This needs saying after Buxton

[Jasper Parrot]

This should be said. The detail of just how bad the refereeing was yesterday should be put online somewhere, and here’s it.

I don’t normally rant about refs. This particular ref was one of the worst I’ve ever seen (some Deadman games give stiff competition) and his decisions led directly to this problem.

We should expect poor refs in the NLN. It’s the first place up-and-coming refs are fast-tracked to. Some will sink, some will swim.

The problem with Buxton was that the referee was in his fourth season at this level, and the errors were so bad as to completely transform the game.

1. In the first 10-15 minutes of the game, the referee allowed almost everything to go. Clear fouls not given.
2. At this point, it was obvious that red cards were going to happen. Tempers were already starting to flare.
3. A decent ref is going to spot the issue. After the first few minutes, it’s obvious what kind of game is coming. He needs to blow his whistle. There are games you can let flow, and that wasn’t ever going to be one of them.
4. A good ref should have figured out that a game between the top of the table, biggest crowds in the division, and the most physical team in the division, will be a banana skin. You ref accordingly from the start.
5. The (probably mistaken) offside call (I’ve only seen it once but was in a good position) against Whitehall changed the game but that’s on the linesman not the ref.
6. When the challenge on Cameron Wilson happens, that’s because the ref has let too much go already. I don’t think a Buxton player would be doing that in a game where the ref is showing control.
7. Fans behind the goal wouldn’t have seen it properly from their angle. Fans in the Mortz stand had a clear view. Fans in the Vertikal stand would see it but would be a long way away to get a proper view.
8. For that challenge, the ref is positioned between the centre circle and the touchline. He is perfectly positioned to see the offence. The challenge happens just inside the Buxton half on the touchline. The player runs, directly in front of the ref, 10+ yards to make the lunge.
9. The ref could not have failed to see the intent. In the Laws of the Game (Law 12), there are three levels of force:
a) Careless – a lack of attention (no card)
b) Reckless – lacking regard to the consequences of actions (yellow card)
c) Excessive – endangering the safety of an opponent (red card)

This is further explained as serious foul play (red card offence): “Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.”

He could not have missed the lunge, from a long way off, with no possibility of getting the ball. He must surely have considered it likely that Wilson could have been seriously injured.

9. The problem isn’t that the ref made a bad call. He made an inexcusable call that no competent referee could possibly make under the circumstances. It’s not just a red, it’s a red that even a totally inexperienced ref in park football would be expected to get right.

10. The referee was trying to be decisive. He’d seen an obvious big foul and the yellow card was out so quickly he didn’t pause to think. You have to be sure to do that.

11. The incident in which Elliott was booked. The referee correctly booked Elliott for the shove. He didn’t resolve the melee before it.

12. Before that moment, the referee’s body language and communication was weak. Players often didn’t know what was going on. It wasn’t clear what decisions were, and at times it appeared he was overruling his linesman when he wasn’t.

13. That speaks to a fake-decisiveness. He was looking for an opportunity to do something, to show that he wasn’t losing control of the game. He saw a red-card offence and rushed into action to decisively produce a yellow.

14. The Buxton goal was odd. The linesman flagged for a penalty. The ball was being played out to the Buxton right, where the linesman should have been looking primarily at the action in front of him. In a crowded penalty area, the referee (who was better positioned to see) should be making the decision.

15. This is a mistake primarily by the linesman. The referee should realise there’s something wrong: no Buxton players were appealing for a penalty. The game was continuing as normal.

16. The referee could have fixed the problem. There was a delay (medical emergency in the crowd) and it was almost 3 minutes before the penalty was actually taken. The referee had chance to go and communicate with his linesman. A good referee would be interrogating the linesman at this point. Instead, he booked Shrimpton.

17. The sending-off was handled bizarrely. I didn’t see it closely enough to comment fully.

18. The 6 minutes of added time at the end of the first half. 2.5 minutes added for the drinks break, 3 minute break in play for the penalty/medical emergency for the Buxton goal. The physios were on the pitch I think 4 times. The incident in which Elliott was booked took considerable time. The Buxton goal celebration added time.

Even before the new guidance about stoppages came in at the start of the season, this would have been 8-9 minutes to add. Six minutes, especially under the new guidance, is impossible.

19. In the second half, the referee showed he was aware of the timewasting. The Buxton keeper was never cautioned. The ref made a huge show of looking at his watch, without doing anything about it.

20. Wright should have been booked before he was.

21. The referee called the Buxton captain over, whilst not booking Wright for persistent offences.

22. There’s a good reason to call the captain over, if he feels that it’s a strategy by Buxton to all foul anything that moves. But that’s not an excuse to book Wright.

23. He then has to book Wright for persistent foul play a minute or two later. Just not necessary.

24. In the second half, the referee mishandled the drinks break. He allowed the physio on, and then instead of restarting play after treatment he blew for a drinks break.

25. In case you think I’m being unduly negative, the ref actually got a couple of things right:

a) In the second half, when Buxton players kept going down “injured”, the referee started to wait longer and longer before allowing them back on the pitch afterwards.
b) He correctly booked a Buxton player for diving

26. Then we come towards the end of the game. To be honest, 10 minutes of added time wasn’t enough and there were huge delays in the first few minutes of that 10.

