Saints considering appeal to FA over Lallana 'abuse' claims

Daily Echo: ADAM LALLANA ADAM LALLANA

Saints are expected to decide in the next 48 hours whether to ask the FA to investigate comments made by referee Mark Clattenburg to star midfielder Adam Lallana.

The controversy between Saints and the official dominated the build-up to Saints’ 4-3 FA Cup third round win over Burnley, in which Lallana came off the bench to score.

Saints wrote to the Professional Game Match Officials Limited (PGMOL), the referees' governing body, on New Year’s Eve to formalise their complaint against Clattenburg.

After also refusing Saints a penalty in their 2-1 defeat to Everton on December 29, Clattenburg is alleged to have told Lallana: "You are very different now, since you've played for England - you never used to be like this."

But after a review the PGMOL has ruled there is no case to answer.

Saints are unhappy with that verdict and are now considering an appeal to the FA to investigate the matter.

The club will be fully aware that there is little chance of any action being taken against Clattenburg with the PGMOL having delivered their verdict already, but may ask for an investigation as a point of principle.

Saints are also unhappy about the prospect of Clattenburg refereeing their future matches, and an investigation would certainly underline that still further and could provide the motivation for a further complaint.

Mauricio Pochettinio’s assistant, Jesus Perez, was facing up to the press after the win over Burnley but refused to discuss the matter.

He said: “I haven’t the authority to talk about it. It’s a situation for the club.”

It’s been a tough week for Lallana, who has been blamed for the complaint, even though it was the club that submitted it.

However, his goal against Burnley proved Lallana’s strength of character and Perez said: “Everyone can see Adam Lallana this season. Every single minute he is on the pitch he tries to do his best and is always doing great, great things.

“He deserved it because of the example for the squad, daily on the training ground, and it’s no surprise for me when Adam Lallana on the pitch is doing things and scoring goals like he did.”

He added: “It hasn’t affected him. We are professionals.

“When you are in this business you have to be aware of everything.

“You have to stay away from the pressure of some things around football and just focus on being fit and being mentally ready to play.

“He played like the other players of the squad with the best mentality at the end of a tough period where it’s difficult to keep a strong mentality because fatigue is not only physical but also menta.

“It was important for us to get into the next round.”

Comments (61)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:44am Mon 6 Jan 14

Tony in Liberia says...

There are two possible scenarios here. Either the quote we've all heard is the sum total of what Clattenberg said, or he said other stuff that hasn't been reported.

If its the first, then I'm very surprised that Saints should have taken this action. Clatt's words seem pretty harmless to me, I would have laughed them off, or said something like "you've changed since your last hair-cut".

If it's the second, then Saints should come out with the full transcript, as at the moment they have made Llalana look a teensy bit stupid. I've been on the "things that upset Llalana" lists and, while some are actually quite funny, having him as a figure of fun doesn't help his profile when we all want him to go to Brasil.

If the quote was the only thing Clat said, then the only other rationales I can see for making this complaint are -

(a) it's part of a wider attempt to lose this "we're nice guys; don't worry about never giving us penalties or other decisions, especially against the bigger clubs, because we'll just roll over and let you tickle our tummy rather than complain", which has a certain logic. However, it's making the point at teh expense of our best player, which seems a risky strategy. Far better to have used Hooveild as a fall guy; I'm sure Clattenburg said something offensive to him at some point; something like "you've changed - you used to be a defender".

(b) it's a ploy to stop Clatenberg referreeing our games in the future, in which case you have to say it's a bit heavy handed and not exactly the easiest ploy to spot - and not even in the same league as the "Everton V Clatterpool" scandal.

Overall, though, I wish the club hadn't bothered. I'm sure it was Guly's fault for giving Cortese bad legal advice.
There are two possible scenarios here. Either the quote we've all heard is the sum total of what Clattenberg said, or he said other stuff that hasn't been reported. If its the first, then I'm very surprised that Saints should have taken this action. Clatt's words seem pretty harmless to me, I would have laughed them off, or said something like "you've changed since your last hair-cut". If it's the second, then Saints should come out with the full transcript, as at the moment they have made Llalana look a teensy bit stupid. I've been on the "things that upset Llalana" lists and, while some are actually quite funny, having him as a figure of fun doesn't help his profile when we all want him to go to Brasil. If the quote was the only thing Clat said, then the only other rationales I can see for making this complaint are - (a) it's part of a wider attempt to lose this "we're nice guys; don't worry about never giving us penalties or other decisions, especially against the bigger clubs, because we'll just roll over and let you tickle our tummy rather than complain", which has a certain logic. However, it's making the point at teh expense of our best player, which seems a risky strategy. Far better to have used Hooveild as a fall guy; I'm sure Clattenburg said something offensive to him at some point; something like "you've changed - you used to be a defender". (b) it's a ploy to stop Clatenberg referreeing our games in the future, in which case you have to say it's a bit heavy handed and not exactly the easiest ploy to spot - and not even in the same league as the "Everton V Clatterpool" scandal. Overall, though, I wish the club hadn't bothered. I'm sure it was Guly's fault for giving Cortese bad legal advice. Tony in Liberia

6:51am Mon 6 Jan 14

City Saint says...

Seems to me that Cortese is on a mission to clean up the league, and refereeing is an ivory tower that could stand for a little more accountability. I've seen my fair share of excellent refereeing at St Mary's, more often than not it is of a high quality. But some of the refs have been awful, and hampered by dodgy linesmen. The linesman along the Kingsland stand for the Chelsea match was shocking.
Seems to me that Cortese is on a mission to clean up the league, and refereeing is an ivory tower that could stand for a little more accountability. I've seen my fair share of excellent refereeing at St Mary's, more often than not it is of a high quality. But some of the refs have been awful, and hampered by dodgy linesmen. The linesman along the Kingsland stand for the Chelsea match was shocking. City Saint

6:53am Mon 6 Jan 14

City Saint says...

This might also be Cortese's attempt to show the world that Saints will stand behind their players, especially the youth that come up from the academy. That is no bad thing--Man U have followed a similar pugnacious policy, and it has helped them bring in good youth over the decades.
This might also be Cortese's attempt to show the world that Saints will stand behind their players, especially the youth that come up from the academy. That is no bad thing--Man U have followed a similar pugnacious policy, and it has helped them bring in good youth over the decades. City Saint

7:37am Mon 6 Jan 14

sburman says...

Just like Chelsea did a while back, Saints are going to make themselves a laughing stock if they continue this.
Just like Chelsea did a while back, Saints are going to make themselves a laughing stock if they continue this. sburman

8:32am Mon 6 Jan 14

elvisimo says...

a bit embarrassing - if the quotes are accurate then pretty harmless.
a bit embarrassing - if the quotes are accurate then pretty harmless. elvisimo

9:22am Mon 6 Jan 14

Malcombe says...

Tony in Liberia

Compliments for a very good assessment I ticked the thumb up.
As an ex Referee of grass roots Football around Hampshire I was very verbal and often said short quips to Players and 99% of the time they loved it, the bit we know that Clattenburg said was in my opinion tongue in cheek and harmless, if he swore when saying it that's when it's abusive and is totally unnecessary and perhaps should be reported.

The Ref gets to know many Players in games if he or she Referees more than once in a season and that was the same in grass roots, in a Dressing Room with Referees lets say Mansell Park Referees discussed a certain Player or Players who can be a distraction constantly and be a nuisance and keep whining, to stop this some of the signs to a Player is the Referee puts his hand to his mouth and does the action of pulling a Zip across horizontally or the Referees puts a finger to his lip in vertical position to be quiet, I use to say to some Players if the were fouled and went down like a Gymnast and rolled about, Ok you've got the free kick but I must give 10 out of 10 for the roll and another if a free kick was given and the ball hit a Player stood in the wall below the waist and it possible hurt a little my sense of humour kicked in and I often said in a squeaky voice, are you all right, sometimes I got a groan or a smile from the Player.

Referees are Assessed and scrutinised in every game and if they are not consistent they will be dropped from the Premiership, if they seemed to be
unfit for the lower Leagues they would have to work harder to improve to climb up to the top leagues again, as everyone knows its not easy to be a Referee and not easy to Referee is it?
Tony in Liberia Compliments for a very good assessment I ticked the thumb up. As an ex Referee of grass roots Football around Hampshire I was very verbal and often said short quips to Players and 99% of the time they loved it, the bit we know that Clattenburg said was in my opinion tongue in cheek and harmless, if he swore when saying it that's when it's abusive and is totally unnecessary and perhaps should be reported. The Ref gets to know many Players in games if he or she Referees more than once in a season and that was the same in grass roots, in a Dressing Room with Referees lets say Mansell Park Referees discussed a certain Player or Players who can be a distraction constantly and be a nuisance and keep whining, to stop this some of the signs to a Player is the Referee puts his hand to his mouth and does the action of pulling a Zip across horizontally or the Referees puts a finger to his lip in vertical position to be quiet, I use to say to some Players if the were fouled and went down like a Gymnast and rolled about, Ok you've got the free kick but I must give 10 out of 10 for the roll and another if a free kick was given and the ball hit a Player stood in the wall below the waist and it possible hurt a little my sense of humour kicked in and I often said in a squeaky voice, are you all right, sometimes I got a groan or a smile from the Player. Referees are Assessed and scrutinised in every game and if they are not consistent they will be dropped from the Premiership, if they seemed to be unfit for the lower Leagues they would have to work harder to improve to climb up to the top leagues again, as everyone knows its not easy to be a Referee and not easy to Referee is it? Malcombe

9:29am Mon 6 Jan 14

george chivers says...

Keep going I say. Clattenburg deserves what he gets. He's not there to belittle players or state personal opinions. He's there to referee. And to give blatant penalties when they occur, not to politically ignore them when it suits him. I don't care about the image of the club where referees like Clattenburg are concerned or the toothless suits at the FA who let the Premier League hi-jack their top division away from them.

If you want to read a different point of view, have a look at Rod Liddle's column in the Sunday times. He is clearly anti Southampton F.C. on this issue. As he has been on a number of topics regarding our club for the past 4 or 5 years. I think he must hate Cortese or have relatives in Portsmouth. A good journalist who where Saints are concerned has become unhinged.
Keep going I say. Clattenburg deserves what he gets. He's not there to belittle players or state personal opinions. He's there to referee. And to give blatant penalties when they occur, not to politically ignore them when it suits him. I don't care about the image of the club where referees like Clattenburg are concerned or the toothless suits at the FA who let the Premier League hi-jack their top division away from them. If you want to read a different point of view, have a look at Rod Liddle's column in the Sunday times. He is clearly anti Southampton F.C. on this issue. As he has been on a number of topics regarding our club for the past 4 or 5 years. I think he must hate Cortese or have relatives in Portsmouth. A good journalist who where Saints are concerned has become unhinged. george chivers

9:34am Mon 6 Jan 14

Linesman says...

