Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

Ach Jim. I do share your optimistic view on the game and realise that you have spent an interesting day at St. Andrews.

It is being reported that the refs are now asking for a £ 1000 match fee at the top level. I have no idea whether this is true but feel that the current £ 800 is more than generous. I have to work 74 hours of hard graft to earn £ 1000 before tax.

That is simply obscene. It would have more credence if they were any good. The modern crop of refs leave me staggered by their utter arrogance. Their match fee comfortably exceeds the weekly pay packet of many of the players on the park. No wonder they act like superior beings.

Poor choice of subject Jim.

Give them their 1000 BUT 100 docked off for each incorrect decison, such as bookings, penalty decisions etc.

If they do well they earn the full amount !

Referees are obviously essential to the game. It is good that ours are working on their performance. There is a need for work, though maybe not quite as much as some people would suggest. It is inevitable that referees will be criticised and no-one is exempt from criticism - but it must be kept within reasonable bounds. We want to attract more good people into refereeing, not drive away the ones we've got.

The everlasting debate about the quality of refereeing is a tiring one for me. I've watched a lot of professional football in the flesh, both at the top level right down to non-league, and the standard of officials degrades no more than the ability of the players.

The media seems to be angling for a world of infallible referring robots, where every decision is the right one and no mistakes are made. Referee's are human, and like players and managers, they make mistakes.

It's not possible to achieve an infallible referring system without the input of technology; video replays, goal line technology etc. But then it seems to me that most of the technophobes who are so anti-technology in the game are the same ones ranting about the standards of officiating.

It's got to be one or the other. Me, I'd take the poor decisions and footballing purity every time - although I may need to remind myself of this the next time a last minute penalty is awarded against my team.

Picking up on Hibby's #1 point I wonder how this proposed pay hike can be justified at a time when footballers incomes are falling in Scotland and in a wider economic recession. Shouldn't there also be a system of performance-related-pay for refs/officials where proven errors result in less pay? Could only be implemented in SPL televised matches.

Generally I think refs are good value for money and I wouldn't want to see a repeat of any 'honest mistakes' campaign next season. Its a hard enough job. Human error is art and part of the game but if we can support their work through new technology then all the better.

Fitness and brainstorming sessions will never recompense for a lack of first hand knowledge of having played the game at a pro-level. All the governing bodies pretend that they want ex players to join the ranks, but experience from ex pro friends of mine who had a go are far different.
Ex players are resented by the failed ex park footballers who make up the majority of officials in the pro game, and some of the county FA's actually make it more difficult for the ex pro's, if they can to maintain the status quo.
In England we are currently in an era where the gentlemen in black decide more games than the players, the same poor officials Lee Mason, Dean, etc will ruin a game near you soon.
By the way, I look at the fitness standards of the officials when I watch games, they are generally OK, but some are far too heavy and fall behind any, but the lowest of standards fitness wise.
Only football does not embrace ex players in the role of officials, cricket are generally ex county or ex test players, rugby is also far better at utilising a ready made experienced group of people.
What can we expect with the cobweb brigades in FIFA, UEAF, and our own inimitable FA making the major decisions?

I had assumed that referees did this every year and that it would be part of their job profile not something that would deserve a commendation.

I agree that it's a difficult job and referees do only get a split second to make a judgement and I support the call for technology to assist them.
We should also have interviews after matches to explain any controversial decisions but television and the press do need to ease up on the constant scrutiny and criticism they currently foist on officials.

Having said that, there should be a system of demotion following poor performances, this happens in England but doesn't seem to be the case in Scotland.

As for £1000 per SPL game, are they joking? Get real chaps, join the real world,there's an economic crisis generally and the game in Scotland is pleading poverty yet these guys want more !!!

Perhaps this explains their decision to become referees in the first place !!

Anyone fancy taking a look? just started off, done a couple of really short articles to test the water. will add longer more detailed and a wider range soon :)

Thanks

Introduce a ratings system for refs wage. Give them £1000 per game only if they receive a 10/10 rating, give them £900 for a 9/10 and so on. Most refs in Scotland would be lucky to get £500 a game.

Pub standard referees for the pub standard SPL !

I have no problem with Refs getting paid "Extra" as long as the quality and integrity improves along with better transparancy.

After games where there has been contentious issues the Refs should front up to the Press (AFTER talking to both Managers) and if they wish be allowed to put over their point of view without duress.


Sadly they can`t buy respect, but may soon need protection money if the present attitutes and harranging continue.

They'd be getting twice the weekly wage of many players.
They can earn that more than once a week.
They do it as a sideline.

Pay the top referees £1000 per week, plus bonuses if they handle difficult games extraordinarilly well, but make them full-time professionals.

But even better to see the SFA embrace change so comprehensively..

#13.

Have you removed your tongue which must have been stuck in your cheek Rob ? Reducing the number of ' blazers ' and speeding up the disciplinary procedure are welcome. Aside from this I entirely fail to understand what this ' sea change ' is all about.

Getting back to refs. Until they understand the players they are dealing with, and ignore the spy in the stand appointed by the SFA , there will be no improvement. I do not subscribe to any conspirancy theories. They are on the back foot due to the dictats of their employer.

Sadly they are mostly, not exclusively, in well paid professional jobs. My comment at #1 applies. Whatever happened to common sense ? Our refs have lost it. They have no idea how to relate to the average player or fan. I cannot imagine that any of them are worried about the next gas bill.

I have absolutely no idea how this may change. Plus ca change......

#14

Having listened to far too many nutters recently telling me the SFA would never vote these changes through, I'm prepared to give them the benefit of the doubt - the SFA not the run of the mill nutters - on this one and see how it goes. Good on Reagan.

The refs? Having worked with one of the top guys at one point I kind of agree with you on the arrogance aspect. I rather liked the Willie Young's of the world who were always chatting back to players and seemed part of the game because they had an understanding of players, unlike those that always appeared aloof, a bit power mad (e.g. Dallas) and want impose their personality on the game. I like common sense but it doesn't always suit the whistle-happy ones like Dougie and Collum, and sometimes brings complaints about the consistency of decisions. And inconsistency as we know breeds conspiracy theories among the same lunatics who can barely spell the word.

I don't bother with conspiracy theories either. If there was ever a refereeing conspiracy I think it would have leaked out by now. After all football isn't blessed with the brightest minds is it?

Liked the way the refs are comparing their pay with those in countries such as Greece and Bulgaria though. I would imagine that refs in these places are paid quite highly - if they are - for very good reasons: to avoid being bought off.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

#15

I also like the cut of Reagan's jib. He stacks up very well against Doncaster at the SPL. Perhaps the issue of so many bodies ' running ' Scottish football is for another day. I know where my vote goes.

I agree entirely. I had Willie Young in mind when posting earlier. He made some howlers - was it him that missed an off the rear frame goal - I can't remember ? The point is he related to the players. Not the fittest, he reffed the game as he saw it. He also had a lucrative life outside football.

Was'nt going there but I do remember Doncaster smugly stating that it was up to the SFA to provide refs as per their contractual requirements. He did nothing to address the concerns that brought that sad state about. Foreign refs were brought in at vast expense. I do think that the SPL has outlived it's time. Get rid of it.

A Grand a week for a saturday job?

Where do I sign up?

£1000 a week for a part time job, these guys are having a laugh. The vast majority of football fans who pay every week to watch games refereed by sub standard officials can only dream of that sort of money, in case they haven't noticed most of us are having our wages frozen or reduced in this economic climate, what makes them so special!!!!!

If I performed in my job as poorly as some of them each week, I would be on the dole.