Referees Blatantly Ignoring The Rules Of The Game

[King Kev]

When were referees given the power to change/ignore the rules of the game?

Yesterday, we were denied a certain goal when Bunn used his hand to stop a back-pass from Garrido going into the net. However, the referee and his assistant decided to ignore this infraction and took no action other than to award us a corner. Why are they allowed to get away with this?

It is one thing for a ref to be hopeless and to make (many) incorrect decisions, but it is quite another for him to blatantly ignore the rules that he is paid to enforce.

He should be sacked.

[Wonderwall]

When were referees given the power to change/ignore the rules of the game?

Yesterday, we were denied a certain goal when Bunn used his hand to stop a back-pass from Garrido going into the net. However, the referee and his assistant decided to ignore this infraction and took no action other than to award us a corner. Why are they allowed to get away with this?

It is one thing for a ref to be hopeless and to make (many) incorrect decisions, but it is quite another for him to blatantly ignore the rules that he is paid to enforce.

He should be sacked.

This fella was shocking yesterday, totally useless and I reckon he will get demoted after that display.

[john@staustell]

No, he would get demoted except he was reffing us. He'll get a gold star now.

[City64]

The refs / officials only play to one rule ......

Purple nose piss cans rules !!!!! When he fucks off we all might have a level playing field !!!!!

[Bear60]

The refs / officials only play to one rule ......

Purple nose piss cans rules !!!!! When he fucks off we all might have a level playing field !!!!!

I sincerely hope he fucks off soon , the game will be much better and more pleasant when he goes , I just find myself being consantly wound up by him influencing the ref's and the higher archy of football his departure cant come quick enough for me he is bad for my health.

[Rag_hater]

I think that you have to consider that the word deliberately is in the rule and what a lawyer could do with that if it ever got that far.

[Beefymcfc]

Anybody think Garrido was doing his old club a favour? That one came right out of the Blue.

[Douglas Higginbottom]

Is there still an assessor in the stands for referees at prem games? I would fascinated to read his report if they are. My guess he wouldn't get a bad report!

Yes there was the Garrido thing and ,you never know, the Vinnie challenge that lead to the 2nd goal but possibly overall he would be considered to have had a good game. For the avoidance of doubt I thought he had a shocker which culminated in adding virtually 2 minutes for Aguero walking off slowly.

[Pretty Boy Lee]

I was fuming at the time, arsehole commontators said nowt as usual tho. Surely it's a free kick on the goal line?

[Im_Spartacus]

Is there still an assessor in the stands for referees at prem games? I would fascinated to read his report if they are. My guess he wouldn't get a bad report!

Yes there was the Garrido thing and ,you never know, the Vinnie challenge that lead to the 2nd goal but possibly overall he would be considered to have had a good game. For the avoidance of doubt I thought he had a shocker which culminated in adding virtually 2 minutes for Aguero walking off slowly.

That last bit would be fine if the rules were stuck to consistently, but as we saw against the rags, more often than not, no time is ever added on for substitutions, allowing the opposition to run down the clock time wasting

[Ted Hughes]

Is there still an assessor in the stands for referees at prem games? I would fascinated to read his report if they are. My guess he wouldn't get a bad report!

Yes there was the Garrido thing and ,you never know, the Vinnie challenge that lead to the 2nd goal but possibly overall he would be considered to have had a good game. For the avoidance of doubt I thought he had a shocker which culminated in adding virtually 2 minutes for Aguero walking off slowly.

That last bit would be fine if the rules were stuck to consistently, but as we saw against the rags, more often than not, no time is ever added on for substitutions, allowing the opposition to run down the clock time wasting

And there is the problem; when you have the rags needing the game to finish & the 4th official telling the ref to get everyone off the pitch early. Then a City player banned for abusing him. Then we see a close up of Rooney abusing a match official but no action. Then we see RVP stick his head in a geezer's face but no action. Then we have Ferguson coming onto the pitch to slag the ref, then the linesman: no action. Then we see Mancini getting pulled up for a bit of a joke comment & Nasri sent off for a non event headbutt.

Consistency does not exist when certain teams are involved & it usually kicks in at its worst at crucial moments. Remember our encounters with Utd & Liverpool this time last year ?

Another reason unfortunately, why I think we will struggle to get those 6 points back; it's around about this time when the refs kick in.

[Cocacolajojo1]

When were referees given the power to change/ignore the rules of the game?

Yesterday, we were denied a certain goal when Bunn used his hand to stop a back-pass from Garrido going into the net. However, the referee and his assistant decided to ignore this infraction and took no action other than to award us a corner. Why are they allowed to get away with this?

It is one thing for a ref to be hopeless and to make (many) incorrect decisions, but it is quite another for him to blatantly ignore the rules that he is paid to enforce.

He should be sacked.

