley had to make he got correct. It was the penalty appeal for Van Der Sar on Malouda, where Van Der Sar takes the ball, so I think no penalty is the correct decision.

Controlling games is one of the key skills of refereeing. Knowing when to let things go and when to clamp down is not easy. Its a delicate balancing act between interfering too much and losing control. Riley did not strike this balance at all, and didn't even give the game a chance to flow. If he'd given it a chance, seen it going out of control and then clamped down, then fair enough. However, he didn't, and its something that we've seen from him before, and is why he is not one of my favourite referees on the Premier League. Mike Dean is perhaps my favourite referee at the moment, and I always enjoy watching him. He handled the West Midlands Derby well, and although there were frequent stoppages and probably a similar number of fouls to the Chelsea game, it didn't seem that way because of the way in which Dean refereed it. He played (as always) stacks of advantages, and gave the impression that he could strike that balance better. It may not have been perfect, but it was an improvement. As referees, we need to contribute to the spectacle and not make life difficult for the players by being overbearing. Rio Ferdinand's frustration at the bizarre conclusion to the game said it all. Not a disastrous performance from Mike Riley, but certainly not a good one.

At least Riley didn't give a goal that clearly wasn't a goal, and in fact didn't go between the posts! For those of you who haven't yet seen the incident, take a look here. Referee Stuart Attwell bizarrely awarded a goal on the advice of his assistant Nigel Bannister. It is a baffling decision by the two, and while the assistant was fooled by an optical illusion, it mystifies me how the Premier League's youngest ever referee could not see that the ball didn't go anywhere near the goal. The referee takes ultimate responsibility for all decisions, and I don't why he didn't intervene and overrule his assistant here. What harm it will do to his chances of continuing the rapid progress he has been making remains to be seen.

We are not finished yet - next there is the controversial disallowed goal at Anfield in Liverpool's match against Stoke. It appears to have been ruled out for offside, with referee Andre Marriner taking the view that one of the Liverpool players interfered with play, even though he didn't touch Gerrard's free kick. Thats not an unreasonable interpretation, although the initial offside decision is marginal. It was probably wrong, but for Liverpool to blame their defeat on this one incident is ridiculous - they did after all have 88 minutes to still try and score and yet failed. Typical Benitez - an excellent result one week, a poor one the next.

I went to see Nottingham Forest play Charlton this week, and saw a distinctly unimpressive performance by young Football League referee Karl Evans. He looked out of his depth, turning down a Charlton penalty claim and harshly sending off Forest substitute Matt Thornhill in an incident-packed game. He, like Riley, was far too fussy for my liking, and Forest boss Colin Calderwood said that he felt like both teams were playing against 12 men! I could extemporise at length about Evans's performance, but I think that's enough discussion for one week! Lets hope I don't have to write as much next week!

Big Match Talking Points...

2008-09-15T13:50:00.002+01:00

Two big matches this weekend, both of them on Saturday, and both of them on TV. I found them both entertaining for differing reasons.

Liverpool against Manchester United is possibly the biggest derby match in the world. Alright, the two teams aren't right next to each other, but the two cities have an intense rivalry, as do the two clubs. It had the feeling of a local derby, with the passion, atmosphere and tension.

Howard Webb did a decent job of controlling it. Things got pretty fiery in the first half, but he rode the storm, and a yellow card for Carlos Tevez helped him to calm things down, and play settled down again. Manchester United played poorly, and deserved to lose. Their afternoon came to a bad climax at the end when Vidic was sent off for two yellow cards. The first was for a cynical foul on Robbie Keane, where some people think the card should have been red. I disagree. I think that there is sufficient doubt as to whether it was an obvious goalscoring opportunity, so I would let him have another chance, as Webb did. It was very close to a red, but not quite. In any case, Vidic used up that other chance with a stupid aerial challenge which saw him receive a second yellow and (eventually, when Howard Webb remembered) a red. It strikes me that the challenge was similar to Kovac's one on Joe Cole in the England game during the week. Anyway, a deserved red card and a good performance from Howard Webb.

