Southampton tried to ruff us up!

[colinwhite]

I don't know perhaps I just don't understand todays game . Since when has it been ok to have two hands on an opposition players and pull them all over the place ? Why is this no longer a yellow card . Shirt pulling and holding are surely yellow cards. Im not just talking about how Mitro was treated ,but how the saints in general approached the game . Stop them playing by rough hand treatment ,push and pull them allover the place. The referee seemed to just shrug his shoulders and look at this as part of the game . Pushing someone in the back is always a free kick in my eyes . As I stated earlier perhaps I just don't understand the modern game.

[alfie]

Yesterday can't remember what game it was, there was a shirt pull and player went down no free kick, commentator said "it was a shirt pull but the ref deemed it not enough to pull him down", do you have to go down to be a foul?

[Arthur]

Yesterday can't remember what game it was, there was a shirt pull and player went down no free kick, commentator said "it was a shirt pull but the ref deemed it not enough to pull him down", do you have to go down to be a foul?

No, a player doesn't. Without knowing the incident you are referring to, I can only assume that, had the player dropped to the floor, the referee would still have not awarded a free kick.

[bobbo]

I noticed that to a degree. And checking the stats they committed more fouls than we did . The refs are totally to blame for allowing all the shirt pulling , arms around players at free kicks, pushing and yet just a touch on the lower half of the body and it's " contact " and a free kick , soare they saying a slight push is not " contact "  the standard of refereeing is an absolute disgrace . When did anyone last see an indirect free kick given for obstruction , or any other of the multiple offences it's available for.

[hovewhite]

Referees think they are an important part on the pitch and deliberately allow this stuff to go on so they are mentioned prefer seen and not heard.

[SuffolkWhite]

Was the Ref the same one ftom Bournemouth away last season?

[Motspur Park]

Was the Ref the same one ftom Bournemouth away last season?

Yes seems to be Graham Scott

[Arthur]

Referees think they are an important part on the pitch and deliberately allow this stuff to go on so they are mentioned prefer seen and not heard.

I disagree. Referees are so often in an invidious position: whatever decision they make, one set of supporters is critical of it. The Palace game is, in my opinion, a common example: I've not seen one word of dissent on here towards the referee at Selhurst Park; on the Palace fans' forum, however, they are, rightly or wrongly, up in arms at his sending off Tompkins and his failure to get to grips with Mitrovic's antics.

[demeant0r]

One of the Southampton players, when Leno caught a cross, put both hands on Leno and tried to stop him from taking a quick kick, TWICE!!! And no card was shown to that player. How is that allowed?

[SuffolkWhite]

Was the Ref the same one ftom Bournemouth away last season?

Yes seems to be Graham Scott

He gave us nothing in that game also.

[Ara's bacon crisps]

Was the Ref the same one ftom Bournemouth away last season?

Yes seems to be Graham Scott

He gave us nothing in that game also.

Also the ref at Newcastle a couple of years ago who sent off Andersen and started our shared loathing of Callum Wilson

[Sting of the North]

One of the Southampton players, when Leno caught a cross, put both hands on Leno and tried to stop him from taking a quick kick, TWICE!!! And no card was shown to that player. How is that allowed?

Yes, that was a joke of a non decision. Stone wall yellow card.

[bobbo]

I'm involved as a founder member of a local club from the combined counties league and I know we've had similar problems with a given referee and we've been able to ask and get that we never get him again . But I don't know if this is a possibility at prem level. I actually thought Saturdays ref was ok in the first half I even mentioned it but I detected many mistakes second half . Being fair I fully understand they are unable to see everything happening in a game .

[Whitesideup]

Thought the ref was shocking. What I really don't get is how some blatant fouls are just waved on. I do appreciate that refs are trying to counteract the touch-me-and-I'll-fall-down syndrome as made famous by jack Grealish, but there are occasions when clear fouls aren't given. There's was one particularly agricultural challenge in the first half from a Saints' player, who didn't come close to connecting with the ball. I thought definite yellow .. not even given as a foul.

