24hoursfromtulsehill Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Just watching the highlights of Fulham v Blackburn on MotD. Right. The first action shown was the ref playing an advantage. The ref featured heavily throughout the highlights of a match that finished 3-2. The post-match punditry was about the ref. If I'd played in that match I might be wondering why the ref is getting all the attention in the highlights package. Time was when you'd get Motty saying, "And today's referee is Mr A Smith of Aldershot," whereafter he would be referred to as "the referee". Now it's "Mark Clattenberg" this and "Mark Halsey" that. Time to re-anonymise refs. It's not about them. It's never about them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLatics Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Honestly, there's nothing more that we hate than being talked about after a match!! You can't say "it was a penalty but it shouldn't have been" - what a load of rubbish! The defender was recklessly holding the forward, which is a PK and a booking! Pundits should have to take the Referee's exam before they can pundit, so you don't get the Andy Grays of the world saying things like "Well, the lad didn't deliberately hit the ball with his hand, but he got an advantage, so that should be a free kick", when the Laws say the exact opposite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLatics Posted March 5, 2011 Share Posted March 5, 2011 Refs achieving excellence like Howard Webb, and going through what Halsey did should be recognised for it, but not to the extent where the commentator is saying their names every 5 minutes! If a ref comes with a reputation, everyone will have a preconceived idea about their ability, and decide that he's had the worst game ever after a throw in at half way that might have possibly taken the slightest deflection, or something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted March 5, 2011 Author Share Posted March 5, 2011 Honestly, there's nothing more that we hate than being talked about after a match!! That might well apply to you but I'm not sure about the Clattenbergs of this world. In another bit of commentary, Motty mentioned that Clattenberg received a supportive phone call from Gerard Houllier. How did Motty know that? There's only two people involved in a phone conversation. I agree about the pundits. They don't know what they're on about most of the time. If they're going to talk about the referee though, he should be referred to exclusively as "the referee". I think it only encourages them otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zorrro Posted March 6, 2011 Share Posted March 6, 2011 There's only two people involved in a phone conversation. Not if your name's Andy Coulson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.