How childish.

I cannot believe that someone at St Marys even considered making a complaint.

Next we will be told that a player's Mum has complained because he got his knees dirty.

Saints will be the laughing stock of professional football and of professional referees.
How childish. I cannot believe that someone at St Marys even considered making a complaint. Next we will be told that a player's Mum has complained because he got his knees dirty. Saints will be the laughing stock of professional football and of professional referees. Linesman

9:46am Mon 6 Jan 14

Egomaniac says...

Tony in Liberia wrote:
There are two possible scenarios here. Either the quote we've all heard is the sum total of what Clattenberg said, or he said other stuff that hasn't been reported.

If its the first, then I'm very surprised that Saints should have taken this action. Clatt's words seem pretty harmless to me, I would have laughed them off, or said something like "you've changed since your last hair-cut".

If it's the second, then Saints should come out with the full transcript, as at the moment they have made Llalana look a teensy bit stupid. I've been on the "things that upset Llalana" lists and, while some are actually quite funny, having him as a figure of fun doesn't help his profile when we all want him to go to Brasil.

If the quote was the only thing Clat said, then the only other rationales I can see for making this complaint are -

(a) it's part of a wider attempt to lose this "we're nice guys; don't worry about never giving us penalties or other decisions, especially against the bigger clubs, because we'll just roll over and let you tickle our tummy rather than complain", which has a certain logic. However, it's making the point at teh expense of our best player, which seems a risky strategy. Far better to have used Hooveild as a fall guy; I'm sure Clattenburg said something offensive to him at some point; something like "you've changed - you used to be a defender".

(b) it's a ploy to stop Clatenberg referreeing our games in the future, in which case you have to say it's a bit heavy handed and not exactly the easiest ploy to spot - and not even in the same league as the "Everton V Clatterpool" scandal.

Overall, though, I wish the club hadn't bothered. I'm sure it was Guly's fault for giving Cortese bad legal advice.
Well thought out and presented Tony - totally agree with you. This is a storm in a teacup and the Saints' management should let it go!

If the quoted statement is all that was said to Adam, then I fail to see how this can be termed abuse. It's nothing short of pathetic.

Forget it saints - move on and concentrate on the League position and the next Cup round - please!
[quote][p][bold]Tony in Liberia[/bold] wrote: There are two possible scenarios here. Either the quote we've all heard is the sum total of what Clattenberg said, or he said other stuff that hasn't been reported. If its the first, then I'm very surprised that Saints should have taken this action. Clatt's words seem pretty harmless to me, I would have laughed them off, or said something like "you've changed since your last hair-cut". If it's the second, then Saints should come out with the full transcript, as at the moment they have made Llalana look a teensy bit stupid. I've been on the "things that upset Llalana" lists and, while some are actually quite funny, having him as a figure of fun doesn't help his profile when we all want him to go to Brasil. If the quote was the only thing Clat said, then the only other rationales I can see for making this complaint are - (a) it's part of a wider attempt to lose this "we're nice guys; don't worry about never giving us penalties or other decisions, especially against the bigger clubs, because we'll just roll over and let you tickle our tummy rather than complain", which has a certain logic. However, it's making the point at teh expense of our best player, which seems a risky strategy. Far better to have used Hooveild as a fall guy; I'm sure Clattenburg said something offensive to him at some point; something like "you've changed - you used to be a defender". (b) it's a ploy to stop Clatenberg referreeing our games in the future, in which case you have to say it's a bit heavy handed and not exactly the easiest ploy to spot - and not even in the same league as the "Everton V Clatterpool" scandal. Overall, though, I wish the club hadn't bothered. I'm sure it was Guly's fault for giving Cortese bad legal advice.[/p][/quote]Well thought out and presented Tony - totally agree with you. This is a storm in a teacup and the Saints' management should let it go! If the quoted statement is all that was said to Adam, then I fail to see how this can be termed abuse. It's nothing short of pathetic. Forget it saints - move on and concentrate on the League position and the next Cup round - please! Egomaniac

9:46am Mon 6 Jan 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

Linesman wrote:
How childish.

I cannot believe that someone at St Marys even considered making a complaint.

Next we will be told that a player's Mum has complained because he got his knees dirty.

Saints will be the laughing stock of professional football and of professional referees.
Perhaps that is the impression that is being created, but I see more to it than that, but I am not going to go over it again, everything has been said that matters, time to leave it to the Authorities to sort it out. I somehow think we won't come out of it smelling of roses, but at least for once we have stood our ground over the bullies and a stance against unfairness in the beautiful game.
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: How childish. I cannot believe that someone at St Marys even considered making a complaint. Next we will be told that a player's Mum has complained because he got his knees dirty. Saints will be the laughing stock of professional football and of professional referees.[/p][/quote]Perhaps that is the impression that is being created, but I see more to it than that, but I am not going to go over it again, everything has been said that matters, time to leave it to the Authorities to sort it out. I somehow think we won't come out of it smelling of roses, but at least for once we have stood our ground over the bullies and a stance against unfairness in the beautiful game. OSPREYSAINT

9:47am Mon 6 Jan 14

george chivers says...

Malcombe wrote:
Tony in Liberia

Compliments for a very good assessment I ticked the thumb up.
As an ex Referee of grass roots Football around Hampshire I was very verbal and often said short quips to Players and 99% of the time they loved it, the bit we know that Clattenburg said was in my opinion tongue in cheek and harmless, if he swore when saying it that's when it's abusive and is totally unnecessary and perhaps should be reported.

The Ref gets to know many Players in games if he or she Referees more than once in a season and that was the same in grass roots, in a Dressing Room with Referees lets say Mansell Park Referees discussed a certain Player or Players who can be a distraction constantly and be a nuisance and keep whining, to stop this some of the signs to a Player is the Referee puts his hand to his mouth and does the action of pulling a Zip across horizontally or the Referees puts a finger to his lip in vertical position to be quiet, I use to say to some Players if the were fouled and went down like a Gymnast and rolled about, Ok you've got the free kick but I must give 10 out of 10 for the roll and another if a free kick was given and the ball hit a Player stood in the wall below the waist and it possible hurt a little my sense of humour kicked in and I often said in a squeaky voice, are you all right, sometimes I got a groan or a smile from the Player.

Referees are Assessed and scrutinised in every game and if they are not consistent they will be dropped from the Premiership, if they seemed to be
unfit for the lower Leagues they would have to work harder to improve to climb up to the top leagues again, as everyone knows its not easy to be a Referee and not easy to Referee is it?
No it's not easy to be a referee. Perhaps that's why we should have ex-professional players put on fast track development, as in other major team sports.

Many ex Hampshire cricketers have become Umpires at county level cricket after retiring as players. Grass roots refs for grass roots leagues. Ex professional players for professional leagues. No doubt there would be some exceptions who made it to the top.
[quote][p][bold]Malcombe[/bold] wrote: Tony in Liberia Compliments for a very good assessment I ticked the thumb up. As an ex Referee of grass roots Football around Hampshire I was very verbal and often said short quips to Players and 99% of the time they loved it, the bit we know that Clattenburg said was in my opinion tongue in cheek and harmless, if he swore when saying it that's when it's abusive and is totally unnecessary and perhaps should be reported. The Ref gets to know many Players in games if he or she Referees more than once in a season and that was the same in grass roots, in a Dressing Room with Referees lets say Mansell Park Referees discussed a certain Player or Players who can be a distraction constantly and be a nuisance and keep whining, to stop this some of the signs to a Player is the Referee puts his hand to his mouth and does the action of pulling a Zip across horizontally or the Referees puts a finger to his lip in vertical position to be quiet, I use to say to some Players if the were fouled and went down like a Gymnast and rolled about, Ok you've got the free kick but I must give 10 out of 10 for the roll and another if a free kick was given and the ball hit a Player stood in the wall below the waist and it possible hurt a little my sense of humour kicked in and I often said in a squeaky voice, are you all right, sometimes I got a groan or a smile from the Player. Referees are Assessed and scrutinised in every game and if they are not consistent they will be dropped from the Premiership, if they seemed to be unfit for the lower Leagues they would have to work harder to improve to climb up to the top leagues again, as everyone knows its not easy to be a Referee and not easy to Referee is it?[/p][/quote]No it's not easy to be a referee. Perhaps that's why we should have ex-professional players put on fast track development, as in other major team sports. Many ex Hampshire cricketers have become Umpires at county level cricket after retiring as players. Grass roots refs for grass roots leagues. Ex professional players for professional leagues. No doubt there would be some exceptions who made it to the top. george chivers

9:51am Mon 6 Jan 14

Puddletown Saint says...

The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match.

Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere.

So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it.

Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty.

Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy.
I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS.

Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF
The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match. Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere. So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it. Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty. Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy. I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS. Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF Puddletown Saint

9:58am Mon 6 Jan 14

george chivers says...

Puddletown Saint wrote:
The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match.

Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere.

So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it.

Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty.

Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy.
I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS.

Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF
Agreed. Plus ex-professional players to do the refereeing. Then eventually replace them with technology. A good evolutionary path.
[quote][p][bold]Puddletown Saint[/bold] wrote: The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match. Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere. So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it. Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty. Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy. I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS. Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF[/p][/quote]Agreed. Plus ex-professional players to do the refereeing. Then eventually replace them with technology. A good evolutionary path. george chivers

10:02am Mon 6 Jan 14

Clever Dick says...

This remark whether we like it or not is unproffessional in the extreme. He is questioning the character of Adam Lalana by insinuating that he has become a big time Charlie since being called up by England. Let's not lose sight of the fact that Adam was appealing for a penalty which most would accept was nailed on. Any other player would have done the same under the circumstances. It's quite ironic that the remark came from the referee who himself is top of the league in the big time Charlie stakes. This action was most likely initiated by NC. He sees it as a slur on our captain and is quite rightly trying to keep him away from officiating any more of our games given his appalling performances against us.
This remark whether we like it or not is unproffessional in the extreme. He is questioning the character of Adam Lalana by insinuating that he has become a big time Charlie since being called up by England. Let's not lose sight of the fact that Adam was appealing for a penalty which most would accept was nailed on. Any other player would have done the same under the circumstances. It's quite ironic that the remark came from the referee who himself is top of the league in the big time Charlie stakes. This action was most likely initiated by NC. He sees it as a slur on our captain and is quite rightly trying to keep him away from officiating any more of our games given his appalling performances against us. Clever Dick

10:06am Mon 6 Jan 14

Golden_Salamander says...