The second big game didn't go quite so well for the referee. Manchester City, with their new found wealth and new signing Robinho, took on Chelsea. It was an open, entertaining encounter, with both sides trying to play football. Robinho got his dream debut goal, but Chelsea performed well and deserved their win. Mark Halsey didn't do so well.

He gave rather too many minor free kicks for little infringements, which was infuriating at times. He played advantage well, including on Chelsea's goal, but thats about the only positive. Chelsea should perhaps have had a penalty for a push by Richards on Anelka. Altogether, not ideal, but not disastrous. And then Halsey sent off John Terry.

This is a very strange decision. John Terry does bring Jo down with a cynical foul, a gentle rugby tackle I suppose. However, it is in the centre circle, and one or even two defenders are covering. If Vidic stayed on at Anfield, then Terry cannot be sent off for denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity - there is massive doubt. But Halsey has said the sending off was for serious foul play.

That makes it even more mystifying. For serious foul play, a player has to use excessive force or endanger an opponent's safety in his tackle. The challenge, while cynical, did neither of these! I know some people would like to see fouls of this nature punished with a sending off, but the laws don't allow for it, and if the card is for serious play then I don't see how it won't fail to be overturned. A rather bizarre decision, and not a good evening for Halsey.

So, two big matches, one of which went well, the other not so well. The matches keep coming too, with the start of the Champions League group stages this week, followed by a West Midlands derby and Chelsea vs Manchester United on Sunday. Doubtless there will be something to discuss!

Excellent England!

2008-09-11T17:13:00.003+01:00

Did anyone expect me to write that as a title? I said on Saturday that if we came out of these two games with six points then it was mission accomplished for Capello. Given yesterday's performance, it was more than that. It was the best England performance for well over two years, and I actually enjoyed watching it!

I went to the Czech Republic friendly less than a month ago, and came home very concerned. There was no shape to the team, and no passion from the players. Capello, to his credit, made the necessary changes, and it worked! Beckham showed he was past it, so a brave decision to play Walcott was made, and it paid off! Lets hope this isn't a one-off from Walcott. Gerrard's absence clearly helped, and the midfield pair of Lampard and Barry were good if not exceptional. What happens when Gerrard returns remains to be seen. Joe Cole deservedly got his place in the team, and did well. Heskey worked well with Rooney, who also did well. The whole team's performance, most importantly, was good. After weathering the early storm, England took the lead, and always looked in control. The sending off didn't change anything, and the win was comfortable.

Refereeing the encounter was Lubos Michel. The match wasn't particularly easy to referee, being full of incidents. I thought Michel controlled the game very well, letting it flow where he could in the first half (notably on Simunic's yellow card, where he played a good advantage before booking him), but clamping down more when things got heated in the second half.

Lots of big decisions though, and this is where Michel fell down. Heskey had a first half penalty appeal, which is a tricky one. You don't often see them given, but that doesn't necessarily make it right, and it did look like he was pulled down. Simunic should have walked in the second half for a cynical block on Rooney, which would have earned him a second yellow card. Inexplicable really once Michel has given the free kick. The Croatian goal shouldn't have stood - there was a high foot in the challenge with John Terry in the build up. On a more positive note, the decision to rule out Lampard's goal appeared correct for a foul off the ball by Heskey.

But the most interesting incident is the sending off. Opinions seem to vary on this - I heard a radio report last night describe it as "harsh", yet several internet reports suggest it was correct! I subscribe to the former view I think. Kovac, as far as I can see, has jumped up to challenge for the ball, not to deliberately elbow Joe Cole. Indeed, I don't think he has used an elbow, and he actually caught him with a flailing arm. I don't think there was deliberate malicious intent. That said, given that the incident occured in a challenge for the ball, it would be viewed as "serious foul play" if Kovac is sent off. For this to be correct, he must have used "excessive force" or have "endangered safety" in his challenge. It could easily be argued that, given Joe Cole's injury, he has used excessive force and his safety was most certainly endangered! But I worry about judging challenges merely by the injuries they cause - many harmless challenges can lead to serious injuries while players suffering horrendous challenges can escape without injury. Overall, I'd suggest a yellow card for recklessness, but not a red. In any case, Simunic should have walked less than five minutes before, and the red card was clearly coming, but I don't think it was correct.

