Arsenal News
Arsenal News & Transfers
As featured on NewsNow: Arsenal newsArsenal News 24/7

Arsenal News, Only Arsenal, Blogs, Transfer News

Archives

November 2017
M T W T F S S
« Oct    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

What good is it when they still can’t get it right?

By Walter Broeckx

For a few seasons now it has become a normal sight that we see referees with mics wired up with each other to communicate with each other.  It is only there for the top leagues of course. Usually lower league referees don’t use it or have it because of the obvious costs involved.  But refs at the top get the material from the football authorities. Buzzer flags, communication devices… they are all there to help the refs.

Does it help? Well usually only refs who do teams in the highest division know this, and as you may know I am a bit of a referee myself.  Indeed people have asked me ‘on what level do I referee matches’ as they consider that important when it came to trying to discredit our referee reviews. Now I am not the one to brag about it but I have been doing matches involving national league teams. And last weekend the football authorities in my country gave me the present of doing a match that involved a team from the Jupiler League in Belgium. The Jupiler league is the name of the PL in Belgium. The top league. Where teams like Anderlecht and Club Brugge play in.

It was a match between Antwerp and Oud Heverlee Leuven. So for those doubting my abilities in refereeing I don’t think that even the PGMOL will send a no-good assistant to matches involving teams from the PL. So when we arrived the ref got out his equipment. Containing the buzzer flags and the headphones and the mics.

So I can tell you from my own experience that this is an amazing help when doing a match. You can communicate with the ref and the other assistant and the 4th ref as if you are sitting  next to each other in a nice terrace outside a cafe.  And once you are used to it, it helps you a lot.  You can warn each other of anything happening out of sight of one of your colleagues. Or when a ball is going along the sideline and you have to wait for you to signal if the ball goes out or stays in. Now I just could say to the ref: it stays in, it stays in and he didn’t have to look behind him to keep an eye on me if the ball would go out. So he can concentrate more on possible fouls.

So it really is something extraordinary to have at your disposal. But then I saw what Marinner and Taylor did at Chelsea and then I wondered how on earth did they mess up like that.

First of all the ref didn’t make any signal at all. He certainly didn’t point at the penalty spot and it took very very long before he actually did. When Marinner said subsequently it was his decision and his decision alone I don’t think he is completely telling the truth.  I do think he is covering for one of his colleagues.  I think we know who.

Now how on earth did it take him so long before he pointed at the penalty spot if it would have been his decision alone? So the question that is interesting is who actually told him to give (a correct) penalty. Taylor who was some 60 meters away and Marinner only 15 meters and in the same line?  It is highly doubtful that Taylor could have seen it from there. Or did he have the assistance of a video ref?   But as far as I know the 4th official is not allowed to use video evidence.  Because if he did this then he then broke the rules.  And it also would mean that it should work both ways. That it should be used to revert a wrong penalty decision when the 4th official can see it is a clear dive.

Now what is even more interesting is the fact that he (they) got the sending off completely wrong. Before and after he gave the red card to Gibbs you could see the ref pressing the speaker in his ear in order to be sure the understand what he was told. So it is clear once again that it wasn’t Marinner who first of all made the decision because if he would have seen it he should have seen that it was Oxlade-Chamberlain who handled and not Gibbs.

So who actually told him to send off Gibbs? Taylor once again? The assistant? I think the only possible one could be Taylor. And that was shown by Marinner because when he was holding his speaker firmly in his ear he was looking in the direction of the 4th ref, Mr. Taylor.

The fact that they sent off a player who shouldn’t have been send off is bad enough. But also the fact that no sending off had to happen at all was bad for the refs. Now you might say that we are sour losers. But the way people like Graham Poll and the former Welsh WC referee reacted says enough. This was utterly disgraceful refereeing.

I almost could imagine them saying : just send someone off, doesn’t matter who just bring them down to 10 man.

My dear pal Mr. Mike Riley also has something to answer for.  Last year he told us that the communication between the ref and assistants would be taped. So the PGMOL should have the full audio conversation on tape. I think the football world deserves to see that transcript of this conversation, so we  know the answers to some vital questions.

Questions that must be answered as soon as possible:

1. Who gave the penalty and when?

2. What was used to determine it was a penalty (only the eyes of the refs can be used because the laws are like that)

3. Who determined which player would be send off

But given the secretive nature of the PL and Mr. Mike Riley I wonder if first of all the communication is really taped and if not he should go for breaking his promise from last season. And secondly if the PGMOL and Mike Riley will give the tape to the involved party in this case Arsenal.

If video evidence was used against the laws of the game and against the regulations then the officials should be banned as demanded by some former referees till at least the end of the season.  Players cannot break the laws and neither can the officials.