As pointed out in the article it is not Adam that has made this complaint but the Don.
We all know by now that Clattenburg has made FIVE major "result changing" decisions against Saints in his 7 games he has had since we returned to the top flight (18 months ) i.e.(last season) Fulham (H), Norwich (H), Norwich (a), (this season) Arsenal (a) and now Everton (a).
It is clear he don't like Saints.
.
But I bet the Don main issues are that :-
1/ wba got an apology from Mike Riley when that Chelsea player dived in the box a few weeks again BUT SAINTS ONLY GOT A £20,000 FINE when holt did that belly flop last year and NO APOLOGY.

2/ It appears that everton have stopped Clattenburg reffing any of their games for the last 6 years after he reffed ONE bad game in 2007, yet AFTER FIVE BAD games against Saints he is still due to ne in charge soon !
Also manure stopped one of the better refs (neutral refs) Martin Adkinson from doing one of their games because Feggie objected !
WHY ARE OTHER SIDES ALLOWED TO VETO REFS and Saints have to put up with Clattenburg ?
As pointed out in the article it is not Adam that has made this complaint but the Don. We all know by now that Clattenburg has made FIVE major "result changing" decisions against Saints in his 7 games he has had since we returned to the top flight (18 months ) i.e.(last season) Fulham (H), Norwich (H), Norwich (a), (this season) Arsenal (a) and now Everton (a). It is clear he don't like Saints. . But I bet the Don main issues are that :- 1/ wba got an apology from Mike Riley when that Chelsea player dived in the box a few weeks again BUT SAINTS ONLY GOT A £20,000 FINE when holt did that belly flop last year and NO APOLOGY. 2/ It appears that everton have stopped Clattenburg reffing any of their games for the last 6 years after he reffed ONE bad game in 2007, yet AFTER FIVE BAD games against Saints he is still due to ne in charge soon ! Also manure stopped one of the better refs (neutral refs) Martin Adkinson from doing one of their games because Feggie objected ! WHY ARE OTHER SIDES ALLOWED TO VETO REFS and Saints have to put up with Clattenburg ? Golden_Salamander

10:16am Mon 6 Jan 14

The Wickham Man says...

So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke. The Wickham Man

10:18am Mon 6 Jan 14

Seedhouse the Unrepentant says...

Forget the emotion. This is a multi million pound game and every time this **** refs one of our games he costs us points which equate to millions come the final reckoning. The club are making sure he is kept away from our games. Simples.
Forget the emotion. This is a multi million pound game and every time this **** refs one of our games he costs us points which equate to millions come the final reckoning. The club are making sure he is kept away from our games. Simples. Seedhouse the Unrepentant

10:20am Mon 6 Jan 14

Seedhouse the Unrepentant says...

The Wickham Man wrote:
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.
Go burn yourself.
[quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.[/p][/quote]Go burn yourself. Seedhouse the Unrepentant

10:41am Mon 6 Jan 14

Dooorrrset saint says...

george chivers wrote:
Puddletown Saint wrote:
The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match.

Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere.

So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it.

Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty.

Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy.
I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS.

Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF
Agreed. Plus ex-professional players to do the refereeing. Then eventually replace them with technology. A good evolutionary path.
Some hand ball decisions divide panels on programs like Match of the Day even with the benefit of slow motion replays, so not sure if technology is the answer in that case. Totally agree with bring ex pros through as refs but in all honesty can you see many ex players wanting to do it?
[quote][p][bold]george chivers[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Puddletown Saint[/bold] wrote: The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match. Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere. So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it. Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty. Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy. I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS. Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF[/p][/quote]Agreed. Plus ex-professional players to do the refereeing. Then eventually replace them with technology. A good evolutionary path.[/p][/quote]Some hand ball decisions divide panels on programs like Match of the Day even with the benefit of slow motion replays, so not sure if technology is the answer in that case. Totally agree with bring ex pros through as refs but in all honesty can you see many ex players wanting to do it? Dooorrrset saint

10:50am Mon 6 Jan 14

JohnItaly says...

Whatever the rights and wrongs of this situation (and remember there are three sides to every story - your side, my side and the truth!) there will be only one winner and unfortunately it will not be Southampton FC. One can only imagine the reaction from both the PGMOL & FA if such a complaint was received from one of the "big" clubs. I suspect it would have been a little different. It will be a long time, if ever, before Southampton FC are viewed as a "big" club and therefore able to influence governing bodies.

Two negatives may well result from this;-

1. All the recent good publicity generated due to the clubs progress and approach to its youth policy will be lost, and

2. Referees, who are only human after all, may well view the Saints as "hostile" and treat us accordingly and unfairly "favour" our opponents with the full knowledge they (the referee) will receive the full backing of the PGMOL.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this situation (and remember there are three sides to every story - your side, my side and the truth!) there will be only one winner and unfortunately it will not be Southampton FC. One can only imagine the reaction from both the PGMOL & FA if such a complaint was received from one of the "big" clubs. I suspect it would have been a little different. It will be a long time, if ever, before Southampton FC are viewed as a "big" club and therefore able to influence governing bodies. Two negatives may well result from this;- 1. All the recent good publicity generated due to the clubs progress and approach to its youth policy will be lost, and 2. Referees, who are only human after all, may well view the Saints as "hostile" and treat us accordingly and unfairly "favour" our opponents with the full knowledge they (the referee) will receive the full backing of the PGMOL. JohnItaly

11:01am Mon 6 Jan 14

Poole Tom says...

JohnItaly wrote:
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this situation (and remember there are three sides to every story - your side, my side and the truth!) there will be only one winner and unfortunately it will not be Southampton FC. One can only imagine the reaction from both the PGMOL & FA if such a complaint was received from one of the "big" clubs. I suspect it would have been a little different. It will be a long time, if ever, before Southampton FC are viewed as a "big" club and therefore able to influence governing bodies.

Two negatives may well result from this;-

1. All the recent good publicity generated due to the clubs progress and approach to its youth policy will be lost, and

2. Referees, who are only human after all, may well view the Saints as "hostile" and treat us accordingly and unfairly "favour" our opponents with the full knowledge they (the referee) will receive the full backing of the PGMOL.
I agree.
[quote][p][bold]JohnItaly[/bold] wrote: Whatever the rights and wrongs of this situation (and remember there are three sides to every story - your side, my side and the truth!) there will be only one winner and unfortunately it will not be Southampton FC. One can only imagine the reaction from both the PGMOL & FA if such a complaint was received from one of the "big" clubs. I suspect it would have been a little different. It will be a long time, if ever, before Southampton FC are viewed as a "big" club and therefore able to influence governing bodies. Two negatives may well result from this;- 1. All the recent good publicity generated due to the clubs progress and approach to its youth policy will be lost, and 2. Referees, who are only human after all, may well view the Saints as "hostile" and treat us accordingly and unfairly "favour" our opponents with the full knowledge they (the referee) will receive the full backing of the PGMOL.[/p][/quote]I agree. Poole Tom

11:08am Mon 6 Jan 14

Costa Baz says...

Ex-pros as refs might work, but then, as those from the top leagues will be too wealthy to need the work, those from the lower leagues that might take the job on, would probably be treated to the same level of contempt as the current refs. Simply because they didn't play at the top level.

Agree with the comments that say Saints took action, simply to bring attention to his inept handling of our matches and that his decision making may be influenced by his personal thoughts about some of our players.
If anyone from the FA has any sense, they will have reviewed his performances and looked for trends, as in do certain clubs always seem to benefit/suffer from his decisions.

Bottom line, as I see it, is that he can be stopped from refereeing our games, which would make it look as if our wishes have been granted.
Or, as I expect, he will be asked to officiate an away match, just as a "we decide who referees matches" type of warning.
At least this would ensure that he has to be seen to be fair, as his performance will be under the greatest scrutiny possible.

Personally, if we can't be rid of him, I'd like him to be given a match at SMS, next week, just so he can have sh1t heaped on him from all sides of the ground, for 90+ minutes.
Ex-pros as refs might work, but then, as those from the top leagues will be too wealthy to need the work, those from the lower leagues that might take the job on, would probably be treated to the same level of contempt as the current refs. Simply because they didn't play at the top level. Agree with the comments that say Saints took action, simply to bring attention to his inept handling of our matches and that his decision making may be influenced by his personal thoughts about some of our players. If anyone from the FA has any sense, they will have reviewed his performances and looked for trends, as in do certain clubs always seem to benefit/suffer from his decisions. Bottom line, as I see it, is that he can be stopped from refereeing our games, which would make it look as if our wishes have been granted. Or, as I expect, he will be asked to officiate an away match, just as a "we decide who referees matches" type of warning. At least this would ensure that he has to be seen to be fair, as his performance will be under the greatest scrutiny possible. Personally, if we can't be rid of him, I'd like him to be given a match at SMS, next week, just so he can have sh1t heaped on him from all sides of the ground, for 90+ minutes. Costa Baz

11:14am Mon 6 Jan 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

The Wickham Man wrote:
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat makes an opinion on this thread showing a complete ignorance of the facts.
[quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.[/p][/quote]So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat makes an opinion on this thread showing a complete ignorance of the facts. OSPREYSAINT

11:17am Mon 6 Jan 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

Tony in Liberia wrote:
There are two possible scenarios here. Either the quote we've all heard is the sum total of what Clattenberg said, or he said other stuff that hasn't been reported.

If its the first, then I'm very surprised that Saints should have taken this action. Clatt's words seem pretty harmless to me, I would have laughed them off, or said something like "you've changed since your last hair-cut".

If it's the second, then Saints should come out with the full transcript, as at the moment they have made Llalana look a teensy bit stupid. I've been on the "things that upset Llalana" lists and, while some are actually quite funny, having him as a figure of fun doesn't help his profile when we all want him to go to Brasil.

If the quote was the only thing Clat said, then the only other rationales I can see for making this complaint are -

(a) it's part of a wider attempt to lose this "we're nice guys; don't worry about never giving us penalties or other decisions, especially against the bigger clubs, because we'll just roll over and let you tickle our tummy rather than complain", which has a certain logic. However, it's making the point at teh expense of our best player, which seems a risky strategy. Far better to have used Hooveild as a fall guy; I'm sure Clattenburg said something offensive to him at some point; something like "you've changed - you used to be a defender".

(b) it's a ploy to stop Clatenberg referreeing our games in the future, in which case you have to say it's a bit heavy handed and not exactly the easiest ploy to spot - and not even in the same league as the "Everton V Clatterpool" scandal.

