The standard of refereeing is, I agree, very poor and seems to have got much worse. This is the thing that makes my blood boil at matches more than anything else.

However, without wishing to sound like Willo, I would make a couple of points in defence of refs:

- as a supporter for 54 years and counting I do wonder if we oldies suffer a bit from 'everything was better in the olden days' syndrome;

- in the distant past every decision wasn't subject to scrutiny from multiple angles in slow motion. I suspect referees have always been sh*t, it's just more obvious now;

- the game is certainly much faster these days, much faster. This certainly makes the officials job harder. If John Sewell ever burst forward on the overlap (I'm not sure he ever did) it was probably at walking pace and quite easy to decide whether or not he was offside!

- I also very much doubt 'simulation' was much of an issue in the '60s when I started following Palace. Players' willingness to cheat makes life tough for the officials.

I have thought about doing a survey, contacting fans' forums up and down the land to get a broader view. I strongly suspect that the fans of every club believe they are hard done by, even the top four probably believe refs are biased against them. I can't be arsed to do the survey but I think it would be an interesting exercise if there are any students out there looking for a dissertation topic!

I do agree that greater 'transparency' would help, as would greater honesty on the part of officials. It's very rare for one to admit that they got a big decision wrong, we might respect them more if they did.

I have long since said that the standard of refereeing has got worse since they became full time professional. The Premier league likes to promote itself as number 1 on the world stage but the officials are making a mockery of this. The lino on the main stand side last night was the same one as on Saturday, he was appalling and could not see a hold if it was on him!!

The issue is that the provision and performance assessment of referees was outsourced to the PGMOL by the Premier League. Basically, the refs now police themselves and, as far as they (and Willo) are concerned, they're doing a great job.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

Your logic is as appalling as ever.

One can of course be assessed and accountable at the same time.

My point was that just because one is assessed doesn't mean one is accountable.

Or can you tell me when a referee has explained his appalling decisions after a match? (Clattenburg doesn't count because he was just using it to get himself back in the limelight).

============
The Ferret
============

Problem is, it will be referees checking referees. Not gonna overrule them for anything but blatant mistakes and probably only those mistakes that are detrimental to the top clubs.

You mentioned about a "Panel of Premier managers or ex-managers...." as opposed to just former referees carrying out assessments.

Just to inform one and all that 'Match delegates' consisting of former managers and players assess the accuracy and consistency of decision making of the referees and their management of the match.It's the technical aspects that are dealt with by former experienced referees.

Anyway, glad to impart information to those who are not wholly 'Au Fait' with the assessment process.
Off to bed now.Goodnight to one and all.

Edited by Willo (14 Dec 2017 12.36am)