And yes I have been a firm defender of using video technology. But only when it is done in an open way. And not in the kind of secretive way as it happened at Chelsea. If they want to change the laws and allow video evidence I will applaud it. But it must be done in the open and for all and everyone.

Using technology is all fine and well as I can testify myself from my own experience. But what good is it when the people who should use it are even showing their incompetence when using it properly….

As things stand Gibbs and the Ox are available to play against Swansea, and no further action is being taken against either of them in recognition of the fact that the wrong player was sent off, and in fact no one should have been sent off.   The referee and his group are free to referee again this weekend.

Coming up next, the referee preview for the Swansea match.

57 comments to What good is it when they still can’t get it right?

  • bjtgooner

    @Walter

    Good write up on this incident, but I don’t think we will ever get the truth from the den of iniquity that is the PGMOL.

    I did notice the Chelski players doing a lot of appealing to and talking at the ref and it looked as if this was also a factor, perhaps we will eventually hear the full sequence of events from within AFC.

  • andy1886

    A poor decision for sure, not a game changer IMO but you’d expect a professional to get that right, and a team of professionals getting it wrong is even worse. To Arsene’s credit he didn’t blame the officials for the result. I wouldn’t count on getting any transparancy from PGMOL though, there’s more chance of seeing Sepp Blatter’s bank account records in the lead up to a World Cup bid.

  • pete

    I wonder if Gibbs/Ox were cleared so quickly to avoid any embarrassing deeper investigations? The tape recording would be very interesting indeed. Arsenal should certainly ask for it. May rid us of Taylor, Marriner and Riley in one fell swoop! Although I had always thought that Marriner was one of the better refs – but the sooner we see the back of Riley and Taylor the better.

    And it proves once and for all that Michael Owen is an idiot – he said on the BT Sport commentary that it “didn’t matter” that the ball was going wide in terms of receiving a red card.

  • Mandy Dodd

    Think you are right Pete, clear the two players , keep Arsenal quiet, let Marriner ref in the PL next week, sweep it all under the carpet.
    Riley is only there because someone,is keeping him there, not due to in anyway doing a proper job for the game in this country in general
    Michael Owen should not be on anything, he is a complete fuckwit, like most players , but not all ex players turned pundits of his era

  • ClockEndRider

    That the result of the game wasn’t or wouldn’t have been changed is irrelevant. The decision in and of itself must be explained by the referee. The fact that both arsenal players have been exonerated or at least not required to suffer a suspension shows just how shaly the FA and PGMOL feels about this latest corrupt decision.

  • Mahdain

    The fact that Marriner is allowed to referee again this weekend says it all really. Incompetence is applauded in the PL instead of being accountable for it. As for Taylor, it still beats me how he even got to be a referee because even i could do a better job at it i reckon. Forget the PL, he is not even fit for the sunday league. Must have sucked up to the right up to get where he is

  • Mahdain

    I wonder will Riley ever be charged for bringing the game into disrepute? He isclearly not good enough and the refereeing standards have gone downhill ever since he took office. But will he ever be held accountable? he seems to be full of himself and doesnt have any shame whatsoever and maybe thats why he has the audacity to send us the same referee in a space of 4 games

  • My take on the penalty incident is that Marriner had a flutter on Arsenal to lose heavily and so decided to keep the worst player on the pitch.

  • bjtgooner

    I noted that Riley apologized to WBA for a penalty wrongly awarded against them (when playing Chelski); has he apologized for the utter farce of sending off the wrong player for a yellow card incident – also, strangely, when playing Chelski?

  • AL

    This hasty ‘rescinding’ of punishment Gibbs and The Ox were facing speaks volumes, more like someone wanted this swept under the carpet asap before too many people start poking around. And for good measure the instruction was to assign marriner another game to take any spotlight away from the whole thing.

    I started feeling like there might be a conspiracy for a cover up after reading that the FA had tweeted Arsenal could appeal the red card, even while the match was progressing I think. Everything was moving too fast for my liking. The door might now be shut to Arsenal stopping them asking for the recordings. If they ask for these now they could be asked what purpose do you need them for, it’s not like you’re appealing anything.

    Taylor is the one who told marriner what to do. This is clear from the amount of time marriner just ambled around in a confused way before taking decisive action in getting Gibbs off the pitch. In those circumstances the ref usually approaches the linesman to have a quick chat with him, seen this too often. But in this case marriner was just moving round in one spot, listening to his earpiece, as he couldn’t “dare approach” the 4th official, who he was speaking with.