Overall, though, I wish the club hadn't bothered. I'm sure it was Guly's fault for giving Cortese bad legal advice.
Your first point is important, the fact that the PGMOL took evidence from their own representatives and none from anywhere else makes them look like a Masonic Lodge.
[quote][p][bold]Tony in Liberia[/bold] wrote: There are two possible scenarios here. Either the quote we've all heard is the sum total of what Clattenberg said, or he said other stuff that hasn't been reported. If its the first, then I'm very surprised that Saints should have taken this action. Clatt's words seem pretty harmless to me, I would have laughed them off, or said something like "you've changed since your last hair-cut". If it's the second, then Saints should come out with the full transcript, as at the moment they have made Llalana look a teensy bit stupid. I've been on the "things that upset Llalana" lists and, while some are actually quite funny, having him as a figure of fun doesn't help his profile when we all want him to go to Brasil. If the quote was the only thing Clat said, then the only other rationales I can see for making this complaint are - (a) it's part of a wider attempt to lose this "we're nice guys; don't worry about never giving us penalties or other decisions, especially against the bigger clubs, because we'll just roll over and let you tickle our tummy rather than complain", which has a certain logic. However, it's making the point at teh expense of our best player, which seems a risky strategy. Far better to have used Hooveild as a fall guy; I'm sure Clattenburg said something offensive to him at some point; something like "you've changed - you used to be a defender". (b) it's a ploy to stop Clatenberg referreeing our games in the future, in which case you have to say it's a bit heavy handed and not exactly the easiest ploy to spot - and not even in the same league as the "Everton V Clatterpool" scandal. Overall, though, I wish the club hadn't bothered. I'm sure it was Guly's fault for giving Cortese bad legal advice.[/p][/quote]Your first point is important, the fact that the PGMOL took evidence from their own representatives and none from anywhere else makes them look like a Masonic Lodge. OSPREYSAINT

11:23am Mon 6 Jan 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

Puddletown Saint wrote:
The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match.

Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere.

So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it.

Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty.

Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy.
I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS.

Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF
Well I guess the controversy hasn't put the punters off wanting to attend the game, perhaps they hope Clottenburk will be the Official? Some of the publicity may not be helpul, but suddenly we are on the map!
[quote][p][bold]Puddletown Saint[/bold] wrote: The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match. Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere. So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it. Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty. Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy. I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS. Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF[/p][/quote]Well I guess the controversy hasn't put the punters off wanting to attend the game, perhaps they hope Clottenburk will be the Official? Some of the publicity may not be helpul, but suddenly we are on the map! OSPREYSAINT

11:42am Mon 6 Jan 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

JohnItaly wrote:
Whatever the rights and wrongs of this situation (and remember there are three sides to every story - your side, my side and the truth!) there will be only one winner and unfortunately it will not be Southampton FC. One can only imagine the reaction from both the PGMOL & FA if such a complaint was received from one of the "big" clubs. I suspect it would have been a little different. It will be a long time, if ever, before Southampton FC are viewed as a "big" club and therefore able to influence governing bodies.

Two negatives may well result from this;-

1. All the recent good publicity generated due to the clubs progress and approach to its youth policy will be lost, and

2. Referees, who are only human after all, may well view the Saints as "hostile" and treat us accordingly and unfairly "favour" our opponents with the full knowledge they (the referee) will receive the full backing of the PGMOL.
It could go either way, but I look at the list of Premier Referees and I can see only two on the list that I would not like to see at St Marys (for different reasons), the rest are top notch, and I doubt that any of them would do anything other than a professional job, it is they that are being besmirched by the actions of the others.
[quote][p][bold]JohnItaly[/bold] wrote: Whatever the rights and wrongs of this situation (and remember there are three sides to every story - your side, my side and the truth!) there will be only one winner and unfortunately it will not be Southampton FC. One can only imagine the reaction from both the PGMOL & FA if such a complaint was received from one of the "big" clubs. I suspect it would have been a little different. It will be a long time, if ever, before Southampton FC are viewed as a "big" club and therefore able to influence governing bodies. Two negatives may well result from this;- 1. All the recent good publicity generated due to the clubs progress and approach to its youth policy will be lost, and 2. Referees, who are only human after all, may well view the Saints as "hostile" and treat us accordingly and unfairly "favour" our opponents with the full knowledge they (the referee) will receive the full backing of the PGMOL.[/p][/quote]It could go either way, but I look at the list of Premier Referees and I can see only two on the list that I would not like to see at St Marys (for different reasons), the rest are top notch, and I doubt that any of them would do anything other than a professional job, it is they that are being besmirched by the actions of the others. OSPREYSAINT

11:47am Mon 6 Jan 14

mbetts says...

It wasn't what he said, it was the way that he said it!
It wasn't what he said, it was the way that he said it! mbetts

11:49am Mon 6 Jan 14

el caballo santos101 says...

george chivers wrote:
Puddletown Saint wrote:
The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match.

Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere.

So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it.

Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty.

Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy.
I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS.

Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF
Agreed. Plus ex-professional players to do the refereeing. Then eventually replace them with technology. A good evolutionary path.
however the ball didn't go out of play after the `handball` and everton could have gone up the other end and scored another goal which would have ended the match as a competition. so in your `hawk eye and review` system do you stop play after the `handball` to review or do you wait for the ball to go out of play? i.e. after everton score. what if saints had used their 2 reviews already? that wouldn't prevent the non award of the penalty. in fact refs are more likely not to give decisions and let teams review. as an example look at cricket, most run outs are now done by video review, even when a player is clearly in or out and the umpire would have given the decision either way before replays. cricket teams and tennis players often use reviews tactically and not in the intended way, tennis players use it to stop play and prevent their oppos getting a rhythm. cricket teams do the same, even when they both know they wont win the replay.
if you say a team can appeal for a replay and immediately stop play in order to get the correct decision then top teams will soon be stopping play when a player is clean through one on one with their keeper, to stop a team scoring against them.
no I`m not a moaner, but I can see past the `replays will get the right decision` claims , which they don't always, and see the pitfalls.
as for former players as refs, what about if larwo had decided to become a ref? no affiliation with our club but clearly anti-saints and would be worse than clutterbrain.
I have said before that their should be 4 linesmen per game. the linesman for our handball penalty claim was on the other side of the pitch and had players blocking his view. if you had another linesman on the other side the handball would have been in directly in his line of sight. don't get rid of refs, help them.
again lots of people said when goal line tech was brought in, it wont be long before others start calling for more and more tech and replays, and as soon as a goal is awarded by goal line tech they will use that as an example of how `great` tech is.
[quote][p][bold]george chivers[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Puddletown Saint[/bold] wrote: The older amongst may sigh but it is time for football to move into the 21st century. Referees need to be miked and teams allowed two reviews per match. Yes I can here the moaners saying it will slow the game down but in fact Hawk eye and DRS add to the atmosphere. So the scenario. Ball hits Everton hand in the penalty area - Clutterbrain says no penalty. AL asks for a review. Clutterbrain must explain why original was made and the 4th referee looks at it. Continue scenario - Clutterbrain says did not touch said part of body - review shows it did - penalty. Drawn match, no yellow card, no controversy. I am sure all fans only want the correct decisions. DISCUSS. Currently 680 in queue for arsenal tickets - WTF[/p][/quote]Agreed. Plus ex-professional players to do the refereeing. Then eventually replace them with technology. A good evolutionary path.[/p][/quote]however the ball didn't go out of play after the `handball` and everton could have gone up the other end and scored another goal which would have ended the match as a competition. so in your `hawk eye and review` system do you stop play after the `handball` to review or do you wait for the ball to go out of play? i.e. after everton score. what if saints had used their 2 reviews already? that wouldn't prevent the non award of the penalty. in fact refs are more likely not to give decisions and let teams review. as an example look at cricket, most run outs are now done by video review, even when a player is clearly in or out and the umpire would have given the decision either way before replays. cricket teams and tennis players often use reviews tactically and not in the intended way, tennis players use it to stop play and prevent their oppos getting a rhythm. cricket teams do the same, even when they both know they wont win the replay. if you say a team can appeal for a replay and immediately stop play in order to get the correct decision then top teams will soon be stopping play when a player is clean through one on one with their keeper, to stop a team scoring against them. no I`m not a moaner, but I can see past the `replays will get the right decision` claims , which they don't always, and see the pitfalls. as for former players as refs, what about if larwo had decided to become a ref? no affiliation with our club but clearly anti-saints and would be worse than clutterbrain. I have said before that their should be 4 linesmen per game. the linesman for our handball penalty claim was on the other side of the pitch and had players blocking his view. if you had another linesman on the other side the handball would have been in directly in his line of sight. don't get rid of refs, help them. again lots of people said when goal line tech was brought in, it wont be long before others start calling for more and more tech and replays, and as soon as a goal is awarded by goal line tech they will use that as an example of how `great` tech is. el caballo santos101

11:52am Mon 6 Jan 14

Sadoldgitte says...

mbetts wrote:
It wasn't what he said, it was the way that he said it!
LOL! Let's us leave this now and move on. The club is making itself look stupid and petty.
[quote][p][bold]mbetts[/bold] wrote: It wasn't what he said, it was the way that he said it![/p][/quote]LOL! Let's us leave this now and move on. The club is making itself look stupid and petty. Sadoldgitte

12:42pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Marchwood Malcom says...

Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him!
Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him! Marchwood Malcom

1:00pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child says...

There will be consequences if refs upset Poch and Nicola by unprofessional behaviour whether it is insulting/abusing a player, the percieved failing to give a penalty because of pressure not to upset the otherside, failure to caution bad tackles against us. That is all the club are saying; we aint gonna roll over no more. OK, so every ref makes mistakes, but IMHO Clatts decisions were quite deliberate.
There will be consequences if refs upset Poch and Nicola by unprofessional behaviour whether it is insulting/abusing a player, the percieved failing to give a penalty because of pressure not to upset the otherside, failure to caution bad tackles against us. That is all the club are saying; we aint gonna roll over no more. OK, so every ref makes mistakes, but IMHO Clatts decisions were quite deliberate. Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child

1:07pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child says...

Marchwood Malcom wrote:
Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him!
Push those bast'rds at PGMOL every inch. They deserve it.
[quote][p][bold]Marchwood Malcom[/bold] wrote: Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him![/p][/quote]Push those bast'rds at PGMOL every inch. They deserve it. Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child

1:10pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Costa Baz says...

Hawk eye type reviews for handball, would probably only work in cases where the officials turn down a penalty appeal, because they were unsighted.

In an incident, as at Everton and also at Norwich, even if it were reviewed the ref would still hide behind the "I didn't consider it to be intentional" and not change his decision.
Equally, if you have a review for those claiming the penalty, then the same right has to be given to the defence.

But on another note, if "intent" is an integral part of decision making, how many goals have wrongly been ruled out for offside, not because the player scoring, deliberately put himself in an offside position, but because a defender stepped up, making him offside?
That is another can of worms.
Hawk eye type reviews for handball, would probably only work in cases where the officials turn down a penalty appeal, because they were unsighted. In an incident, as at Everton and also at Norwich, even if it were reviewed the ref would still hide behind the "I didn't consider it to be intentional" and not change his decision. Equally, if you have a review for those claiming the penalty, then the same right has to be given to the defence. But on another note, if "intent" is an integral part of decision making, how many goals have wrongly been ruled out for offside, not because the player scoring, deliberately put himself in an offside position, but because a defender stepped up, making him offside? That is another can of worms. Costa Baz

1:11pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Brock_and_Roll says...

