That is shocking - ref comments to wilder

If that had of been lumley wilder would say he needs to be stronger but because it's his shiny new keeper who hes bigged up for weeks hes protecting him.

Maybe we could get the ref on the scouting team.

He barely touches him it's not a push. He should do better and be stronger no issue with refs comment. Clutching at straws
 
Alex-The-Kid said:
I’m talking about this isolated incident, the referee is saying it wasn’t a foul and Steffen should have been stronger.
Click to expand...
But it not the refs job to pass comment on a players performance - it’s his job to to judge judge whether a player has committed a foul or made some other action against the rules. His comments constituted to a direct judgement of our keepers performance i.e. player should have done this not this - it’s not his job to do this
 
Funky_Chicken said:
But it not the refs job to pass comment on a players performance - it’s his job to to judge judge whether a player has committed a foul or made some other action against the rules. His comments constituted to a direct judgement of our keepers performance i.e. player should have done this not this - it’s not his job to do this
Click to expand...
Not really he’s said he should have been stronger, basically saying he’s looked for the foul and he hasn’t got it.
 
Jedi boro said:
Let’s get this straight

He wasn’t replying to the manager as a right of reply, nor was he commenting after the game to “set the record straight”.

It was an underhand off the record sly dig at one of our players made not to the manager in official capacity ( as some have now made it out to be) but uttered to a coach.
Click to expand...
You're assuming he wasn't replying to someone, that isn't what's been said. All Wilder said was that the referee told a Boro coach at half time that Steffan should have been stronger. That will have been a reply to the coach either asking why it wasn't a foul or stating that the referee made the wrong decision.

Referees don't just walk over and randomly make comments like that unprompted. The interaction will have gone something like:

Coach - Why haven't you given that? There was a clear push!

Referee - I didn't see any foul, the keeper needs to be stronger in that situation.

Or something along those lines. There's nothing wrong with the referee explaining his decision when challenged on it.
 
rbmfc1985 said:
You're assuming he wasn't replying to someone, that isn't what's been said. All Wilder said was that the referee told a Boro coach at half time that Steffan should have been stronger. That will have been a reply to the coach either asking why it wasn't a foul or stating that the referee made the wrong decision.

Referees don't just walk over and randomly make comments like that unprompted. The interaction will have gone something like:

Coach - Why haven't you given that? There was a clear push!

Referee - I didn't see any foul, the keeper needs to be stronger in that situation.

Or something along those lines. There's nothing wrong with the referee explaining his decision when challenged on it.
Click to expand...
Sorry but that is absolute bullshít - there is no need whatsoever for a referee to explain himself in detail on why he has or hasn’t given a decision. A simple explanation such as “i deemed there was insufficient contact” is all the explanation needed. He isn’t there to pass judgement on a players performance, he’s there to judge whether an offence was committed or not - nothing more.
 
Funky_Chicken said:
Sorry but that is absolute bullshít - there is no need whatsoever for a referee to explain himself in detail on why he has or hasn’t given a decision. A simple explanation such as “i deemed there was insufficient contact” is all the explanation needed. He isn’t there to pass judgement on a players performance, he’s there to judge whether an offence was committed or not - nothing more.
Click to expand...
"I deemed there was insufficient contact" means that Steffan should be able to withstand the contact that he received. Which means the exact same thing as "He needs to be stronger". There is nothing wrong with what the referee said.
 
Funky_Chicken said:
But it not the refs job to pass comment on a players performance - it’s his job to to judge judge whether a player has committed a foul or made some other action against the rules. His comments constituted to a direct judgement of our keepers performance i.e. player should have done this not this - it’s not his job to do this
Click to expand...
spot on, it's very unprofessional of him to do that, and clearly what angered Wilder, and rightly so
 
rbmfc1985 said:
"I deemed there was insufficient contact" means that Steffan should be able to withstand the contact that he received. Which means the exact same thing as "He needs to be stronger". There is nothing wrong with what the referee said.
Click to expand...
It really isn’t - it’s like a welding inspector inspecting a join and passing it and then saying well lads you should have had a better mix on your flame there. It’s not his job to pass judgement on an individual’s performance, he’s there to decide if it’s legal or not, nothing more.
 
HolgateCorner said:
Disappointing result today.

Just watched the highlights.

It was a clear push on our keeper.

It‘s excuse number 352 from the ref for an incorrect decision.

It‘s also the ref admitting there was a clear push.
Click to expand...
Yep just seen it myself and that is a foul on the keeper - you simply can’t touch the keeper normally and get away with it. Very poor officiating from the referee during the game, and afterwards with his comments. No excuse with our first half performance though, which just wasn’t good enough but we may have got something had it not been for that decision
 
BoroMart said:
what is wrong with protecting his players?
Click to expand...
Nothing at all but using this as a stick to beat the ref just seems really low.

I thought the ref all round was poor but that wasnt a foul.

He should maybe start protecting all his players. He has a habit the same as warnock of protecting his buys and highlighting others who were already at the club of their mistakes.
 
Funky_Chicken said:
Yep just seen it myself and that is a foul on the keeper - you simply can’t touch the keeper normally and get away with it. Very poor officiating from the referee during the game, and afterwards with his comments. No excuse with our first half performance though, which just wasn’t good enough but we may have got something had it not been for that decision
Click to expand...
exactly funk, it was a foul. I was about 10 foot from it, happened quick but it meant that the keeper lost his balance and overshot the flight of the ball. Wanted to see it on TV to confirm and yes it's a push as I thought at the time. You cannot put your hands on the keeper without it being a foul, everyone knows this except this ref.

None of that is an excuse for the first half. but it's the reality.
 
TheWolfman said:
Nothing at all but using this as a stick to beat the ref just seems really low.

I thought the ref all round was poor but that wasnt a foul.

He should maybe start protecting all his players. He has a habit the same as warnock of protecting his buys and highlighting others who were already at the club of their mistakes.
Click to expand...
Just watched it on the highlights, clear push, the ref is just making excuses for a poor decision.

It happens, no doubt we will get away with something similar at some point in the season.
 
Funky_Chicken said:
It really isn’t - it’s like a welding inspector inspecting a join and passing it and then saying well lads you should have had a better mix on your flame there. It’s not his job to pass judgement on an individual’s performance, he’s there to decide if it’s legal or not, nothing more.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree with you. Wilder is finding a way to deflect from a bad performance - and that's fine (although Warnock was always criticised for it) - and is keeping the headlines on the referee rather than his players. But there really isn't anything wrong with what the referee said. If the referee had said "there wasn't enough contact" Wilder would be making similar comments.

I also don't think the decision was wrong. I've watched the goal back on the highlights multiple times and there really isn't enough contact to stop him getting to the ball, he just mistimes his punch. It would be an incredibly soft foul to give and we'd all agree with that if it was the other way round. All keepers make mistakes though, and I'd rather Wilder found any excuse to deflect the criticism away from the player.
 
It’s pretty clear where the line lies between officiating and commenting upon a player’s performance and it’s perfectly clear the ref went over that line with his comments on the keeper’s strength, despite what the contrarians of this board will try and argue,

Does that mean we deserved anything from the game? No. We were poor and awful refereeing performance such as today should be priced in by now.
 
Let's have it said. Steffen was mildly touched at best, and has to be punching ball along with anything else in his way in that situation. What a fanny of an attempt to prevent that goal.
Lumley-esque. In addition, almost beaten by a lob for the second game in a row because he's wandering about well outside his area. And an attempt to repeat Lumley's assist at QPR last season. None of the above suggests we've moved forward at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top