    The media also have let the ref off lightly. Compare this with the raucous that greeted Webb’s failure to award Liverpool a penalty against us, or the incident at Sunderland when the ref didn’t “punish” Sagna for bringing back the foul to outside the box. Then, someone even had the time to examine Webb’s performances for the last 10years. Marriner has made some big blunders this season alone; the last minute penalty against WBA at the very same ground that had Riley apologising to the WBA manager and the Danny Rose red card v City that the FA rescinded. There’s no mention in the media that this is his third high profile blunder this year, only talk of how heartbroken he is. They let him off very lightly, unsurprisingly. Had the shoe been on the other foot he would probably have been kissing his chances to go to the world cup goobye.

  • Rantetta

    I wrote a long piece. It disappeared.
    Anyway, check out Martinez’s pitch to allow Arsenal to be kicked shitless at Goodison. Roberto done this at the end of last season too, or the season before, and that’s why I don’t want him managing Arsenal EVER:

    http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/mar/24/andre-marriner-not-dropped-arsenal-red-card-error

  • Rantetta

    By the way, thanks Tony and Walter for excellent articles over the last few days.

  • In a twisted way, I am grateful that Gibbs was wrongly sent off instead of the Ox. If it was the latter, as Owen did the rest of the punditocracy would rationalise it as the correct decision and it would not have been rescinded.

    I’m not excusing the ineptitude of the refs in anyway but let’s be grateful for little mercies. We are too short of players and can’t afford to lose anyone at the moment.

    It saddens me to see ‘fans’ wish our players ill over one poor performance. One bad game and Chamberlain is being wished to not be available. Some fans uh?

  • Pat

    Per Mertesacker for one believes the sending off did make a difference, and he was on the pitch.

    I like the photo the Arsenal web site has chosen, with Ox, Gibbs and Sagna all looking very worried and Marriner on his phone – turning in a particular direction, perhaps?

    It really is amazing that Marriner is officiating again this weekend. I wonder if Anthony Taylor is working as well.

  • GooneressNo1

    I don’t see this as refereeing incompetence I see it as cheating; and I agree it does feel like an attempt is being made to sweep this under the carpet.

    As for those fans wishing our players ill – there are some very sick people in this world whose connection to reality is tenuous at best. This is the kind of mentality that scream obscenities and throw coins at children playing in the U18’s. It doesn’t matter that their 12yr old keeper is reduced to tears, it doesn’t matter that the coins hit him… he must be punished… why because winning is everything.

  • Florian

    I really wonder what on Earth would it take to get an investigation started, if such a blatant mistake doesn’t.

  • Gianni Dioro

    As an educated guess, I would venture that:

    1. Taylor gave the penalty.

    2. Mourinho determined it was a penalty.

    3. Taylor guessed who to send off thinking it was some coloured chap of about average height.

  • Gianni Dioro

    And the penalty and sending off did affect the match – it killed any chance of Arsenal getting back into the match.

    I’m not saying that Arsenal didn’t deserve the penalty and red card, but how many times do Arsenal appeal for a penalty (and possible sending off), and the ref ignores it? Too often, in my view.

    So if both the ref and the linesman missed it, and the 4th official could not have clearly seen it with any certainty from 60 yards away, then like
    what Walter wrote, who gave the penalty and why?

  • gouresh

    Ok why is Arsenal not asking for an investigation? Looks like something’s not clearly not right. They should not do it behind closed doors, but have a press conference and make a statement that they want to be part of this investigation. They should demand these so called tapped conversation. That will certainly put Riley in the shit and expose him. We have to make a big deal of this and this our chance. Hit them where it hurts.

  • Brickfields Gunners

    Failure of technology or intentional obfuscation ? Incompetence or deceit ? Truth or lies ? Conspiracy or collusion ?
    I do hope that you forgive me for using your own words from this post to point out similar sad misdoings on a global scale .Life often imitates art .
    The clue is of course that its not found in the back pages .

    bjtgooner @March 24, 2014 at 9:04 pm
    …, but I don’t think we will ever get the truth …..

    andy1886 @ March 24, 2014 at 9:04 pm
    I wouldn’t count on getting any transparancy from …..

    pete @ March 24, 2014 at 9:13 pm
    …. were cleared so quickly to avoid any embarrassing deeper investigations?

    Mandy Dodd @ March 24, 2014 at 9:35 pm
    …..clear the two players , keep …. quiet, ……sweep it all under the carpet.
    …. not due to in anyway doing a proper job for …… this country in general.

    ClockEndRider @March 24, 2014 at 9:44 pm
    That the result of the ……wasn’t or wouldn’t have been changed is irrelevant. The decision in and of itself must be explained by the …. The fact that …… have been exonerated or at least not required to suffer a suspension shows just how shady the …..feels about this latest corrupt decision.

    Mahdain @March 24, 2014 at 9:53 pm
    The fact that …. is allowed to ….. says it all really. Incompetence is applauded in the …..instead of being accountable for it.