As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires.

So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.
As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro. Brock_and_Roll

1:40pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child says...

Brock_and_Roll wrote:
As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires.

So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.
Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.
[quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.[/p][/quote]Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude. Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child

1:43pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Brock_and_Roll says...

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child wrote:
Brock_and_Roll wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.
Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.
yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork.

Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake!
[quote][p][bold]Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.[/p][/quote]Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.[/p][/quote]yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork. Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake! Brock_and_Roll

1:47pm Mon 6 Jan 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

Sadoldgitte wrote:
mbetts wrote:
It wasn't what he said, it was the way that he said it!
LOL! Let's us leave this now and move on. The club is making itself look stupid and petty.
Who says? Red tops? Journalists, ignorant WUMs. Look harder, there is a lot of support for the stance, it just isn't getting the same amount of publicity, I wonder why that is?
[quote][p][bold]Sadoldgitte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mbetts[/bold] wrote: It wasn't what he said, it was the way that he said it![/p][/quote]LOL! Let's us leave this now and move on. The club is making itself look stupid and petty.[/p][/quote]Who says? Red tops? Journalists, ignorant WUMs. Look harder, there is a lot of support for the stance, it just isn't getting the same amount of publicity, I wonder why that is? OSPREYSAINT

1:49pm Mon 6 Jan 14

right back in the bar says...

Marchwood Malcom wrote:
Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him!
Agreed - unless there is more substance behind the allegations (was that all Cretinberg said?). Otherwise we really will be hung out to dry by the media and fans of other clubs who are queuing up to have a go. Rod Liddel's piece in the Sunday Times is typical - it was all about AL and there is no mention anywhere about this idiot referee's incompetence or that he talks to players all the time. Cretinberg is winning allies.
[quote][p][bold]Marchwood Malcom[/bold] wrote: Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him![/p][/quote]Agreed - unless there is more substance behind the allegations (was that all Cretinberg said?). Otherwise we really will be hung out to dry by the media and fans of other clubs who are queuing up to have a go. Rod Liddel's piece in the Sunday Times is typical - it was all about AL and there is no mention anywhere about this idiot referee's incompetence or that he talks to players all the time. Cretinberg is winning allies. right back in the bar

1:51pm Mon 6 Jan 14

REDARMYRULETHESOUTH says...

I THINK IT'S RIGHT THAT CLATTENBURG does not officiate in any of SAINTS games.

How we go about this - leave to NC to work his magic.

FANS realise that their season is well and truly alive after the Burnley result.

ON THE BACK OF THIS - WE GO TO WIN AGAINST WBA.

CONFIDENCE AND THE FEEL GOOD FACTOR ARE BACK.

TEAM SELECTION IS VITAL.

WE ARE THE MIGHTY SOUTHAMPTON. COYR
I THINK IT'S RIGHT THAT CLATTENBURG does not officiate in any of SAINTS games. How we go about this - leave to NC to work his magic. FANS realise that their season is well and truly alive after the Burnley result. ON THE BACK OF THIS - WE GO TO WIN AGAINST WBA. CONFIDENCE AND THE FEEL GOOD FACTOR ARE BACK. TEAM SELECTION IS VITAL. WE ARE THE MIGHTY SOUTHAMPTON. COYR REDARMYRULETHESOUTH

2:06pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Seedhouse the Unrepentant says...

Brock_and_Roll wrote:
As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires.

So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.
For a ref your attention to detail is appalling. If you read what has been written about this event you would see that it is not Adam making the fuss over what was said but the club.

I'm not a ref but I am a businessman. Cortese has handled this brilliantly. Yes he and the club will be accused of being petty but he has forced the league to keep Cretinberg away from us and that is worth millions to us. When he does eventually ref us again he will be very very careful over his decisions knowing we wont tolerate his incompetence.
[quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.[/p][/quote]For a ref your attention to detail is appalling. If you read what has been written about this event you would see that it is not Adam making the fuss over what was said but the club. I'm not a ref but I am a businessman. Cortese has handled this brilliantly. Yes he and the club will be accused of being petty but he has forced the league to keep Cretinberg away from us and that is worth millions to us. When he does eventually ref us again he will be very very careful over his decisions knowing we wont tolerate his incompetence. Seedhouse the Unrepentant

2:12pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Costa Baz says...

Brock_and_Roll wrote:
Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child wrote:
Brock_and_Roll wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.
Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.
yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork.

Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake!
Referees get the abuse because, collectively, they don't have the balls to stop it, and also because too many big team managers use intimidation, through their players' actions on the pitch and through their own comments in the media, to influence the referee's decision making.

If a ref was to go into each team's dressing room, prior to kick off and state VERY clearly that he would accept enquiries about decisions from just the team captain, without the use of profanities, he would be setting clear boundaries. If he then clearly stated that he would issue yellow or red cards for breaches of this ruling, then he has again set the boundaries.

I may be wrong, but I thought these boundaries had already been set?
Bottom line is, that the ref decides how much abuse he gets, by not taking appropriate action when being abused.
[quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.[/p][/quote]Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.[/p][/quote]yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork. Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake![/p][/quote]Referees get the abuse because, collectively, they don't have the balls to stop it, and also because too many big team managers use intimidation, through their players' actions on the pitch and through their own comments in the media, to influence the referee's decision making. If a ref was to go into each team's dressing room, prior to kick off and state VERY clearly that he would accept enquiries about decisions from just the team captain, without the use of profanities, he would be setting clear boundaries. If he then clearly stated that he would issue yellow or red cards for breaches of this ruling, then he has again set the boundaries. I may be wrong, but I thought these boundaries had already been set? Bottom line is, that the ref decides how much abuse he gets, by not taking appropriate action when being abused. Costa Baz

2:17pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child says...

Brock_and_Roll wrote:
Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child wrote:
Brock_and_Roll wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.
Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.
yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork.

Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake!
you miss the point. Refs are supposed to be impartial. Players aren't. Its the refs job to make decisions and to make them fairly...when he is perceived not to have done that job fairly or impartially then a player will obviously moan. The only recourse a club has when they think they have been treated unfairly is to complain to PGMOL which is all Saints have done. As you kniow PGMOL are a law unto themselves; a kangaroo court, judge jury and executioner.
[quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.[/p][/quote]Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.[/p][/quote]yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork. Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake![/p][/quote]you miss the point. Refs are supposed to be impartial. Players aren't. Its the refs job to make decisions and to make them fairly...when he is perceived not to have done that job fairly or impartially then a player will obviously moan. The only recourse a club has when they think they have been treated unfairly is to complain to PGMOL which is all Saints have done. As you kniow PGMOL are a law unto themselves; a kangaroo court, judge jury and executioner. Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child

2:25pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child says...

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child wrote:
Brock_and_Roll wrote:
Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child wrote:
Brock_and_Roll wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.
Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.
yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork.

Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake!
you miss the point. Refs are supposed to be impartial. Players aren't. Its the refs job to make decisions and to make them fairly...when he is perceived not to have done that job fairly or impartially then a player will obviously moan. The only recourse a club has when they think they have been treated unfairly is to complain to PGMOL which is all Saints have done. As you kniow PGMOL are a law unto themselves; a kangaroo court, judge jury and executioner.
oh, and policeman too!
[quote][p][bold]Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.[/p][/quote]Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.[/p][/quote]yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork. Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake![/p][/quote]you miss the point. Refs are supposed to be impartial. Players aren't. Its the refs job to make decisions and to make them fairly...when he is perceived not to have done that job fairly or impartially then a player will obviously moan. The only recourse a club has when they think they have been treated unfairly is to complain to PGMOL which is all Saints have done. As you kniow PGMOL are a law unto themselves; a kangaroo court, judge jury and executioner.[/p][/quote]oh, and policeman too! Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child

2:25pm Mon 6 Jan 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

Costa Baz wrote:
Brock_and_Roll wrote:
Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child wrote:
Brock_and_Roll wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.
Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.
yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork.

Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake!
Referees get the abuse because, collectively, they don't have the balls to stop it, and also because too many big team managers use intimidation, through their players' actions on the pitch and through their own comments in the media, to influence the referee's decision making.

If a ref was to go into each team's dressing room, prior to kick off and state VERY clearly that he would accept enquiries about decisions from just the team captain, without the use of profanities, he would be setting clear boundaries. If he then clearly stated that he would issue yellow or red cards for breaches of this ruling, then he has again set the boundaries.

I may be wrong, but I thought these boundaries had already been set?
Bottom line is, that the ref decides how much abuse he gets, by not taking appropriate action when being abused.
Absolutely Baz, the player designated as Captain should be the only one to argue about why a decision was made, this is where the waters were a bit muddied at Everton, whereas Adam was still doing his bit, KD had the armband! That resulted in Adam getting a yellow, had he sworn and been abusive it would have been a red card so although it got heated I don't think it could have been OTT.
[quote][p][bold]Costa Baz[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brock_and_Roll[/bold] wrote: As a (part-time) referee I have to say that if I had a pound for every time a player is downright abusive, sarcastic or generally unpleasant I would be a very rich. I appreciate that the stakes can be high, but what goes on at the top filters down to the parks. It does not happen in cricket - primarily because the top players do not disrespect the umpires. So as for AL, I can only assume he is being badly advised as althrough Saints fans will give him support, he is making himself look a petulant boy in the eyes of the rest of the country for something that is really mind-blowingly unoffensive said by a repsected official who earns in a year what AL earns in a week but has 10x the aggro.[/p][/quote]Doesn't matter how much premier league refs are paid in comparison to players. They are professionals and supposed to be impartial arbiters. I don't think anyone has any beef with honest refs who make an honest call on a decision. The beef with Clatt is Saints perception that he was never going to give Saints any important decisions given his history with Everton. I'm sure they felt he behaved unprofessionally in that way and his comments to Lallana are evidence of his poor/unprofessional attitude.[/p][/quote]yeah? and what about the players thats display an "unprofessional attitude" - if referees complained about every one of these the FA would be burried 100ft deep in paperwork. Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. Leave it and move on for gawd's sake![/p][/quote]Referees get the abuse because, collectively, they don't have the balls to stop it, and also because too many big team managers use intimidation, through their players' actions on the pitch and through their own comments in the media, to influence the referee's decision making. If a ref was to go into each team's dressing room, prior to kick off and state VERY clearly that he would accept enquiries about decisions from just the team captain, without the use of profanities, he would be setting clear boundaries. If he then clearly stated that he would issue yellow or red cards for breaches of this ruling, then he has again set the boundaries. I may be wrong, but I thought these boundaries had already been set? Bottom line is, that the ref decides how much abuse he gets, by not taking appropriate action when being abused.[/p][/quote]Absolutely Baz, the player designated as Captain should be the only one to argue about why a decision was made, this is where the waters were a bit muddied at Everton, whereas Adam was still doing his bit, KD had the armband! That resulted in Adam getting a yellow, had he sworn and been abusive it would have been a red card so although it got heated I don't think it could have been OTT. OSPREYSAINT

2:37pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Malcombe says...

