Curiouser and curiouser . . .

  I have had some of my best ideas in the fresh early-morning light of a new day, when the brain is alert and rested, and the hours of sleep have allowed inchoate thoughts to develop and mature without the confusion of new material constantly pouring into the flask of gray matter that gives us our functioning.      

    So it didn't surprise me that this morning, while looking over the press reports of the "phantom goal" from the Watford/Reading match in the English Championship division, I noticed something that gave me pause (again) about soccer administrators (and instructors, and assessors) who do not seek out expert information before making decisions or expressing opinions.

    Yes, yes, I know I've written about this before, but in this case I am not commenting on past goings-on in our own referee program, but upon opinions and decisions made in England, where you would expect a higher level of sophistication about the game, than what frequently used to come from Chicago.  Read this, from the Daily Telegraph of September 22, and if you need too, remind yourself of details of the incident described in Ed's piece (September 29).

    Meanwhile, Nigel Bannister, the false-flagging linesman, is to set to receive "operational advice" from the Professional Game Match Officials.  Paul Rejer, PGMO assistant referees' manager, said:
"From his position and angle it appeared the ball had crossed the line for a goal. He has made a human error.

    "When the ball is bobbling about in the penalty area it is difficult to know that the ball has crossed the line. Performances by referees and assistant referees are reviewed every game, both on the day and by DVD."

    The first thing that (now) strikes me is the phrase "false-flagging linesman".  The assistant did not flag falsely.  His raised flag signals that the ball had crossed the goal-line.  But the real problem is:  Where did it cross the line?  And to answer that question, we need more information, in the form of goal kick, corner kick or a sprint for a goal.

    The second is the expression "difficult to know".  The decision is surely not that difficult if the assistant is standing where he should be--behind the corner-flag in line with the goal=line.

    And the third, the most important observation, is that Paul Rejer missed the point.  [By the way, because of the ambiguity of the writing, I can't be sure whether Rejer was the manager of assistant referees, or the assistant manager of referees.]  Either way, he should have known what techniques the officials could have used to get the decision right, once they enter into a discussion after the confusion.  Perhaps he had never been a referee or assistant referee at this level? 

    As it is, he is quick to blame the assistant and to send him away for re-education and "operational advice".  I hope he sends the referee away for the same thing, and sends a reminder to all officials of what to do when they don't have the answer, which is, as we have emphasized, to use information from the players and their behavior.

    Administrators, eh?  An endless source of stimuli for commentary!  And why the "Curiouser and curiouser" remark of Alice as she looked down the rabbit-hole?  Because after she mused about descending into the darkness, she finally admitted: "Oh, dear!  What nonsense I'm talking!"

Comments

[Vince]

Another spot-on post. I had a situation yesterday refereeing a U14 Girls game where there was a ricocheting ball and it wasn't clear which team touched the ball last before going over the goal line (I had no ARs). I waited a couple of seconds (really less that 2...) and noticed that the defending team was retrieving the ball and the attack team was retreating. It was as easy as that - Goal Kick.

[Brian Smith-White]

I am brought to remember an event in the ref career of Brian Hall. After returning from a WC appearance he had a "bad-hair" day in the MLS. I forget the exact details of the incidence but a couple of days later a news-blurb was issued about how Brian was going to be doing lower level games. After the public head-scratching a second news-blurb asserted that this wasn't punishment but rather an effort to bolster his confidence. Maybe the guys across the pond don't have access to the same caliber of spin-meisters as here.