    Mahdain @ March 24, 2014 at 9:59 pm
    I wonder will …. ever be charged for bringing the game into disrepute? He is clearly not good enough and the …. standards have gone downhill ever since he took office. But will he ever be held accountable? he seems to be full of himself and doesnt have any shame whatsoever and maybe thats why he has the audacity …….

    callum @ March 24, 2014 at 10:01 pm
    …..and so decided to keep the worst player on the pitch.

    bjtgooner @ March 24, 2014 at 10:08 pm
    … has he apologized for the utter farce of sending .. the wrong … for … incident – also, strangely, when ….

    AL @March 24, 2014 at 10:31 pm
    This hasty ‘rescinding’ …… speaks volumes, more like someone wanted this swept under the carpet asap before too many people start poking around. And for good measure the instruction was to …… to take any spotlight away from the whole thing.

    I started feeling like there might be a conspiracy for a cover up after reading that the …….was progressing I think. Everything was moving too fast for my liking. The door might now be shut to… stopping them asking for the recordings. If they ask for these now they could be asked what purpose do you need them for, it’s not like you’re appealing anything.

    This is clear from the amount of time … just ambled around in a confused way before taking decisive action in getting ….

    Rantetta @March 24, 2014 at 10:40 pm
    It disappeared.

    Bootoomee @ March 24, 2014 at 10:46 pm
    In a twisted way, I am grateful that…. . the rest of the …. would rationalise it as the correct decision and it would not have been rescinded.
    I’m not excusing the ineptitude of the …. but let’s be grateful for little mercies.
    It saddens me to see …….. poor performance.

    Pat @ March 24, 2014 at 11:36 pm
    …. for one believes the …. did make a difference, and he was on the ….
    I like the photo the …. has chosen, with… all looking very worried and ….on his phone – turning in a particular direction, perhaps?

    GooneressNo1 @ March 25, 2014 at 12:24 am
    I don’t see this as …. incompetence I see it as cheating; and I agree it does feel like an attempt is being made to sweep this under the carpet.
    … – there are some very sick people in this world whose connection to reality is tenuous at best. This is the kind of mentality that scream …..

    Florian @March 25, 2014 at 12:53 am
    I really wonder what on Earth would it take to get an investigation started, if such a blatant mistake doesn’t.

  • Brickfields Gunners

    And …not be left the closure by

    gouresh @March 25, 2014 at 5:45 am

    Ok why is …. not asking for an investigation? Looks like something’s not clearly not right. They should not do it behind closed doors, but have a press conference and make a statement that they want to be part of this investigation. They should demand these so called tapped conversation. That will certainly put … in the shit and expose him. We have to make a big deal of this and this our chance. Hit them where it hurts.

    While many worried about football and their usual affairs, others were equally transfixed by incidents of a global scale which left more questions than answers .

  • ARSENAL 13

    How many connections are there in that loop. Is it only ref, his assistants and the 4th official. Or is there a 5th connection???…..

    Are the refs on the pitch the puppets. Controlled by a 5th man???

  • WalterBroeckx

    Arsenal 13,
    An interesting question.
    When I used the communication device it was a 4 way channel device. But as we know in CL matches and in some leagues even in all the matches there are a standard of 6 referees in total. Like in Italy they always have 6 refs. So they must have 6 channels. And as Marinner is a Uefa badge ref so he can be doing matches with 6 refs one can wonder if there was anyone else on channel 5 or channel 6?

    Now of course this might sound far fetched but as long as the PGMOL doesn’t let all listen to the tapes of the communication all options should be kept in mind.

  • ARSENAL 13

    Conspiracy theory: ARSENALs downfall is an orchestrated one. The 5th connection is controlling the game. The media and gambling industry(leagal and illegal), whats their role in all this?? Arsenal to concede 3 in first 20 mins. Are there any bets placed like this????

    And important question. What does ARSENAL know about all this? There is something that ARSENAL is not happy about. Why the media blackout out of the blue. I dont remember us taking any such step after that infamous(8-2) OT game.

  • WalterBroeckx

    When you look back at this incident and the fact that Marinner has told that it was his decision and his alone you wonder why he was listening to his earpiece and speaking with whoever it was that much.
    Let me say that Marinner saying it was his decision and his alone and looking at the images you can have your doubts about his post match declaration.

    In other words: I doubt that Marinner has spoken the truth about it. I do think he was dishonest about it. Maybe in an act to cover up for Taylor (or for someone else?) ?? But either way the job of a referee is based upon honesty.
    And when you feel that a ref is maybe not completely honest about this, it leaves the question about his integrity wide open.

