Open-Mic: The Standard of Refereeing In The EPL

Referees are arbiters of any sport. They have to get the most objective view of the sport and make decisions which are accurate. These decisions don't just reflect on the result of the game but they could also have an impact on the minds and futures of the sports-persons, especially if the decision is wrong.

The standard of refereeing in the English Premier League has been diminishing over time. The focus on referees is now higher than ever. Managers use referees as pawns in their "mind games" and don't want to cede the advantage of getting into the referees' heads before a game. The referees seem to keep a lot of the things that the managers say in mind and make decisions accordingly.

The focus on referees is so high that there are managers calling for the referees to have separate press conferences so that they can be held accountable for their decisions. I can remember so many decisions which have been poor or controversial or both in the season gone by.

There also seems to be a lack of common sense among the referees. A lot of the referees today haven't played the game at a high level or understand the dynamics of a game. They don't allow the game to flow and want to dish out cards just to show that they're in charge. A prime example of such a referee is Steve Bennett—who is supposedly one of the top referees in England today.

Let me take you back to a game played between Everton and Liverpool in October 2007. Jamie Carragher pulled down Joleon Lescott twice in the box—in two separate instances of what appeared to be stone-wall penalties and they were not given.

Then, when Tony Hibbert brought Gerrard down in the penalty box, Mark Clattenberg instantly awarded a penalty and reached for a yellow card. Gerrard made his way over to the referee and had a quiet word with him and Clattenberg suddenly dished out the red card to Hibbert. We're talking about Steven Gerrard, the heartbeat of the Liverpool side and one of the "best behaved" players in the Premier League. This was pathetic.

A couple of months ago when Arsenal were in their "barren spell"—Adebayor scored a perfectly legitimate goal against Middlesborough only for it to be waved away for offside. Now, the offside rule is pretty clear. If the defender does get a deflection off the ball on the way to the attacker and the attacker is in an offside position and scores, it is not an offside due to the defender deflecting the ball en route to the attacker. In this instance, George Boateng, the Middlesborough player stuck his foot out onto the ball right in front of Mark Halsey, the referee.

Either Halsey was blind or didn't understand the offside rule—both are explanations as to why he shouldn't be a referee.

Everyone knows about the now infamous games between Arsenal and Liverpool in the Champions League. It isn't the Premier League but due to the teams involved, I take liberty to include this in my case against referees. In the first leg, Peter Vink was in clear view of the foul that Dirk Kuyt made on Alex Hleb and waved away protests for a penalty. That is potentially one goal in a quarterfinal of the Champions League.

Move to the second leg where the referee—Peter Frojdfeldt—should've noticed that there was absolutely no contact made by Kolo Toure on Ryan Babel and yet a penalty was awarded. That makes it two goals - potentially. The quarter final ended in a 4-2 aggregate win for Liverpool. Do the math, and according to my calculations Arsenal should've gone through to the semi finals.

Two referees made two crucial mistakes and that led to Arsenal's elimination. If Arsenal did have a ruthless owner like Abramovich, Wenger might be out of a job and because of two atrocious refereeing decisions.

You could argue that referees are human beings and that they are in a high-pressure job. What about the players, then? They also have to concentrate for ninety minutes. They get booed when they perform badly and get humiliated in the press when they perform poorly. Why do the referees get so much leeway?

Referees have some sort of divine authority to make bad errors which could spoil a team’s season or an individual’s future and yet be abdicated of all the blame. I know that the players have to accept the referee’s decision as the final one, but I think it is very difficult to take for the fans, players and managers alike when major decisions are wrong.

Graham Poll retired as a referee due to strange circumstances. His slump really started in the FIFA World Cup 2006 when he failed to give a red card to Josip Simunic after he got booked twice. This was a world event and Poll got panned by many which eventually led to him losing confidence. Anders Frisk, the Swedish referee also retired due to death threats from Chelsea fans after their match against Barcelona in 2006 but Graham Poll was one of the few referees who retired due to the fact that he couldn’t perform anymore.

The fact that we're discussing technology as an aid to referees despite the presence of three people who have a fairly complete view of the situation on the ground says it all. Refereeing standards have gone down pretty drastically over the years.

There should be systems in place to make refereeing more effective. Their training and "education" should be thorough. I feel that if referees are well trained, there will be no need for technology in the game of football.

I think that we're setting a dangerous precedent for referees if they don't get trained properly as it could affect not only the teams we love and support, but the game of football itself.