Cup semi-final day

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

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

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'

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

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...

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...

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?

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

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!

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

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

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...

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

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

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...

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!

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

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

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

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!

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

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

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.