Given the number of big decisions that Lubos Michel faltered on, it can't really be considered a good showing. He has really gone off form in the last 12 months - at the 2006 World Cup he looked imperious. The Champions League final wasn't his finest hour, and nor was Euro 2008, and he needs to recapture some of his form of previous years to put himself back among UEFA's elite. Not a good night for him, but a great night for England.

Looking forward now, we have two intriguing TV matches when the Premier League returns on Saturday. Liverpool vs Manchester United is always fiercely contested, and Howard Webb will unsurprisingly be in charge of this one. Manchester City vs Chelsea is the battle of the big spenders against the even bigger spenders, and it will be interesting to see how the now moneybags Manchester City perform. Mark Halsey should hopefully handle that one in his usual understated manner. Lots to look forward to then!

Unconvincing England

2008-09-08T10:39:00.002+01:00

So, the pressure was on. England got the result they needed in Andorra, but probably not in the way they wanted it; in fact it was probably one of the most depressing games of football I've ever seen.

It was always going to be that way though. Andorra decided that defence was the best form of attack, and put 11 men behind the ball for most of the game. They did everything possible to stop England playing. And England had no reply. They couldn't find some other way to break Andorra down and only a couple of quick goals from Joe Cole, who must be due a place in the starting line up, saved England. To be honest, I don't blame the team too much for this performance. Andorra did make it a niggly, difficult kind of game, and at least England did the job. How things go against Croatia on Wednesday is far more important. If we come out of that with six points out of six, then you'd have to say its been a successful week for England, regardless of the performance on Saturday.

Anyway, the man in charge in Barcelona on Saturday was Turkey's Cuneyt Cakir. I'd never seen him referee before, and so was interested to see how he'd handle it. The nature of the game meant that it would probably be niggly, stop-start and indeed a more challenging game than the one in Zagreb on Wednesday. Overall, he did a pretty decent job.

Positives - and there are several. He played some good advantages. He wasn't conned by the Andorrans, who seemed to make the most of any slight contact, notably the accidental contact by Defoe on the Andorran keeper in the first minute. He dealt with that pretty well and without unnecessary recourse to the notebook. Indeed, he never went to book people unnecessarily, while also not missing any obvious bookings. One of the yellow cards was for an Andorran waving an imaginary yellow card, which is something people should be booked for more often. I'm not sure the referee could speak a lot of English or Spanish, but he let his body language do the talking, and that seemed to be effective too.

The main negative was his use of the whistle. He blew it, but every time it was a long blast - there was no variation. In order to use the whistle most effectively, you need to vary its tone and length - a short blast for minor offences just to stop play, long blasts for major fouls and confrontations. Players will recognise then how serious the referee is about something when there is a major incident. A subtle point maybe, but still irritating!

I'm not saying the referee saw everything or got everything spot on, but he handled a difficult match pretty well. There wasn't a chance for him to shine much by contributing to a fast-flowing attacking game of football, but it was certainly not a bad showing, and on this evidence I'd be pleased to see Cuneyt Cakir's name appear again for European encounters. He was better than the England team, at any rate.

Unexpected scorelines

2008-09-01T11:22:00.002+01:00

Last weekend was a pretty quiet one as far as controversy goes, so I didn't write, but we have a bit more to discuss concerning this weekend's Premier League games.

The first thing to say though - the Premier League is certainly not predictable! Last season, you got the feeling that you could comfortably predict the way many of the games would go. This season, things seem quite different. An imperious looking Chelsea fell back to earth with a drab draw with Tottenham. The previously pointless Spurs looked in trouble last week, losing to Sunderland. This week, Sunderland looked poor, losing easily to a Manchester City side who lost to Aston Villa on the opening day, an Aston Villa side who then lost to Stoke! Hull started brightly, but fell to a Wigan side who were previously pointless but absolutely thrashed them. Portsmouth won unexpectedly easily at a troubled Everton. The results don't always seem to go the way you'd think, which is excellent, making the Premier League much more watchable!