    The most important part of a referee is that he can be trusted as completely honest and unbiased. After Saturday I lost my faith in Marinner and his honesty in fact. I always rated him rather high as a referee. But looking back at things we now can be sure of the fact that he seems to have a soft spot for Chelsea. (based on the reviews of 2 seasons with a firm positive bias for Chelsea)

    And now he gives the impression to be not completely honest in this and that is a worrying thought. When a ref loses his integrity he has nothing else to show any more.

    From now on there will be a shadow hanging over Marinner (and Taylor) about being dishonest. Only the tape of the communication between the refs could take that shadow away…or confirm that they are not honest about the incident.

    In a way you could say that if the PGMOL is open they will take the shadow away. But might expose Marinner and Taylor as liars. Or could set them free completely.

    As long as the PGMOL doens’t open up Marinner and Taylor have a label as ‘suspected dishonest’ on them. A bad label for a ref….

  • AL

    Arsenal 13

    That’s certainly interesting, also the media blackout like you say. I also found Wenger’s taking full responsibility of this a little ‘strange’. Not out of character but we would certainly have had a finger pointed in a particular direction.

    But yes, the whole thing is a mystery, esp with regards to who made that call. You know, it took marriner 2 to 4 minutes to get the whole thing ‘sorted’, and I find it really strange that he never for once made an attempt to approach his assistant ref (who some quarters would like us believe informed marriner of the offence and culprit) for clarification when he was like only 30 yards away. All this time while he’s surrounded by two sets of angry players appealing for different things. Many times we see the ref walk over to the linesman after awarding a penalty just to clarify a thing or two, and in most cases there the call wouldn’t be as controversial as this. You’d think the Ox’s admission would’ve prompted him to do this but he remained in one spot, continuously speaking into his mike.

    What we can deduct from this all is marriner was talking to someone who he could obviously not be seen to approach to get clarification, as it would have been breaking the rules for that person to advise marriner on that incident at the time. I really wish someone could ask Mark Halsey for his opinion on this one. Wishful thinking I know….

  • Shard

    Walter

    Does the 4th official have access to a tv set? The dugouts used to have them, but they were removed a few seasons ago because managers were remonstrating with referees on the basis of instant replays (and this search for justice cannot be good for the game can it? I’m surprised they don’t make it part of the TV contract to not show replays of the referee being wrong)

    Marriner certainly did not make that call himself. Even the studio pundits (and Dermot Gallagher) were saying that he’s covering for a colleague. Which would be the charitable interpretation since they made it out as if he was sacrificing himself rather than hurt a colleague. Interestingly, Dermot Gallagher also said that it shouldn’t make a difference that the ball wasn’t on target when Ox handled, and that since the player’s intention was to prevent a goal, a red card is justified. This man holds an official position in the League and was one of the longest serving referees, and he’s quoting the wrong rules on live TV, and has just been contradicted by the FA clearing Ox to play. How incompetent (or deliberately obfuscating) can you get?

  • Mick

    The idiot Michael Owen, together with a lot of other ‘expert’ pundits, called the red card correct because Ox deliberately handled the ball. On the basis that for a handball to be given it has to be deemed to be deliberate is Owen therefore advocating an automatic red card for all handballs.

  • para

    We have to completely realise what Arsenal has to fight against, and the only way is to play our game and be top class. I know it is hard for the players when they know the odds are stacked against them, but we still have to put in performances. OK we have many injuries to key players, but i do not think that even if there was no penalty, we would have done anything at all, maybe in the second half, but the game was already running away from us.
    It is these types of performances that cost us, regardless of the refs and their agenda, and we should be looking to change that.
    We have to look at our selves now, we all know the refs and the problems they give us, but we need to look at the team and how they play from one game to the other. Statistics will say that we are not capable of beating ManC, Chelsea and ManU, we know we can, but there seems to be some type of block with Arsenal.
    Anyway, we have done well with the team and injuries we have, and i wonder if the team will grow in summer, as we are looking to step up again.

  • Shard

    para

    I agree that the a non-red card probably would not have affected the result (although there are other considerations in a game, including the extra ground that players are forced to cover leading to more fatigue), but this article isn’t about that. It is about refereeing standards and accountability.

  • Mike T

    You really are all whipping yourselves into a frenzy.

    Yes you have acknowledged it was a penalty, which it clearly was.

    There is no doubt whatsoever the ref was trying to give himself thinking time for had he
    been sure he would have immediately signalled for either a penalty, corner (if he thought the defender had headed the ball), or a goal kick if he had missed the player contact.

    Walter are you as a ref suggesting he should have rushed into making a decision if he wasn’t sure? Aren’t refs taught to consult with their colleagues in such situations?

    We were sat in front of the asst and he didn’t appear to be able to add much to the debate and looking over at the two benches , supported by the TV coverage that we viewed later, the line of sight and the various reactions suggested that they had a good view from that area.The 4th official was well into the coaching area looking at the goal area would suggest to me that he was doing no more than confirming the hand ball.