I actually hadn't thought of that but you're right, that was very much against the rules. Strange when you mention it. Did the English commentators pick up on it because the Swedish guy didn't?

[dazby]

It could be argued that the back pass wasn't controlled, so that the keeper was able to use his hands to make a save.

For the millionth time, there are no rules to football. There are laws.

[john68]

It could be argued that the back pass wasn't controlled, so that the keeper was able to use his hands to make a save.

For the millionth time, there are no rules to football. There are laws.

...and it took a fuclin Kangaroo soccer fan to correct you...Sheesh!

You embarrassed Lee?

[Pretty Boy Lee]

...and it took a fuclin Kangaroo soccer fan to correct you...Sheesh!

You embarrassed Lee?

Nah he's a goalie, that outranks country of residence.

[King Kev]

It could be argued that the back pass wasn't controlled, so that the keeper was able to use his hands to make a save.

For the millionth time, there are no rules to football. There are laws.

Here is a link to the part of The FA's website that deals with the RULES and Governance. The Laws of the game form only a part of this.

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance

[carl_feedthegoat]

It could be argued that the back pass wasn't controlled, so that the keeper was able to use his hands to make a save.

For the millionth time, there are no rules to football. There are laws.

Here is a link to the part of The FA's website that deals with the RULES and Governance. The Laws of the game form only a part of this.

http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance

Your dealing with a cabbage...good luck.

[frozen_pea]

Personally I can understand why it wasn't given.
The laws/rules state it has to be intentional. Although we was clearly trying to knock it back, a looping pass would not likely have been intentional.
I know we can't know a players intent, and it's a problem with the rules, however if that was us, would you have been happy if Zabs had done that and it was given as a free kick?

I like the fact Mancini does highlight these though. He gets in trouble for making a joke, so the next match makes another joke (about the rules change) yet is unrelenting on criticising referees when they need to be.

I used to get angry at so many decisions that we didn't get / given against us, until I started looking at it as: How would I feel if that was the other way round.
So if it was our player fouled or if the freekick / penalty given against us, how would I feel?

Looking at the freekick for their goal, I wouldn't have expected one for us. So in my eyes, shouldn't have been a freekick.
If the Aguero penalty incident had been Kompany on the floor after a challenge and a Norwich striker fell over his body, probably would have seen it as a bit harsh.

[sidSmith]

Personally I can understand why it wasn't given.
The laws/rules state it has to be intentional. Although we was clearly trying to knock it back, a looping pass would not likely have been intentional.
I know we can't know a players intent, and it's a problem with the rules, however if that was us, would you have been happy if Zabs had done that and it was given as a free kick?

I like the fact Mancini does highlight these though. He gets in trouble for making a joke, so the next match makes another joke (about the rules change) yet is unrelenting on criticising referees when they need to be.

I used to get angry at so many decisions that we didn't get / given against us, until I started looking at it as: How would I feel if that was the other way round.
So if it was our player fouled or if the freekick / penalty given against us, how would I feel?

Looking at the freekick for their goal, I wouldn't have expected one for us. So in my eyes, shouldn't have been a freekick.
If the Aguero penalty incident had been Kompany on the floor after a challenge and a Norwich striker fell over his body, probably would have seen it as a bit harsh.

I'm not sure the argument that he meant to pass back along the floor but miss kicked it holds as 'not intentional'. It's all in the eyes and that's the direction he was looking!!

I look at incidents these days and think what if it was us too. Aguero pen, no. Their freekick, bloody joke, back pass, definitely, and I'd have called zaba for it, although I do think hart knows the rules. He would have tried to head it leading to a goal and then we'd want that head on a pole ;-)

[sweenyuk]

Personally I can understand why it wasn't given.
The laws/rules state it has to be intentional. Although we was clearly trying to knock it back, a looping pass would not likely have been intentional.
I know we can't know a players intent, and it's a problem with the rules, however if that was us, would you have been happy if Zabs had done that and it was given as a free kick?

I like the fact Mancini does highlight these though. He gets in trouble for making a joke, so the next match makes another joke (about the rules change) yet is unrelenting on criticising referees when they need to be.

I used to get angry at so many decisions that we didn't get / given against us, until I started looking at it as: How would I feel if that was the other way round.
So if it was our player fouled or if the freekick / penalty given against us, how would I feel?

Looking at the freekick for their goal, I wouldn't have expected one for us. So in my eyes, shouldn't have been a freekick.
If the Aguero penalty incident had been Kompany on the floor after a challenge and a Norwich striker fell over his body, probably would have seen it as a bit harsh.

How can the back pass not be intentional? He may not have meant it to be at such a height but he sure was not trying to do anything other than get the ball back to his goalie. If he wanted to put the ball out of play he would have put it out for a throw in or wide of goal.