Anyway, to the analysis of controversy. West Ham had a goal wrongly disallowed against Blackburn, with Matt Derbyshire being level with the last defender and therefore not offside - I guess the assistant referee was unsighted, in that Derbyshire blocked his view of the defender - an unfortunate error. The penalty awarded to Blackburn by Mike Riley was correct though.

The worst performance of the weekend was at Sunderland. Here, Chris Foy made a series of mistakes - there weren't any big decisions wrong, it was just a poor, inconsistent performance. Foy is usually reliable and understated in his ways, but he just lost his way a little bit, losing control and not giving obvious fouls. Everyone has a bad day at the office from time to time, and for Foy this was one such day.

On a more positive note, Mike Dean was on the spot to make two correct calls at Middlesbrough - namely sending off Stoke's Amdy Faye for a dreadful challenge and then later awarding 'Boro a penalty. In both cases he was excellently positioned to make the correct decision.

There were several contentious goal-line decisions this weekend too. Wigan's fifth goal at Hull was one such decision, and I think Amir Zaki's shot did just cross the line, although the assistant referee was not in line with it so must have used some guesswork here. Portsmouth's third goal also came courtesy of a shot rebounding off the crossbar - Defoe's shot might have crossed the line but it isn't certain, and in any case Peter Crouch made sure. At Bolton, Kim's shot also rebounded off the crossbar, but I don't think this one did cross the line. Ishmael Miller should have put in the rebound for West Brom, but messed it up. These three situations show that video evidence isn't totally conclusive in any case; a chip in the ball seems the only answer to solving this problem.

Now we have a two-week break for the Premier League as we turn to the first World Cup qualifiers for 2010. I went to see England's friendly with the Czech Republic a couple of weeks ago and the signs aren't promising. Capello still has some work to do to make us perform convincingly, and the match in Croatia will be a real test. We'll just have to see what happens!

The Opening Weekend

2008-08-18T11:33:00.002+01:00

Well, it appears that my wish at the end of my last post was granted - most players did get on with the game this weekend! This made it an excellent weekend football wise, with not a single Premier League red card and only four in the rest of the Football League. It also made for some entertaining games and a few surprises along the way. Lets discuss the key incidents.

Arsenal vs West Bromwich Albion - Howard Webb
A trouble-free start for Howard and team here, with not a yellow card in sight. However, I have to say that I felt Webb interfered a little too much in proceedings, giving free kicks for the most minor fouls (Miller on an Arsenal defender springs to mind), missing the odd advantage and fussing over blades of grass when it comes to positions from which free kicks are taken. In a tense and difficult game these would help him keep control, but in an easy game like this they were unnecessary. I think Webb has become a little over-fussy at times since his rise to the top in the past couple of years - I'd prefer to see the Webb of two years ago, who let things flow more. But no major errors, a good if not outstanding performance.

Middlesbrough vs Tottenham - Martin Atkinson
Only one incident of note here - David Wheater's disallowed first half goal. There was a fair bit of tugging going on by both parties, and in such a situation the defender nearly always gets the decision. Its unfortunate really, as I can see what Martin Atkinson saw, but it was six of one and half a dozen of the other if the truth be told. Atkinson has admitted his mistake and apologised, and thankfully it didn't affect the result.

Chelsea vs Portsmouth - Mike Dean
I thought Mike Dean missed a few things here and there - including not punishing Deco more severely for his early poor challenge, giving just a free kick. But the main issue of contention will be the penalty awarded to Chelsea, on the advice of assistant referee Mo Matadar. Distin's hand is away from his body and does stop the ball going across the area. But is it deliberate? I'm tempted to say not, and the look on Distin's face too suggests that he knew nothing about it. This is one of those decisions which falls in the grey area as to what is and isn't deliberate. In such cases, I'd err on the side of caution and not give the penalty, but can totally understand the argument in favour of giving it. A good spot from Mr Matadar, whether it was correct is open to debate.

