We need to talk about reffing

The Scottish game sits in crisis and if it is not a laughing stock to the wider footballing community it will be soon.

Over the past month, the game has lurched from one refereeing scandal to another: the McDonald imbroglio and massive subsequent fall-out, the ‘look-away penalty’ in the Old Firm game, the Dallas email affair, the referee test debacle and, now, the Scottish referees going on strike.

This is not a good state of affairs for anyone and one that needs to be rectified swiftly for the good of the game in Scotland. These are two things, at least, we can all agree upon.

Before we consider whether or not the referees should go on strike or how we can improve the standard of refereeing in Scotland, let us consider the wider impact of the strike.

As Craig Brown has noted, clubs will lose gate money for this as the Saturday game will no doubt be played on a dreich Tuesday evening in February. Add to that missing out on the loss of broadcasting revenue, the possibility of the police charging clubs twice and fixture congestion. These are all heavy prices to pay.

Referees are fundamental to the game of football. Further, referees will make contentious calls in most games. Sometimes, indeed the majority of times, they will get the decisions correct. Sometimes they will make errors. They, like the rest of us, should be able to go about their business without fear of having bricks thrown through their windows.

Whilst some criticism is justified, I can well understand why many referees feel that the current scrutiny and vitriolic media campaigns from some in the game have gone a step too far.

Further, it is interesting that UEFA’s view is that this is a domestic matter. Reading between the lines, I would wager that this is tacit support for the referees – that is UEFA are not intervening either to end the dispute or put forward UEFA referees.

Falling standards

It is probably unfortunate for the referees to have gone on strike on the same day that the Sunday Mail ran a piece on the supposedly poor knowledge of the game from Scottish referees. The referees have come back saying that this is ‘routine’. I’m more worried by this. If it is routine, why did so many do so badly?

The story is sensational at first viewing. 80% of Scotland's Category One referees failed a test on the Laws of the Game. This is huge. For those conspiracy theorists out there this must be manna from heaven – the striking referees don’t know the rules! Let them strike! Joking aside, this test occurred in February. These referees were clearly refereeing important games - and still are doing so.
 

The spokesperson for the SFA points out that the monthly tests are based on ‘unlikely and unusual scenarios’. My immediate suspicion is that the blazers have been handing whistlers copies of ‘You are the Ref’ and timing their answers.

Whilst a deep knowledge of the Laws of the games is key, I think most of us would like to think that referees get the decisions right. Most of these decisions are relatively routine – Was it a foul? Should it be a red card? Was the player offside?

I’m not sure that testing them on ‘unlikely and unusual scenarios’ is likely to improve decision-making in the main even though it is worrying that other European FA’s saw much better marking.

I’m also not sure of the educational soundness of an assessment-based system of learning regarding the Laws of the Game. If it isn’t applied to the practice of refereeing it is a strange concept indeed. It is like expecting someone to be able to drive having taken the theory test.

This probably does point to a wider malaise and clearly there is a problem if there is a fundamental lack of knowledge about the Laws of the game. If there is a lack of such knowledge, it is understandable as to why the Laws are applied badly during the game.

My guess is that the welcome improvements to referee fitness may have reduced focus on knowledge, and application of that knowledge, of the laws of the game.

Bandwagon jumping

Always keen to jump on a bandwagon, one MP has jumped in with a call for referees to state who they support and that they should be barred from refereeing their favourite team. So a Rangers supporting referee could referee Celtic but not Rangers? That way, I’m afraid, lies utter madness.

How do we improve the standard of refereeing?

There is a brutal reality that we must all accept before there can be any improvement in the standard of refereeing.

The Golden Rule

All involved in the game – commentators, managers, players, fans and the referees - must realise that mistakes will continue to happen.

Even, heaven forbid, if we give in to the calls for video replay (I'm for goal-line technology and nothing else) mistakes will still happen. We cannot move to a system where there are no errors. We just can’t.

Without acknowledging this there can be no movement forward. It would be quite a step forward if managers managed to get their heads around this. Any manager who blames a referee for their side not winning the game is usually a manager covering his own mistakes. Too often the referee is blamed for a defeat to save a managers skin. Too often the media are complicit in this.

Remember that decisions are often opinions. As I say below, many commentators will watch an incident a number of times and still be unable to call it conclusively one way or another.

If we accept this, we can move on. If we don’t, let’s go and watch something else instead. It is that fundamental.

11 steps to rehabilitating Scottish refereeing

So what should be done?

1.            Scottish referees should be full-time professionals. This would allow them time to work on fitness, on knowledge of the game and on integrating those to a greater degree. It is idiotic to put so much pressure on individuals who are doing something part-time.

2.            All referees require to be respected. Some will argue, no doubt, that respect must be earned. There is something in that but, in this context, it is nonsense. The referee has both the power and the authority to make decisions in play  - whether the team likes it or not. That is a matter of fact and must remain so.

3.            Linking back to my Golden Rule above, part of being respected involves the realisation that people who are asked to make judgement calls on high-speed, multi-agent events in a high-pressure environment where they only get one viewing are, from time to time, going to get things wrong.

4.            The media can help here. One of the most frustrating things in the modern game is listening to a commentator who, having watched a highly contentious call from five or six angles, in slow motion, and then declaring ''I think the referee got that one wrong'. You think? Even after all the different angles and speeds you aren’t certain?

5.            Football can learn from rugby Watching the England - Samoa highlights yesterday showed the need for clear guidelines on who can speak to the referee.

My view is that the offender(s) should be spoken to and each team's captain. Anyone else who comes in to ''give his opinion'' should be booked. If they have already been booked, send them off. The only way that things are going to improve on the pitch is by moving in this direction.

6.            To facilitate this referees should be miked up. (a) This would allow the public to hear the abuse that they routinely receive from players (b) provide evidence of how and why decisions were made after the fact.

7.            The appeals system needs to be overhauled. I would recommend that each appeal committee that is constituted should have at least one lay member (a solicitor or advocate would be a good start) and one former player (better still a former manager). Referees should not regulate themselves and there should be external scrutiny.

8.            Referees should meet with both managers before and after the game, and should attend press conferences to explain their decision.

9.            Clubs should use the proper channels for appeals against decisions. Those that do not should be fined by the SFA. I’m not only talking about Celtic – although they have been loudest and most vociferous in recent weeks. The culture of publicly criticising referees is widespread. How many managers have served touchline bans? How many owners have questioned the integrity of referees? How many have gone too far, too often?

10.       The Referee Development department of the SFA should offer the various highlights shows a referee talking head to explain decisions.

11.       Hugh Dallas, is currently Head of Referee Development. As above, there have been massive developments in referee fitness in recent years.

My view, from a learning and training point of view, is that adjudication can be integrated with fitness training – this is the next step for Mr. Dallas.

I’m not sure how much of the above can be introduced in the current climate. Reform needs to happen. If it doesn’t, we’ll be doing a little less football watching these coming weeks.