Ref: Palace v Spurs (LOCKED)
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
chateauferret  21 Feb 18 11.05pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Willo
Suffice to say a declamatory post which shouts a lot but imparts little.24-carat tosh. As McEnroe said "You cannot be serious". Not going to waste my time proving any further 'Oxygen' to such hogwash.
Well, you had the opportunity to point to examples of improvement which had taken place because of your "forensic examination" but failed once again to do so. You therefore presumably concur that they are either going through the motions or not doing it at all.
============ |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
|
 HKOwen  Hong Kong 21 Feb 18 11.21pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
At least Clattent*** has gone Refs of course will never get everything right but it can't be assumed that because there is a more formal performance evaluation that the performances are getting better. The more technology the better IMHO
Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
 |
Willo Online  South coast - west of Brighton. 21 Feb 18 11.26pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by chateauferret
Well, you had the opportunity to point to examples of improvement which had taken place because of your "forensic examination" but failed once again to do so. You therefore presumably concur that they are either going through the motions or not doing it at all. "Forensic" appraisal of a referee's match performance is all to do with maintaining the high standards set and I can assure you that they are carried out after every game.NOT forgetting the 'Training camps' every 2 months. I have to say that when "Diving panel" is mentioned without mention of players or the need for such a panel then arguments lose credibilty.And of course the 3 person panel views the footage independently and there has to be a UNANIMOUS decision which recognises the fact there could be differing viewpoints despite seeing the incident numerous times with 'Slow-Mo'.A referee only gets one chance of viewing the incident in real time. Apropos VAR, it has been recognised worldwide that referees cannot see everything from every angle, hence it's introduction. Clearly some believe that referees should be able to do so.Yet another argument short of any credibility. Anyway time to go to bed now so Goodnight to one and all. Edited by Willo (21 Feb 2018 11.30pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| HeathMan Purley 22 Feb 18 12.22am |
 |
|---|---|
|
We must not forget that referees are also evaluated while in action, and are able to respond to the spoken words, both of players, and supporters during matches. "Who's the Scouser in the black" is an assessment sentence I have heard. COYP
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| chateauferret 22 Feb 18 12.24am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Willo
"Forensic" appraisal of a referee's match performance is all to do with maintaining the high standards set and I can assure you You accuse me of not bringing facts and then expect me to treat "I can assure you" as though it were evidence? You must have worked in a Government Department's policy letter-writing team for years and years because that's the only place I can think of where that counts as logic. As for "the high standards set" - ROTFL.
============ |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Midlands Eagle 22 Feb 18 6.24am |
|
|---|---|
|
same old, same old
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.