Manchester United vs Newcastle United - Mike Riley
Two penalty claims here, one for each side. Manchester United's claim that Milner handled Giggs' free kick was turned down correctly in my opinion by Riley. The ball was struck at such a pace that Milner could do little about it hitting him anywhere, so I don't think you can class that as deliberate and give a penalty. Newcastle's claim involved Vidic bodychecking Jonas as he ran through. This was a clear foul missed by Mike Riley - Vidic had no intention of playing the ball. However, I think the offence was just outside the area, so it would have been a free kick and probably a yellow card had it been given.
Otherwise, I thought Riley was excellent, didn't miss anything and handled things very well. Mr Rooney obviously wasn't listening when it came to the campaigns against dissent, as he didn't seem to be behaving any differently, although I guess it was frustration, caused by an excellent showing from Newcastle.

Overall, a decent start then. I think a few of the referees might have been slightly off the pace - just like the players, referees can sometimes take a while to get into the swing of things at the start of the new season. I'm sure things will settle down, and it should certainly be an interesting season. If you want tips from me, I'd go for Chelsea for the title, the big four to be the top four and probably Aston Villa in fifth. As for relegation, I think West Brom have the best chance of surviving of the three promoted clubs, and I fear for Stoke after a dreadful start for them.

Get on with the game!

2008-08-15T16:02:00.003+01:00

The kick-off of the Premier League season is now less than 24 hours away. As expected, four of the more experienced referees have been given the four TV games. Howard Webb will blow the opening whistle of the Premier League season at the Emirates tomorrow, with Alan Wiley taking the trip to the north-east for Sunderland's evening clash with Liverpool. On Sunday, Mike Dean heads to Stamford Bridge for Chelsea's opener, with Mike Riley at Old Trafford for Manchester United's clash with Newcastle. Four experienced performers there who should get the season off to a good start. I hope that the two newcomers, Mike Jones and Stuart Attwell, will get Premier League appointments soon.

Meanwhile, the Premier League have launched their Get on with the Game campaign, adding support to the FA's Respect agenda. It is along roughly the same lines - encouraging discipline among players towards referees and their fellow players. The key action points of the campaign are:

Charters signed by Chairmen, Managers and Players, agreeing that all have a shared responsibility to improve the image of the game.
Team Captains and Senior Coaching Staff to meet with the referee before each game to set out the agenda for how the match will be controlled and build a rapport.
Referee to use the team captain during the game to help control other players, giving warnings and so on.
New "Get on with the Game" flag to lead the teams onto the pitch before each game.
Official fair play handshake to continue before each game.
TV monitors to be removed from the technical area so fourth officials and managers cannot see replays of incidents
Three TV channels to each employ a refereeing expert to provide a referees' perspective on key incidents. The three experts are Dermot Gallagher for Sky, Paul Durkin for the BBC, and PGMO General Manager Keith Hackett for Setanta.

Overall, I think this is a positive campaign. Pure publicity stuff like the Charter, fair play flag and handshake are mere formalities, and will probably not make too much difference. However, the adjustment to how referees control the game, using the captains, should hopefully help to reduce incidents where players have a go at the referee. The presence of TV monitors in the technical area has been a problem for referees for some time, making it difficult to control managers, so that is a good move to get rid of them. The best idea of them all (in my opinion) is the allocation of the three refereeing experts to the TV channels. Three respected figures who can provide a referees' perspective on matters should help to improve the image of refereeing. However, we have to see the experts used properly, given a chance to have their say, and not just brought out once in a blue moon. For the experts, they cannot merely support the referee in every case, otherwise they will lose credibility. So, there are some conditions for the scheme to work, but if it does it should be a very positive addition.

It is good to see action from the very top of the game, encouraging more respect and trying to improve the game's image. How this actually translates to what happens on the pitch remains to be seen. Lets hope that, when Howard Webb blows the first whistle tomorrow, the players get on with the game!

The Curtain-Raiser

2008-08-12T13:04:00.003+01:00

So the beginning of the Premier League season is fast approaching, and pre-season is almost at an end. What can we say about Sunday's Community Shield encounter?