    When it came to identifying the player then the asst did start to become involved. After Ox approached Marriner the ref walked away faced the asst and I can only assume that they worked out it was the full back. Of course it went pear shape but the fact that you cant for one second accept it was a genuine mistake and keep looking to blame someone else for the result is interesting.

    For me their is a major flaw in your suggestion that video replays were possibly used. If that were the case I can not see how the wrong player would have been picked out and in all probability the ref would have been told the ball was probably going wide.

  • Florian

    Mike T,

    Your argument is well within reason. For me, this mistake demonstrates two things:
    1. The refereeing is in the stone age compared to the rate the game is developing at. If this was an honest mistake, it means that the ref had no way to determine the right outcome of the action based on the evidence available to him – which means he didn’t have enough evidence, and he effectively rolled the dice. Kind of dangerous when the stakes are so high.
    2. A bit coupled with the first, but not quite: The situation is not new. The series of mistakes dates ages back, and nobody theoretically in power seems to be doing a thing to put an end to it. The only pale reason for being happy (completely relatively speaking of course) is that the blunders are getting more and more obvious, so they become harder to ignore.

  • andy bishop

    Deliberate handball, not preventing a goal or goalscoring opportunity (going wide and no chelsea player near). Clear penalty. Red or Yellow?? The rules do not allow for a yellow for deliberate handball unless the ref deems it unsporting behaviour. It was not persistant infringement or any of the other yellow card criteria. He has no choice but to give a warning or red card provided he thought the ball was going into the net or to a Chelsea player. The rest is history and more evidence for the need for swift replays to assist the officials.

  • WalterBroeckx

    Mike T,
    there are certain rules and instructions you must follow as a ref. It’s not do as you like.

    According to Marinner it was his decision and his decision alone. 🙂 🙂 So why the consulting then? If he had seen it then why the confusion? If he had seen it and was 100% sure then he can rush in to the decision. No, he then HAS TO RUSH IN TO THE DECISION to show the whole world that he had seen it and that he was 200% sure.

    I know a bit how it works as a ref of course and I can smell something fishy within a split second when I see a ref doing something unusual.

  • WalterBroeckx

    Mike T,

    To give a game changing decision (such as penalty, red card) you have to be not 100% sure but 200 % sure. By the way he acted I think he was about 25% sure

  • WalterBroeckx

    And once again I don’t have any problem with the penalty decision. But I do have a big problem with the not correct red card. The fact that the FA ruled that there shouldn’t have been a red card is telling a story I would think.
    And yes it is a big deal playing with 10 man against the team top of the league. It was the final nail in the coffin one could say.

    And saying that we were finished with 3-0 down after 20 minutes is something that we will never know.
    Last Sunday I was doing my match and the home team was 3-0 in front with 7 minutes on the clock completely wiping away the visitors for the first 25 minutes.
    The visitors scored what seemed a consolation goal after 27 minutes. The score after 33 minutes was 3-3.

    The final score was 5-4 by the way in a highly enjoyable match of football with both teams on the pitch with 11 players for 90 minutes.

    And again I’m not saying that we would have come back at all. But the ref made sure that we didn’t have a chance to come back.

    And as I said before the match: we knew Marinner was probably the worst pick of them all apart from Atkinson. Atkinson who gifted you two goals last season in the home match and refused us a clear penalty. So maybe Riley didn’t want it to make too obvious. So Riley took the second best Chelsea ref to make sure. And shooting ourself in the foot helped a lot of course, well it did for Chelsea

  • Damilare

    @mike t, and your point is?

  • Damilare

    The FA must have looked at the issue like you reasoned above and they must have considered the rules of the game as Walter pointed out. Their decision shows you-mike t, marinner, taylor and co are wrong.

  • AL

    I don’t get this whole thing about the red card wouldn’t have changed the result, why not? Liverpool were 3nil down at half time to the then best team in the world but came back in the second half(ok, maybe that game was fixed…). At the weekend spuds were 2 nil down but won 3-2 in the end. At the Etihad we were 3-1 down and 5-2 down at different stages, but could’ve drawn that match if we hadn’t had two disallowed goals and a stonewaller denied. So noone can sit here and try and tell us that red card had no bearing on the final result, I find it ludicrous, especially given that it was given after only 12 minutes. And to a defender too.