And yet the incident for the free kick from which Saints scored, yes, possibly a foul if a very soft one, (or maybe the player put himself in the way and then took a tumble .. need to see that again) but he hadn't been giving stuff like that all game. Introducing inconsistency at a key moment is potentially game-changing.

I also agree with the comments about the lack of yellows being shown for professional fouls such as the blocking of Leno. Clearly makes you question the ref's competency. As should the assessors. I guess we'll never get to see assessors' verdicts, but they'd be interesting.

[Sting of the North]

Referees think they are an important part on the pitch and deliberately allow this stuff to go on so they are mentioned prefer seen and not heard.

I disagree. Referees are so often in an invidious position: whatever decision they make, one set of supporters is critical of it. The Palace game is, in my opinion, a common example: I've not seen one word of dissent on here towards the referee at Selhurst Park; on the Palace fans' forum, however, they are, rightly or wrongly, up in arms at his sending off Tompkins and his failure to get to grips with Mitrovic's antics.

Whilst I agree with the sentiment, I also checked the Palace forum, and I felt that it was a quite large proportion of posters that admitted that they believed the ref made the correct calls. That to me indicates that the calls were maybe not as controversial as some claim them to be (certainly the straight red was not by any means controversial in the slightest). But that is just my take.

I don't think the ref made any particular game changing mistakes in our game against Southampton, but he did for sure make it hard for us by allowing plenty of fouls against our players. Not a good showing, but as others have mentioned, we have seen this before from that same ref.

[Ara's bacon crisps]

One smaller glimmer of hope on the horizon is that Howard Webb, now in charge of referees, has made encouraging noises about a) allowing referees to talk to the media after games and b) as he has been in the US for the past few years, allowing refs to be miked up so that the whole ground can hear their discussions with VAR. Will it happen? Who knows, but those two changes could be a big step forward in addressing the monumental disconnect at present between fans and officials. Even if we don't agree with their decisions, better understanding of how and why they were made would definitely be a start.

[filham]

Southampton entered that game bottom of the table and their directors and fans would have expected the players to do everything possible to bring home a point. This would have included maximum physical effort and stretching the laws regarding fouling and time wasting to the limit, this they did and nearly succeeded in getting a point or three.

To our credit we stood up to it all and just managed to win the match.
The pressure on teams to survive now a days is tremendous and not good for the game of football.

[HarryBayles]

Refs have almost impossible job these days due to the level of cheating by players, at every single club, every single game. Everyone blames the refs, no one ever blames the players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ronnief]

I thought Southampton were deliberately targeting certain players. The early tackle on Pereira and then an elbow to his face were not properly dealt with by the Ref. Mitrovic is no angel but the persistent fouling of him was again not dealt with by the ref and in at least one incident the Ref gave a foul against Mitro when it should have been the other way round. Refs definitely give defenders the benefit of the doubt especially when Mitro is involved.

[rogerpbackinMidEastUS]

It would be good to have some sort of forums or debates between the supporters,
and refs, like a Town Hall meeting.
Either televised (preferable, due to potential upheavals) or regional 'human' meetings.
There's a lot of ways to clear up and explain what goes into referee's brains which
causes inconsistencies under various situations.
As Ara above said "Talking to the Media" or, better, referees miked live.
Whether that would change the fans viewpoint to the refs explanation
"Oh, I get his/her reasoning for not giving a foul, he/she gave the advantage to the attacking
team who went on and scored, but it was offside, but he didn't go back and punish the original
foul" etc
Another is clarity on extra time, what was the game that the ref allowed 91 minutes OT and then 32 minutes in the extra time the world cup :0)
A live clock showing the minutes etc
One of the players wives phoned up and said "Is he coming home for dinner: ?
The quick-witted receptionist said "Unlikely, he's from Japan"

Simulated situations could be debated and diving, called the "Grealish/Robben Debate"
VAR...Say no more.

Openness is the key although there will still be fans agreeing/disagreeing.

Finally the "The Palace/Leno blocking question"   How was that not any sort of infringement