27. However, if the ref was worried about having to blow up early due to the weather, he could have added less. If he’d added 6 minutes, we’d have completed the game without this embarrassment.

28. The ref at Curzon Ashton spoke to both managers when there was a danger of abandonment. The ref for the Buxton game didn’t communicate at all.

29. When Scunthorpe were awarded the penalty, did the ref have abandonment on his mind? The weather was reaching its worst at that point.

a) If no, then it’s strange that just 3 minutes later he abandoned the game.
b) If yes, then why allow a potentially game-changing event to take place with a waterlogged penalty spot?

30. The penalty award provided a clear break in play and the opportunity for taking players off to see whether conditions could improve to enable a finish to the game. It’s difficult to imagine that in the 92nd/93rd minute it’s perfectly okay, but in the 95th it is completely unplayable.

31. Then there’s the total lack of communication. It’s not just the farce at the end of the game, it’s not just not talking to the managers about it. It’s the whole thing.

32. Oh, and finally, I’ve forgotten about the failure to show a red card for the elbow on Evans!

33. And his shocking misuse of the advantage rule. I could keep going. I won’t.

Our players had to cope with a lot yesterday. I don’t want to be too critical of them. Whitehall could have had a penalty in the first half (bad offside decision) and that would have been a yellow/red card. Buxton should have been down to 8 men, arguably 7. Buxton shouldn’t have had the penalty for their first goal. The penalty at the end should have been scored. We were chasing the game, and had Sembie-Ferris at RB chasing the game when they scored their second goal in his position.

With a different ref, we could have won by a hatful. That’s the definition of bad refereeing, when the referee single-handedly changes the outcome of the game.

THIS ref went one further: no game at all! Depending on what the NLN decides.

[ironfromafar]

Excellent piece well said jasper .. you need to forward that to the club and NL

2 users thanked author for this post.

iron64, Jackie

[TheJuryeffsOut]

Yes, excellent post. I understand there is a referee assessor at every game at this level and that one of the reasons all games have to be filmed is for ref assessment. If so surely this ref isn’t going to get a very good assessment….
Unfortunately he won’t be the only ref that poor at this level.

[Cliff Byrne’s Right Peg]

Great post.

After commenting on the ref in here onSaturday and speaking to others- I wondered if I was being overly harsh on him, especially so close to after the game.

Having had time to reflect, I believe he was the worst referee I’ve ever seen officiate a game at GP. Completely and utterly out of his depth.

3 users thanked author for this post.

lesgeo, ironfromafar, MK Iron

[Jasper Parrot]

TheJuryeffsOut wrote:

Yes, excellent post. I understand there is a referee assessor at every game at this level and that one of the reasons all games have to be filmed is for ref assessment.

If the Match Referee is awarded a mark below 60 from the Assessor, the club is obliged to send the video to the National League. Failure to send the video results in a £100 fine for the club.

[Awaywego]

Maybe a booking for the dive in our penalty area in the first couple of minutes would have set a better tone.

[64]

so we’re all agree ,dishonesty isn’t wanted in the game?

[BobbyGmeister]

Wow!

[Iron-awe]

64 wrote:

so we’re all agree ,dishonesty isn’t wanted in the game?

OK fans we are all aware of your agenda on this, back in on your box now there’s a good little stirrer.

[Iron-awe]

Great post Jasper, very thorough and bang on the money.

[Awaywego]

Only if it’s the other team 64, if you went to games you’d see that’s 40% of Whitehall’s game.

[Iron Age]

Another point of view.

https://www.buxtonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/football/buxton-boss-craig-elliott-bitterly-disappointed-to-be-ordered-to-replay-scunthorpe-united-game-after-stoppage-time-abandonment-4298511

[ironfromafar]

Iron Age wrote:

Another point of view.

https://www.buxtonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/football/buxton-boss-craig-elliott-bitterly-disappointed-to-be-ordered-to-replay-scunthorpe-united-game-after-stoppage-time-abandonment-4298511

He obviously woulf seen things differently if the score had been 2-1 to Scunny … and not a mention of the Buxton players time wasting with then dropping like been shot by a sniper and even fresh legged subs getting cramp.

I hope the guy who was wiping tears away to Scunny fans is playing .. dick head.

[Jasper Parrot]

Iron Age wrote:

Another point of view.

https://www.buxtonadvertiser.co.uk/sport/football/buxton-boss-craig-elliott-bitterly-disappointed-to-be-ordered-to-replay-scunthorpe-united-game-after-stoppage-time-abandonment-4298511

It’s selective rather than wrong. The abandonment was really harsh on Buxton. That’s true. It’s just, everything that happened in the previous 94 minutes with that clown of a referee was what led to Buxton being 2-1 up in the first place. Or having as many as 10 men on the pitch.

[Iron-awe]

The whole game from start to end/abandonment was a complete farce as far as the officials were concerned, that ref should not be taking charge of a non league game anytime soon but I’m guessing he will.

[Deereyme66]

Elliott may think it’s harsh but it would be plain wrong not to replay it.

[Author]

Posts