    Mike T
    You say when the ox approached the ref he walked away and faced the assistant ref and they “worked out” it must have have been the defender. Why try to work it out if they had seen the incident? Did you at any point see the assistant raise his flag? Like Walter said, at best Marriner guessed that incident, and the ref shouldn’t make any guesses where penalties and/or red cards are concerned. It doesn’t matter that he “guessed” the penalty correctly, he must be absolutely certain it is the correct decision he’s making. And marriner certainly didn’t appear certain he was doing the right thing. The daily wail also reported that he was looking confused when he made that decision, so it’s not just a figment of a blogger’s (at UA) imagination.

  • Mike T

    @ Damilare

    My point is that times individuals make mistakes. We are human and as they say he who never made a mistake never did anything.

    Also everyone, me included, is trying to second guess when we don’t know. Some are even suggesting that he didn’t make the decision himself. We know that how? These comments are based purely on how some wish to interpret the situation. None of us know what actualy happened. Yes I realise that is part of the debate and I have said on here before that refs should come out and explain themselves but some of the suggestions about betting, corruption etc are based on a view that is tainted by whatever coloured specs we wear.
    Would you have come back from 3 down? Possible of course but just as possible the way you were playing our motivation had you remained with 11 and indeed AW not been forced into an immediate substitution then who knows the score could have been greater

    @Walter 200% Is there such a number in such situations? Again your take on how things panned out is feasible but that’s not to say its correct. Its an opinion no more than that.

  • Mike T

    Al

    In my first post I say that the asst wasn’t involved in the debate as to the awarding of the penalty and it is indeed a fair assumption based on the fact that he didn’t, as you say, raise his flag that he didn’t see the offence.
    In a perverse way to a point(and only that you can take one of the officials out of the equation its supporting Mariners comment that he made the decision. The reason the asst became involved was, in my mind, to identify who had indeed handled the ball and as I said earlier that’s where it went pear shape

  • AL

    Bootoomee 10:46
    I fully understand what you are saying and agree with you. But don’t you think in a way it may have been better to have The Ox punished as it might have provided us with an avenue to request those recordings in the event of an appeal? Because without the possibility of an appeal I think we don’t have any basis to make any requests for those recordings. Of course I don’t know the ins and outs of how these things work, and it may well be that any interested party can request these under the data protection act??? I don’t know. But it seems the FA were too willing to find in our favour this time, that it makes the whole thing suspicious.

  • WalterBroeckx

    Mike T,
    there is a procedure that refs have to follow to give a penalty. And this procedure was not followed by the ref. He was running around like a headless chicken at the time.
    Even the fact that he had to come out and say it was his decision is suspicious. Why would he insinuate that anyone else made a decision? As far as I know he was the ref so it should be his decision always. Unless the assistant follows his procedure and helps the ref by ‘giving clear signals’. Which he didn’t.
    So no need for him to say that it was his decision. And yet he did… strange.

  • AL

    Mike T
    Wouldn’t it make more sense to assume there was another party that suggested to both the ref and his assistant who the perpetrator was.
    1. If we assume that marriner and his assistant did not see who hand balled then why dismiss The Ox when he said it was him.

    2. Why didn’t marriner approach his linesman instead of just standing there looking lost?

    3. If he managed to spot that handball, which was not so obvious, how then could he fail to identify the culprit, which was the easier of the two?

  • bjtgooner

    In view of Mike T’s comments I have re-watched the incident, painful although it still is. Chelski won the ball in midfield by an uncalled foul (nothing new there) and attacked quickly. The ref was in a good position to see the incident/handball, but initially did nothing, he was subjected to pleading by Hazard then other Chelskis for a penalty, Marriner put his hand to his earpiece & talked into his mike, Terry got involved, the Arsenal players including the Ox pleaded with the ref who again talked into his mike & sent Gibbs off.

    I didn’t see any discussion between the linesman and the ref, certainly the linesman did not come close to Marriner – but we don’t know who Marriner talked to by radio – however if he had wanted to talk to the linesman surely he would have walked over to him – I could not see any sign of that.

    Marriner stated it was his decision to red card Gibbs – i.e. he implies that he did not discuss the matter with the linesman or anyone else, or that he took no notice of other views. Either that, or the linesman did not know what was happening any more than Marriner – could the linesman as well as Marriner and Taylor all have identified the wrong player – what do these guys smoke before a match? Are the officials subject to drug testing?

    Whatever happened, Marriner despite being in a good position, initially did not seem to make any decision until mobbed by the Chelskis, and/or received instruction by earpiece. Gallagher excused the incident by claiming that Marriner had a lapse of concentration – strange when only 14 mins into the match – if the plonker can’t concentrate he should not be there! So by Gallagher’s reasoning the linesman and Taylor were also not concentrating? What a pathetic excuse to come up with.

    But we should not really worry ourselves – it all evens out in the end – well for some more than others.