Peter Walton took charge, and while his general control of matters seemed fine, he got it wrong on two key decisions. Firstly, Carlos Tevez was definitely fouled in the penalty area by Hermann Hreidarsson, who grabbed hold of his leg. That said, it wouldn't have been an easy offence to spot, and from Walton's angle it probably looked like Tevez was just going down easily. Tevez then reacted to this by grabbing Hreidarsson by the throat, for which he should have been sent off. I'm sure that if any of the officials had seen it, he would have been. So, while these two key decisions were both wrong, it was understandable, as they were both difficult to see.

Walton was also out on clear instructions to get the FA's "Respect" campaign going. He did this, cautioning two players for dissent in the first half. If this kind of line carries on, then hopefully players will get the message and start to show more respect for officials. However, the cynics would suggest that this sort of thing will last barely a month and then we'll be back to the bad old ways, where officials get complained at and abused at will. The promise of FA backing should hopefully see an improvement, at least for a while.

I was delighted to see Dagenham register an excellent 6-0 win over a woeful Chester side on Saturday, an excellent start for us. There are Carling Cup ties and European qualifiers this week, but everyone is looking to Saturday, and the kick-off of the Premier League season. The referee appointments have not yet been released, but I'd expected to see four of the more experienced officials on the four TV games, each of which involves one of the 'big four' clubs. Lets hope its another exciting season!

Welcome - Season 2008/9

2008-08-08T17:58:00.002+01:00

Welcome to Tales from the Ref Online! Many of you may be aware that I've been posting notes on facebook for sometime, so its time to take it online, ready for the start of the new football season.

As always, the curtain raiser will be the Community Shield on Sunday, although the Football League season kicks off tomorrow. Mark Clattenburg was originally appointed to the Community Shield back at the beginning of July, but has now been replaced. Clattenburg has been suspended, as he has run up significant personal debts. This will be investigated, and hopefully he'll be back refereeing before too long. It is difficult to comment on what has actually happened, as it would be mere speculation. Meanwhile, Peter Walton has been chosen as his replacement, and he will have Ian Gosling and Dave Richardson assisting him, with Andre Marriner as fourth official.

Although a virtually meaningless game for the two clubs, the Community Shield does have some importance from the point of view of the officials. It sets the standard for the season - giving an impression of how things might go when the Premier League kicks off next weekend. Walton has the responsibility to get things off to a sound start, and following a good season last time out I'm sure he will.

Walton actually reached the retirement age of 48 at the end of last season, along with Uriah Rennie. However, both appealed and have subsequently been retained in the Select Group of Premier League referees. Walton did have a very good season last year, his best on the Premier League yet, but Rennie has been troubled by injury of late. Hopefully he can settle down and get back into the groove.

There are also two new arrivals onto the Select Group. The two individuals could not have more contrasting levels of experience. Mike Jones has been on the National list of Football League referees for some 15 years, and has been one of the most consistent performers, with regular appointments to the Championship and to the Play-offs, including the League Two final in 2007. He is still under 40, so while he probably won't be able to referee internationally he can hopefully have a long and successful time at the top. In contrast, Stuart Attwell secured promotion to the Select Group after only one year refereeing in the Football League. It was, by all accounts, a successful year, culminating in the League Two play-off final at Wembley, which he handled very well. His promotion to the Football League came on the back of further successive promotions, so he can clearly adapt to rises up the ladder, but whether he can adapt as quickly to life in the biggest league of all remains to be seen. My personal opinion is that he should have perhaps had one more year on the Football League; it will be very interesting to see how he does. At only 25 years old, he is the youngest ever Premier League referee, and the international list will surely beckon for him within a couple of years.

So, thats whats changed in terms of personnel. "Respect" is clearly the buzz word of the moment, and the FA's Respect Campaign hopes to combat unacceptable behaviour at all levels of the game. The example needs to be set from the top level downwards; we'll see how that works too.

Meanwhile, I'll be off to watch Dagenham & Redbridge's League Two opener with Chester City tomorrow, before catching the Community Shield highlights on Sunday. I'll return then with some comments on the weekend's action.