George Chivers

With respect to your comments let's briefly compare Cricket to Football, you are correct ex Cricketers become Umpires but they still have to sit a course and learn the Laws and rules and work hard to climb a Ladder of progress to reach the top, ex Hants Player Trevor Jesty, David Willey, Sky Commentator David Lloyd all qualified to Umpire also Cricket is a non contact Sport with totally different Laws and playing equipment and you don't need me telling you that.

Now to Football which as we all know is a very physical contact Sport , ex Players rarely become Referess, there was one who played professionally in the 80s who's name eludes me, I think his Christian name is Lee, he retired from playing in his middle 20s and took up Refereeing, the last time I saw him in the 90s he was Refereeing in the Championship and lower Leagues.
I know in the past all Players in the Football League had to learn the Laws of the Game for obvious reason, they got to practise by Refereeing and Lining on there own training ground, whether it applies now I do not know but I would think it does and is a part in the life of a Player wanting to play Professionally.

Age plays a part in considering becoming a Referee, the younger you are the better chance you have of making it to the top, Referees get assessed and when they receive them sometimes they want to screw them up and bin them I know I did it can be very frustrating all Referees from The Hampshire League up have to take a fitness test, in the 90s it use to be a Referee had to do Sprints, Bleep test to a certain number and run 1 & 1/2 miles in 12 minutes, I was always able to do these in my 50s at Eastleigh Football ground.
Fitness is very important to be able to Referee, people in the 90s may remember Wendy Gee one of the first females to become a top Referee, she had to retire for failing the fitness test, if a Referee failed they would get a 2nd chance to pass she obviously didn't pass so ended her career.
How much has changed I will be finding out soon as I'm rejoining Southampton Referees Society. Over the last 20 years a top Referee had to retire at 48 and that might still apply, in the 90s John Martin who was an excellent Referee was allowed to continue into his early 50s because he was a very fit man but that was an exception so age can go against thousands of ex Players becoming Referees, fast tracking an ex Player to a Referee I'm not sure if it's feasible but things are changed and it's 14 years since I Refereed and nothing would shock me, if the ex Players can do it then why not.

It would be interesting to do a survey and ask many ex Players as possible if they would consider becoming Referees, consider that most Football Players retire in there 30s and to just step out of the role of a Footballer then instantly into a Referee I cannot see that will ever happen, I'll stick my neck out and suggest only 10% of ex Players would want to Referee
George Chivers With respect to your comments let's briefly compare Cricket to Football, you are correct ex Cricketers become Umpires but they still have to sit a course and learn the Laws and rules and work hard to climb a Ladder of progress to reach the top, ex Hants Player Trevor Jesty, David Willey, Sky Commentator David Lloyd all qualified to Umpire also Cricket is a non contact Sport with totally different Laws and playing equipment and you don't need me telling you that. Now to Football which as we all know is a very physical contact Sport , ex Players rarely become Referess, there was one who played professionally in the 80s who's name eludes me, I think his Christian name is Lee, he retired from playing in his middle 20s and took up Refereeing, the last time I saw him in the 90s he was Refereeing in the Championship and lower Leagues. I know in the past all Players in the Football League had to learn the Laws of the Game for obvious reason, they got to practise by Refereeing and Lining on there own training ground, whether it applies now I do not know but I would think it does and is a part in the life of a Player wanting to play Professionally. Age plays a part in considering becoming a Referee, the younger you are the better chance you have of making it to the top, Referees get assessed and when they receive them sometimes they want to screw them up and bin them I know I did it can be very frustrating all Referees from The Hampshire League up have to take a fitness test, in the 90s it use to be a Referee had to do Sprints, Bleep test to a certain number and run 1 & 1/2 miles in 12 minutes, I was always able to do these in my 50s at Eastleigh Football ground. Fitness is very important to be able to Referee, people in the 90s may remember Wendy Gee one of the first females to become a top Referee, she had to retire for failing the fitness test, if a Referee failed they would get a 2nd chance to pass she obviously didn't pass so ended her career. How much has changed I will be finding out soon as I'm rejoining Southampton Referees Society. Over the last 20 years a top Referee had to retire at 48 and that might still apply, in the 90s John Martin who was an excellent Referee was allowed to continue into his early 50s because he was a very fit man but that was an exception so age can go against thousands of ex Players becoming Referees, fast tracking an ex Player to a Referee I'm not sure if it's feasible but things are changed and it's 14 years since I Refereed and nothing would shock me, if the ex Players can do it then why not. It would be interesting to do a survey and ask many ex Players as possible if they would consider becoming Referees, consider that most Football Players retire in there 30s and to just step out of the role of a Footballer then instantly into a Referee I cannot see that will ever happen, I'll stick my neck out and suggest only 10% of ex Players would want to Referee Malcombe

2:42pm Mon 6 Jan 14

right back in the bar says...

So far I have only one taker for my misnomer Cretinberg. Disappointed...thoug
ht it was right on the money speaking as it does to idiocy and suspect lineage.
So far I have only one taker for my misnomer Cretinberg. Disappointed...thoug ht it was right on the money speaking as it does to idiocy and suspect lineage. right back in the bar

2:57pm Mon 6 Jan 14

johnlennonar says...

Hope this dent effect his place in the England sider, because the FA can be very childish
Hope this dent effect his place in the England sider, because the FA can be very childish johnlennonar

3:07pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child says...

Malcombe wrote:
George Chivers

With respect to your comments let's briefly compare Cricket to Football, you are correct ex Cricketers become Umpires but they still have to sit a course and learn the Laws and rules and work hard to climb a Ladder of progress to reach the top, ex Hants Player Trevor Jesty, David Willey, Sky Commentator David Lloyd all qualified to Umpire also Cricket is a non contact Sport with totally different Laws and playing equipment and you don't need me telling you that.

Now to Football which as we all know is a very physical contact Sport , ex Players rarely become Referess, there was one who played professionally in the 80s who's name eludes me, I think his Christian name is Lee, he retired from playing in his middle 20s and took up Refereeing, the last time I saw him in the 90s he was Refereeing in the Championship and lower Leagues.
I know in the past all Players in the Football League had to learn the Laws of the Game for obvious reason, they got to practise by Refereeing and Lining on there own training ground, whether it applies now I do not know but I would think it does and is a part in the life of a Player wanting to play Professionally.

Age plays a part in considering becoming a Referee, the younger you are the better chance you have of making it to the top, Referees get assessed and when they receive them sometimes they want to screw them up and bin them I know I did it can be very frustrating all Referees from The Hampshire League up have to take a fitness test, in the 90s it use to be a Referee had to do Sprints, Bleep test to a certain number and run 1 & 1/2 miles in 12 minutes, I was always able to do these in my 50s at Eastleigh Football ground.
Fitness is very important to be able to Referee, people in the 90s may remember Wendy Gee one of the first females to become a top Referee, she had to retire for failing the fitness test, if a Referee failed they would get a 2nd chance to pass she obviously didn't pass so ended her career.
How much has changed I will be finding out soon as I'm rejoining Southampton Referees Society. Over the last 20 years a top Referee had to retire at 48 and that might still apply, in the 90s John Martin who was an excellent Referee was allowed to continue into his early 50s because he was a very fit man but that was an exception so age can go against thousands of ex Players becoming Referees, fast tracking an ex Player to a Referee I'm not sure if it's feasible but things are changed and it's 14 years since I Refereed and nothing would shock me, if the ex Players can do it then why not.

It would be interesting to do a survey and ask many ex Players as possible if they would consider becoming Referees, consider that most Football Players retire in there 30s and to just step out of the role of a Footballer then instantly into a Referee I cannot see that will ever happen, I'll stick my neck out and suggest only 10% of ex Players would want to Referee
I used to play a bit in the eighties. Only non-league stuff. Wendy Gee was ref for a few games too. I used to like it when she was allocated to our games because you knew she was extremely competent and fair unlike a number of others. However, I do remember her running the line in a league game (I think it was a Saints match). I watched her closely and I remember thinking at the time that she was just supporting whatever decision the ref made even if it was blatantly wrong. There were a number of incidents (nothing major) when she was in a much better position than the ref to judge whether a ball was out of play, who touched it last or whether a foul had been committed close to her but she appeared to just flag whatever way the ref gave it. It was almost like she knew where the power was (I suppose linos are marked in someway by the ref?) and felt that to get on she couldn't afford to upset the ref by contradicting him. I was rather saddened watching this because it seemed to confirm that the officials weren't impartial arbiters but just career professionals looking to get on and that she knew which side her bread was buttered.
[quote][p][bold]Malcombe[/bold] wrote: George Chivers With respect to your comments let's briefly compare Cricket to Football, you are correct ex Cricketers become Umpires but they still have to sit a course and learn the Laws and rules and work hard to climb a Ladder of progress to reach the top, ex Hants Player Trevor Jesty, David Willey, Sky Commentator David Lloyd all qualified to Umpire also Cricket is a non contact Sport with totally different Laws and playing equipment and you don't need me telling you that. Now to Football which as we all know is a very physical contact Sport , ex Players rarely become Referess, there was one who played professionally in the 80s who's name eludes me, I think his Christian name is Lee, he retired from playing in his middle 20s and took up Refereeing, the last time I saw him in the 90s he was Refereeing in the Championship and lower Leagues. I know in the past all Players in the Football League had to learn the Laws of the Game for obvious reason, they got to practise by Refereeing and Lining on there own training ground, whether it applies now I do not know but I would think it does and is a part in the life of a Player wanting to play Professionally. Age plays a part in considering becoming a Referee, the younger you are the better chance you have of making it to the top, Referees get assessed and when they receive them sometimes they want to screw them up and bin them I know I did it can be very frustrating all Referees from The Hampshire League up have to take a fitness test, in the 90s it use to be a Referee had to do Sprints, Bleep test to a certain number and run 1 & 1/2 miles in 12 minutes, I was always able to do these in my 50s at Eastleigh Football ground. Fitness is very important to be able to Referee, people in the 90s may remember Wendy Gee one of the first females to become a top Referee, she had to retire for failing the fitness test, if a Referee failed they would get a 2nd chance to pass she obviously didn't pass so ended her career. How much has changed I will be finding out soon as I'm rejoining Southampton Referees Society. Over the last 20 years a top Referee had to retire at 48 and that might still apply, in the 90s John Martin who was an excellent Referee was allowed to continue into his early 50s because he was a very fit man but that was an exception so age can go against thousands of ex Players becoming Referees, fast tracking an ex Player to a Referee I'm not sure if it's feasible but things are changed and it's 14 years since I Refereed and nothing would shock me, if the ex Players can do it then why not. It would be interesting to do a survey and ask many ex Players as possible if they would consider becoming Referees, consider that most Football Players retire in there 30s and to just step out of the role of a Footballer then instantly into a Referee I cannot see that will ever happen, I'll stick my neck out and suggest only 10% of ex Players would want to Referee[/p][/quote]I used to play a bit in the eighties. Only non-league stuff. Wendy Gee was ref for a few games too. I used to like it when she was allocated to our games because you knew she was extremely competent and fair unlike a number of others. However, I do remember her running the line in a league game (I think it was a Saints match). I watched her closely and I remember thinking at the time that she was just supporting whatever decision the ref made even if it was blatantly wrong. There were a number of incidents (nothing major) when she was in a much better position than the ref to judge whether a ball was out of play, who touched it last or whether a foul had been committed close to her but she appeared to just flag whatever way the ref gave it. It was almost like she knew where the power was (I suppose linos are marked in someway by the ref?) and felt that to get on she couldn't afford to upset the ref by contradicting him. I was rather saddened watching this because it seemed to confirm that the officials weren't impartial arbiters but just career professionals looking to get on and that she knew which side her bread was buttered. Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child