  • WalterBroeckx

    Thing is from reviewing the refs all these seasons I tend to know them. I know how they are how they react how they will cope with some situations. And then suddenly they produce something strange.
    Like I said Marinner is one of the few refs I don’t mind seeing in an Arsenal match. He gives us nothing but usually is rather fair and stops the kicking most of the time. That alone makes him a better ref for me. So seeing him so confused. It was as if a little voice was talking to him in his head at the time and making him confused. Oh wait a minute… 😉

  • AL

    Walter
    Your last line hits the nail on the head; why go to pains to explain whose decision it was. That is the give-away 🙂

  • WalterBroeckx

    About knowing refs look at Probert tonigh Mike T. Our ref previewer lifted already a little of the lid.

    If you are able to see the match: watch out for most fouls not being called at all. Watch out for the ref giving in to the home fans if they start getting on his neck.
    Watch out for few fouls given in total.

    If Swansea wants to kick the shit out of Arsenal it will be tolerated for a big part. Not that Swansea is known for being a kicking team at all but with this ref they have the chance to do it.

    I’m glad we play at home. If it would have been the reverse tie I’m pretty sure we would not win.

    Mind you I will not be able to see the match live tonight as I have other obligations but will run the match later on of course to check my predictions 😉

    And watch out for Dean next Saturday. After having been rather fair to us so far this season I think he will go all out this time. To even things out you know 😉

  • WalterBroeckx

    Al,
    indeed. And that is my biggest disappointment in Marinner. That he gives me the impression that he has been dishonest. I don’t like dishonest refs.

  • AL,

    I totally agree with you and please understand that I am not under any illusion about what happened. However, going by our history with PGMOL, the PL and the FA, I am grateful for the mistake in grand scheme of things. I believe that the only reason why the FA is dropping the whole issue altogether is because of the embarrassment from their ref issuing a card to a wrong player. I can guarantee that had the card being issued the Ox, it would not have been rescinded.

    Others may not agree with me but if the card was issued to the player who actually touched the ball, the whole of the media will be singing the same some i.e. the red card is deserved and the FA wouldn’t have budged. We can all talk about evidence all we want but shouldn’t our past experiences tell us that the FA does not care about evidence in matters like this? Did TV evidence against Kompany cause the FA to take any action against him? Did evidence in support of Giroud in one of our latter league games of last season made the FA rescind his red card?

    Hell, some who have been ‘supporting’ Arsenal from the womb have been making the same rationalisation that the Ox deserved the red card.

    I’m grateful for the error of the refs and I’ll even be more grateful if the Ox plays a big role in our game tonight.

  • Mike T

    Walter

    I doubt I will be able to watch your game as I think our match choice is Man U V City. As it happens I know Lee Probert from my time involved in football administration. We always thought he looked like Tim Henman!

    There is an interesting article in the press today about the travel that Marriner ref was requires to undertake as he was in Europe midweek traveling back home on Thursday and didn’t arrive in London till early Saturday morning. If that’s correct then the rules about what games refs can be appointed to

    Bootomee

    I cant believe I am going to agree with you but I do think your 2nd paragraph is almost 100% correct.

    As you

  • Mike T

    appointed to need to be looked at

  • AL

    Bootoomee
    Sadly, what you say is absolutely correct, this is the best we could get out of this. Had the card been shown to The Ox, the argument that the ball was going wide would have been dropped, and he would be serving a ban tonight.

  • AL

    Walter,
    I am with regarding dishonesty, it’s terrible, especially if coming from someone entrusted with protecting the integrity of our game. But it seems honesty is a rare trait to be found in our friends in the pgmol(like we didn’t know that) 🙂
    This reminds me of the incident where Webb said afterwards he had not seen the attempted stamp by Balotelli on Parker, even though he was a couple of yards from the incident ,to get him banned retrospectively. I recall Balotelli’s agent having a right go at Webb and calling him a cheat and a coward, or something to that effect. With officials like these, we have no hope.

  • AL

    I’m with you** regarding dishonesty…

  • OMGArsenal

    Normally experienced referees will, in their pre-game briefing, instruct their assistants on what they want them to do in case an intentional hand ball or other serious infringement is seen by the assistant but not by the referee. When I officiated, I asked my assistants to hold their flag in a certain fashion but NOT to signal the infringement in the usual manner If it occurred in the penalty area. This avoided a potentially embarrassing situation where the referee decided it wasn’t a penalty, but the assistant signaled the infringement.Marriner had the final and full responsibility for awarding the penalty and for deciding who, if anyone, would be cautioned or ejected as the case may be.
    What happened is that nobody seems to have performed their duties correctly and there is the possibility, as Walter has pointed out, that a 4th part was involved in the decision. IF this is the case then it is a serious breach of the Laws and refereeing protocol….but of course this has now been swept under the rug by the FA, who probably heard the tapes of the officials and knows what really happened.