3:26pm Mon 6 Jan 14

The Wickham Man says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat makes an opinion on this thread showing a complete ignorance of the facts.
...and you of course in your expensive XXXXL replica shirt sat 20 rows back in your expensive plastic seat in the Kingsland stand "Knows all the facts" do you? Yes sure - only the inside truth is ever told on fan forums isn't it. The "facts" are this was a game watched by thousands in the flesh and millions on TV, yet you have seen some insult so terrible and so shocking that it hurt poor Adams feelings so much that it has affected his and the team's game? I knew footballers were spoiled and prissy but I'm amazed by the army of dupes and suckers who dumbly hand over their wages to them then rush to protect them if they get mud on their fancy hairstyles.
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.[/p][/quote]So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat makes an opinion on this thread showing a complete ignorance of the facts.[/p][/quote]...and you of course in your expensive XXXXL replica shirt sat 20 rows back in your expensive plastic seat in the Kingsland stand "Knows all the facts" do you? Yes sure - only the inside truth is ever told on fan forums isn't it. The "facts" are this was a game watched by thousands in the flesh and millions on TV, yet you have seen some insult so terrible and so shocking that it hurt poor Adams feelings so much that it has affected his and the team's game? I knew footballers were spoiled and prissy but I'm amazed by the army of dupes and suckers who dumbly hand over their wages to them then rush to protect them if they get mud on their fancy hairstyles. The Wickham Man

3:29pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Marchwood Malcom says...

right back in the bar wrote:
Marchwood Malcom wrote:
Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him!
Agreed - unless there is more substance behind the allegations (was that all Cretinberg said?). Otherwise we really will be hung out to dry by the media and fans of other clubs who are queuing up to have a go. Rod Liddel's piece in the Sunday Times is typical - it was all about AL and there is no mention anywhere about this idiot referee's incompetence or that he talks to players all the time. Cretinberg is winning allies.
Everything you say is true of course. Because we have history with this clown we are looking to get even, which is understandable. Obviously this has backfired massively and the club and the player have come out looking petty. It's time to cut our losses and slink away from this one. Nice to see another poster reading a broadsheet, it explains your reasonable & measured attitude to this whole debacle.
[quote][p][bold]right back in the bar[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marchwood Malcom[/bold] wrote: Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him![/p][/quote]Agreed - unless there is more substance behind the allegations (was that all Cretinberg said?). Otherwise we really will be hung out to dry by the media and fans of other clubs who are queuing up to have a go. Rod Liddel's piece in the Sunday Times is typical - it was all about AL and there is no mention anywhere about this idiot referee's incompetence or that he talks to players all the time. Cretinberg is winning allies.[/p][/quote]Everything you say is true of course. Because we have history with this clown we are looking to get even, which is understandable. Obviously this has backfired massively and the club and the player have come out looking petty. It's time to cut our losses and slink away from this one. Nice to see another poster reading a broadsheet, it explains your reasonable & measured attitude to this whole debacle. Marchwood Malcom

3:41pm Mon 6 Jan 14

RED & WHITE..RED & WHITE says...

Lets wipe our mouths and move on.....Bigger fish to fry !
Lets wipe our mouths and move on.....Bigger fish to fry ! RED & WHITE..RED & WHITE

4:12pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child says...

Marchwood Malcom wrote:
right back in the bar wrote:
Marchwood Malcom wrote:
Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him!
Agreed - unless there is more substance behind the allegations (was that all Cretinberg said?). Otherwise we really will be hung out to dry by the media and fans of other clubs who are queuing up to have a go. Rod Liddel's piece in the Sunday Times is typical - it was all about AL and there is no mention anywhere about this idiot referee's incompetence or that he talks to players all the time. Cretinberg is winning allies.
Everything you say is true of course. Because we have history with this clown we are looking to get even, which is understandable. Obviously this has backfired massively and the club and the player have come out looking petty. It's time to cut our losses and slink away from this one. Nice to see another poster reading a broadsheet, it explains your reasonable & measured attitude to this whole debacle.
You all forget that Cortese doesn't care about what the press say. You might, but he doesn't. All he wants is results.
[quote][p][bold]Marchwood Malcom[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]right back in the bar[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Marchwood Malcom[/bold] wrote: Let it go NC! This whole affair has caused enough embarrassment to the club. We are coming across as small time, over sensitive and petulant. It would be better to focus squarely on what's going on on the pitch and not some muppet referee. Qualifying for Europe is what counts not Adam's hurt little feelings, bless him![/p][/quote]Agreed - unless there is more substance behind the allegations (was that all Cretinberg said?). Otherwise we really will be hung out to dry by the media and fans of other clubs who are queuing up to have a go. Rod Liddel's piece in the Sunday Times is typical - it was all about AL and there is no mention anywhere about this idiot referee's incompetence or that he talks to players all the time. Cretinberg is winning allies.[/p][/quote]Everything you say is true of course. Because we have history with this clown we are looking to get even, which is understandable. Obviously this has backfired massively and the club and the player have come out looking petty. It's time to cut our losses and slink away from this one. Nice to see another poster reading a broadsheet, it explains your reasonable & measured attitude to this whole debacle.[/p][/quote]You all forget that Cortese doesn't care about what the press say. You might, but he doesn't. All he wants is results. Cpt. Kirk's illegitimate love child

4:24pm Mon 6 Jan 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

right back in the bar wrote:
So far I have only one taker for my misnomer Cretinberg. Disappointed...thoug

ht it was right on the money speaking as it does to idiocy and suspect lineage.
He has and will be called worse things than that, not by us though!
[quote][p][bold]right back in the bar[/bold] wrote: So far I have only one taker for my misnomer Cretinberg. Disappointed...thoug ht it was right on the money speaking as it does to idiocy and suspect lineage.[/p][/quote]He has and will be called worse things than that, not by us though! OSPREYSAINT

6:58pm Mon 6 Jan 14

george chivers says...

Malcombe wrote:
George Chivers

With respect to your comments let's briefly compare Cricket to Football, you are correct ex Cricketers become Umpires but they still have to sit a course and learn the Laws and rules and work hard to climb a Ladder of progress to reach the top, ex Hants Player Trevor Jesty, David Willey, Sky Commentator David Lloyd all qualified to Umpire also Cricket is a non contact Sport with totally different Laws and playing equipment and you don't need me telling you that.

Now to Football which as we all know is a very physical contact Sport , ex Players rarely become Referess, there was one who played professionally in the 80s who's name eludes me, I think his Christian name is Lee, he retired from playing in his middle 20s and took up Refereeing, the last time I saw him in the 90s he was Refereeing in the Championship and lower Leagues.
I know in the past all Players in the Football League had to learn the Laws of the Game for obvious reason, they got to practise by Refereeing and Lining on there own training ground, whether it applies now I do not know but I would think it does and is a part in the life of a Player wanting to play Professionally.

Age plays a part in considering becoming a Referee, the younger you are the better chance you have of making it to the top, Referees get assessed and when they receive them sometimes they want to screw them up and bin them I know I did it can be very frustrating all Referees from The Hampshire League up have to take a fitness test, in the 90s it use to be a Referee had to do Sprints, Bleep test to a certain number and run 1 & 1/2 miles in 12 minutes, I was always able to do these in my 50s at Eastleigh Football ground.
Fitness is very important to be able to Referee, people in the 90s may remember Wendy Gee one of the first females to become a top Referee, she had to retire for failing the fitness test, if a Referee failed they would get a 2nd chance to pass she obviously didn't pass so ended her career.
How much has changed I will be finding out soon as I'm rejoining Southampton Referees Society. Over the last 20 years a top Referee had to retire at 48 and that might still apply, in the 90s John Martin who was an excellent Referee was allowed to continue into his early 50s because he was a very fit man but that was an exception so age can go against thousands of ex Players becoming Referees, fast tracking an ex Player to a Referee I'm not sure if it's feasible but things are changed and it's 14 years since I Refereed and nothing would shock me, if the ex Players can do it then why not.

It would be interesting to do a survey and ask many ex Players as possible if they would consider becoming Referees, consider that most Football Players retire in there 30s and to just step out of the role of a Footballer then instantly into a Referee I cannot see that will ever happen, I'll stick my neck out and suggest only 10% of ex Players would want to Referee
Thanks for your comments Malcombe. Personally I think it would be a good opportunity for lower division professional players and players from the Conference. In some cases they could combine it with a coaching Job until they became full time refs.

There are other team sports in the world which employ ex-pros as well especially in the states.I'm all in favour of trying it. But I am also fully aware that the Football Associations the world over are very slow moving conservative bodies which don't like change or experiment. Both at the top and at grass roots level. Where as in general in life I am in favour of change and innovation.

So I'm not holding my breath.

I get very fed up with poor decision making that changes the outcome of games. Especially when referees appear to make political decisions, usually in favour of the home or more to the point, big clubs.
[quote][p][bold]Malcombe[/bold] wrote: George Chivers With respect to your comments let's briefly compare Cricket to Football, you are correct ex Cricketers become Umpires but they still have to sit a course and learn the Laws and rules and work hard to climb a Ladder of progress to reach the top, ex Hants Player Trevor Jesty, David Willey, Sky Commentator David Lloyd all qualified to Umpire also Cricket is a non contact Sport with totally different Laws and playing equipment and you don't need me telling you that. Now to Football which as we all know is a very physical contact Sport , ex Players rarely become Referess, there was one who played professionally in the 80s who's name eludes me, I think his Christian name is Lee, he retired from playing in his middle 20s and took up Refereeing, the last time I saw him in the 90s he was Refereeing in the Championship and lower Leagues. I know in the past all Players in the Football League had to learn the Laws of the Game for obvious reason, they got to practise by Refereeing and Lining on there own training ground, whether it applies now I do not know but I would think it does and is a part in the life of a Player wanting to play Professionally. Age plays a part in considering becoming a Referee, the younger you are the better chance you have of making it to the top, Referees get assessed and when they receive them sometimes they want to screw them up and bin them I know I did it can be very frustrating all Referees from The Hampshire League up have to take a fitness test, in the 90s it use to be a Referee had to do Sprints, Bleep test to a certain number and run 1 & 1/2 miles in 12 minutes, I was always able to do these in my 50s at Eastleigh Football ground. Fitness is very important to be able to Referee, people in the 90s may remember Wendy Gee one of the first females to become a top Referee, she had to retire for failing the fitness test, if a Referee failed they would get a 2nd chance to pass she obviously didn't pass so ended her career. How much has changed I will be finding out soon as I'm rejoining Southampton Referees Society. Over the last 20 years a top Referee had to retire at 48 and that might still apply, in the 90s John Martin who was an excellent Referee was allowed to continue into his early 50s because he was a very fit man but that was an exception so age can go against thousands of ex Players becoming Referees, fast tracking an ex Player to a Referee I'm not sure if it's feasible but things are changed and it's 14 years since I Refereed and nothing would shock me, if the ex Players can do it then why not. It would be interesting to do a survey and ask many ex Players as possible if they would consider becoming Referees, consider that most Football Players retire in there 30s and to just step out of the role of a Footballer then instantly into a Referee I cannot see that will ever happen, I'll stick my neck out and suggest only 10% of ex Players would want to Referee[/p][/quote]Thanks for your comments Malcombe. Personally I think it would be a good opportunity for lower division professional players and players from the Conference. In some cases they could combine it with a coaching Job until they became full time refs. There are other team sports in the world which employ ex-pros as well especially in the states.I'm all in favour of trying it. But I am also fully aware that the Football Associations the world over are very slow moving conservative bodies which don't like change or experiment. Both at the top and at grass roots level. Where as in general in life I am in favour of change and innovation. So I'm not holding my breath. I get very fed up with poor decision making that changes the outcome of games. Especially when referees appear to make political decisions, usually in favour of the home or more to the point, big clubs. george chivers

7:02pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Baddesley Bill says...

The Wickham Man wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat makes an opinion on this thread showing a complete ignorance of the facts.
...and you of course in your expensive XXXXL replica shirt sat 20 rows back in your expensive plastic seat in the Kingsland stand "Knows all the facts" do you? Yes sure - only the inside truth is ever told on fan forums isn't it. The "facts" are this was a game watched by thousands in the flesh and millions on TV, yet you have seen some insult so terrible and so shocking that it hurt poor Adams feelings so much that it has affected his and the team's game? I knew footballers were spoiled and prissy but I'm amazed by the army of dupes and suckers who dumbly hand over their wages to them then rush to protect them if they get mud on their fancy hairstyles.
Wickham...I you hate premier league football so much, why come onto a prem club's football forum and make yourself look like a complete twonk?

Go back to your women's hockey page please.
[quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.[/p][/quote]So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat makes an opinion on this thread showing a complete ignorance of the facts.[/p][/quote]...and you of course in your expensive XXXXL replica shirt sat 20 rows back in your expensive plastic seat in the Kingsland stand "Knows all the facts" do you? Yes sure - only the inside truth is ever told on fan forums isn't it. The "facts" are this was a game watched by thousands in the flesh and millions on TV, yet you have seen some insult so terrible and so shocking that it hurt poor Adams feelings so much that it has affected his and the team's game? I knew footballers were spoiled and prissy but I'm amazed by the army of dupes and suckers who dumbly hand over their wages to them then rush to protect them if they get mud on their fancy hairstyles.[/p][/quote]Wickham...I you hate premier league football so much, why come onto a prem club's football forum and make yourself look like a complete twonk? Go back to your women's hockey page please. Baddesley Bill

7:07pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Skating on thin ice says...

So what happens now? The complaint has been rejected. The appeal against the rejection of the complaint has been rejected. Suppose Clattenburg is assigned to referee a Southtampon game. Suppose the club reject the appointment. Will they refuse to play? Looks to me like a 10 point deduction.
So what happens now? The complaint has been rejected. The appeal against the rejection of the complaint has been rejected. Suppose Clattenburg is assigned to referee a Southtampon game. Suppose the club reject the appointment. Will they refuse to play? Looks to me like a 10 point deduction. Skating on thin ice

7:20pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Clever Dick says...

Skating on thin ice wrote:
So what happens now? The complaint has been rejected. The appeal against the rejection of the complaint has been rejected. Suppose Clattenburg is assigned to referee a Southtampon game. Suppose the club reject the appointment. Will they refuse to play? Looks to me like a 10 point deduction.
We like to leave things to the experts here at the Mighty Saints. So when it comes to 10 point deductions we would need to find a real expert on the subject. Got any suggestions?
[quote][p][bold]Skating on thin ice[/bold] wrote: So what happens now? The complaint has been rejected. The appeal against the rejection of the complaint has been rejected. Suppose Clattenburg is assigned to referee a Southtampon game. Suppose the club reject the appointment. Will they refuse to play? Looks to me like a 10 point deduction.[/p][/quote]We like to leave things to the experts here at the Mighty Saints. So when it comes to 10 point deductions we would need to find a real expert on the subject. Got any suggestions? Clever Dick

7:39pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Skating on thin ice says...

Clever Dick wrote:
Skating on thin ice wrote:
So what happens now? The complaint has been rejected. The appeal against the rejection of the complaint has been rejected. Suppose Clattenburg is assigned to referee a Southtampon game. Suppose the club reject the appointment. Will they refuse to play? Looks to me like a 10 point deduction.
We like to leave things to the experts here at the Mighty Saints. So when it comes to 10 point deductions we would need to find a real expert on the subject. Got any suggestions?
13 minutes! Not long for a bite. Anyway, Merry Christmas!
http://live.russia.t
v/index/index/channe
l_id/1
[quote][p][bold]Clever Dick[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Skating on thin ice[/bold] wrote: So what happens now? The complaint has been rejected. The appeal against the rejection of the complaint has been rejected. Suppose Clattenburg is assigned to referee a Southtampon game. Suppose the club reject the appointment. Will they refuse to play? Looks to me like a 10 point deduction.[/p][/quote]We like to leave things to the experts here at the Mighty Saints. So when it comes to 10 point deductions we would need to find a real expert on the subject. Got any suggestions?[/p][/quote]13 minutes! Not long for a bite. Anyway, Merry Christmas! http://live.russia.t v/index/index/channe l_id/1 Skating on thin ice

9:37pm Mon 6 Jan 14

florida saint says...

im taking my missus to court as she says ive changed over our thirty years of wed .come on saints bl-oody drop this stupidity, it is now so embarrassing, just concentrate of putting the wheels back on the bus.. u t s
im taking my missus to court as she says ive changed over our thirty years of wed .come on saints bl-oody drop this stupidity, it is now so embarrassing, just concentrate of putting the wheels back on the bus.. u t s florida saint

10:34pm Mon 6 Jan 14

Strasbourg Saint says...

The Wickham Man wrote:
OSPREYSAINT wrote:
The Wickham Man wrote:
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.
So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat makes an opinion on this thread showing a complete ignorance of the facts.
...and you of course in your expensive XXXXL replica shirt sat 20 rows back in your expensive plastic seat in the Kingsland stand "Knows all the facts" do you? Yes sure - only the inside truth is ever told on fan forums isn't it. The "facts" are this was a game watched by thousands in the flesh and millions on TV, yet you have seen some insult so terrible and so shocking that it hurt poor Adams feelings so much that it has affected his and the team's game? I knew footballers were spoiled and prissy but I'm amazed by the army of dupes and suckers who dumbly hand over their wages to them then rush to protect them if they get mud on their fancy hairstyles.
Tried to resist but, no, sorry I just couldn't .....

Just s0d 0ff you ignorant 4rse! Come back once you can contribute something intelligent and factual.
[quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Wickham Man[/bold] wrote: So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat gets his feelings hurt by what is no more than a statement of opinion, yet the club is outraged by this? WHy not get outraged by the fact that most games in the Premiership are now decided by cheating? All the idiots here supporting this ludicrous immature whining just because it is a Saints player doing the whining probably deserve to fork out so much of their hard earned cash on season tickets just to buy these overpaid semiliterate children a tenth gold Rolex. If it was a Spurs player comlaining they'd be arguing the opposite. The Premiership is laughable, but those who pay to sustain this nancyboy ballet are an even bigger joke.[/p][/quote]So a spoiled prissy overprotected brat makes an opinion on this thread showing a complete ignorance of the facts.[/p][/quote]...and you of course in your expensive XXXXL replica shirt sat 20 rows back in your expensive plastic seat in the Kingsland stand "Knows all the facts" do you? Yes sure - only the inside truth is ever told on fan forums isn't it. The "facts" are this was a game watched by thousands in the flesh and millions on TV, yet you have seen some insult so terrible and so shocking that it hurt poor Adams feelings so much that it has affected his and the team's game? I knew footballers were spoiled and prissy but I'm amazed by the army of dupes and suckers who dumbly hand over their wages to them then rush to protect them if they get mud on their fancy hairstyles.[/p][/quote]Tried to resist but, no, sorry I just couldn't ..... Just s0d 0ff you ignorant 4rse! Come back once you can contribute something intelligent and factual. Strasbourg Saint

10:44pm Mon 6 Jan 14

OSPREYSAINT says...

Skating on thin ice wrote:
So what happens now? The complaint has been rejected. The appeal against the rejection of the complaint has been rejected. Suppose Clattenburg is assigned to referee a Southtampon game. Suppose the club reject the appointment. Will they refuse to play? Looks to me like a 10 point deduction.
Evening Soti how was your Christmas?
[quote][p][bold]Skating on thin ice[/bold] wrote: So what happens now? The complaint has been rejected. The appeal against the rejection of the complaint has been rejected. Suppose Clattenburg is assigned to referee a Southtampon game. Suppose the club reject the appointment. Will they refuse to play? Looks to me like a 10 point deduction.[/p][/quote]Evening Soti how was your Christmas? OSPREYSAINT

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree