First and Third Trinity Boat Club
Log In

Message Board

Web Links

Interesting or entertaining web pages, as recommended by members!!

Message board > Web Links > Familiar name commenting on a BBC story 
  

Familiar name commenting on a BBC story
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazi...from Simon, Tue 14th Nov, 2:10pm
15 comments...
by BJ - Tue 14th Nov 2006, 5:34pm
This is worth reading just for the reactions... Reading this for the second time at 5:30pm, Neil is mentioned by name in a further 6 comments. If I were you I'd ditch the RAF and become a diplomat.
by Our Own Correspondent - Tue 14th Nov 2006, 8:53pm
A predictably ill-informed reaction to a reasonable comment which didn't even mention women's football. These six mostly take issue with the fitness argument, one saying "are you seriously saying that women can't run/accelerate as fast as men?" (er, yes) and the others citing the fitness tests for refs (but the standards are pathetically low - and I agree that some male refs/linesmen are not fit or, more importantly, fast enough). Another makes a totally spurious analogy with rugby. Clearly none has heard of Wendy Toms, who did not just make some bad decisions, she was absolutely laughable.

And an absolute classic from Emma of Liverpool:
"From my observations, many male fourth officials cannot keep up with play, hence the numerous dodgy offside and penalty decisions..." [eh?!]

I think the most relevant comment is from Chris(tine) Williams, who as an active supporter of Kidderminster Harriers clearly is one of the few genuine fans to have replied:

"As a female, I suppose I should be expected to object strongly to Mike Newell's comments...but having seen Ms Amy Rayner 'officiate' at 2 games for Kidderminster Harriers I would like to say that she is simply not good enough. This is yet another example of positive discrimination gone wrong. At Conference level, she has proven again and again that she is not up the grade yet she is rewarded by running the line at Luton. Maybe the point here isn't so much she can't adequately do the job because she is the female...the point is she cannot do the job adequately full stop. Personally, I think her appearance at a Kiddy Harriers game, officiating in any way would spark a mini-riot. She's just not good enough..."
Chris Williams, Kidderminster

I do agree with some of the comments about male officials - in particular, Dermot Gallagher, Uriah Rennie and Phil Dowd should have been removed from the Premiership refs list long ago.
by Mike - Wed 15th Nov 2006, 8:54am
I haven't seen either Amy Rayner or Wendy Toms officiate a match, so I cannot comment on either of their competences. However, I also take issue with your fitness argument.

Just because women on average are slower than men, it doesn't logically follow that there are no women who have the required speed to referee a match or run the line.

Whether either of the female officials mentioned actually have this speed is another matter (and whether or not women should be allowed to officiate at men's matches is another matter entirely), but I thought I'd pick up on the logical fallacy.
by Neil T - Wed 15th Nov 2006, 10:06am
I agree with your logic, Mike, and of course there are some women who would have the necessary speed, but these are few and far between.

The fastest Premiership defenders (I think Ashley Cole is the quickest, and Wayne Bridge was a schools sprint champion) can run 100m in under 11 seconds. I know that none of the male officials in the Premiership could match these times, but whereas a fairly fast man running the line could get adequately close to this, it would take an exceptionally quick woman to do so. It seems to be hard enough to find competent officials without also dramatically reducing the number of candidates by demanding extreme speed.

Her general incompetence notwithstanding, Wendy Toms's fitness level was simply abysmal - in fact, the reason she was removed from the list of Premiership linesmen was that she failed the fitness test, which is quite a feat given the low standards required.

Maybe the real point is that men's and women's football are as different as Test and one-day cricket, if not more so, and that it is therefore not reasonable to expect a woman to officiate in a professional men's match (which I agree is a different debate entirely - and I also readily acknowledge that a similar argument could be applied to certain male officials in the Premiership who have never played football at more than a casual level).
by Mike - Wed 15th Nov 2006, 11:26am
Neil T said: It seems to be hard enough to find competent officials without also dramatically reducing the number of candidates by demanding extreme speed.
Just to play devil's advocate:

It seems to be hard enough to find competent officials without also reducing the number of candidates by demanding a pair of testicles.
by Simon - Wed 15th Nov 2006, 1:30pm
Neil T said: I agree with your logic, Mike, and of course there are some women who would have the necessary speed, but these are few and far between.

The fastest Premiership defenders (I think Ashley Cole is the quickest, and Wayne Bridge was a schools sprint champion) can run 100m in under 11 seconds.
Making the not totally dangerous assumption that Championship & league players are slower, would you accept more female officials at lower levels of the game?
by Neil T - Wed 15th Nov 2006, 6:18pm
Simon said: Making the not totally dangerous assumption that Championship & league players are slower, would you accept more female officials at lower levels of the game?
Except at the top level I don't think fitness is a major issue. Nor do I have any innate objection to women referees. But the empirical evidence suggests that the best female officials are currently nowhere near good enough to officiate in professional men's matches. Mike Newell described Amy Rayner's selection as 'tokenism for the politically correct idiots', and sadly her performances, and those of Wendy Toms, lend credit to this view.

Perhaps the real problem is that female officials cannot have experienced playing men's football at any level, and that women's football (except perhaps at the very top level) is incomparable in terms of the skill level and physical nature of the men's game at League standard. I don't really have a clue how (say) Arsenal Ladies would fare against male opposition (let's say in a 5-a-side match, to remove most of the men's physical advantage), but I'd be very surprised if they could live with any English League teams.

To put a different slant on this, last time I played football (June 1st) I went berserk at the ref because he was consistently failing to do anything about some quite appalling tackles. (He'd also failed to give us an absolutely blatant penalty for handball.) Five minutes later I had my foot broken so badly by another x-rated challenge that it's still not fully healed. Lack of courage is probably the worst failing in a ref, and I'd much rather have had a female ref with some bottle refereeing me that day.

STOP PRESS: Mike Newell keeps his job.
by Dubya - Fri 17th Nov 2006, 1:38pm
Mike has a good point that there is no sense in reducing the size of the field of potential refs. The problem is that there is no objective standard for ref quality.

Why not give fans a data recorder. When they see a ref make a good or bad decision, they push the appropriate button for that ref. Upload the data to a database after the game. Data mine afterward to identify where a large fraction of fans on both sides think a decision occurred, and whether it was good or bad. Over lots of games in a season, you could
a) work out which refs make relatively more good / bad decisions out of their total number of decisions
b) work out which users make good / bad judgements (and re-weight their contributions appropriately) by seeing how often other users or an expert baseline generated by a committee at a few specific matches agree with them.
c) give out big prizes to particularly good and regular users (eg season tickets, etc)
by Neil T - Fri 17th Nov 2006, 2:57pm
Ahhhh. The American Dream......

A few reasons why this won't work:

1) Referees are usually a few metres away from the action, fans are much further away. Decisions that look bad from a distance often look good when viewed closer up.

2) Supporters remember specific bad decisions against their clubs by referees. I am still seething at Mike Reed (number 4 here) who probably cost Leicester City the FA Cup in 1997 (Chelsea went on to win it and all the other big teams were out). This applies even if the referee in question is actually good but happened to make one bad significant decision (not the case with Mike Reed). Such refs would never receive sensible 'marking' from fans.

3) Just because a large majority of fans thinks a decision is (in)correct doesn't mean that it is. This particularly applies when less common rules are being applied. When I used to referee in county matches, I was astonished by how many players and especially managers just didn't know the laws of the game.

4) Just because an 'expert' thinks a decision is (in)correct doesn't mean that it is. Some TV pundits and commentators come out with the most unbelievable rubbish, as do certain broadsheet journalists.

5) Any sensible output from a scheme like this would be ignored because the FA insists on doing everything by committee. This means that they get most things that matter wrong, like not selecting Martin "Come" O'Neill "Before Him" as England manager. Noone wanted Steve McClaren, but he got the job because noone wanted to rock the boat.

6) Being a good referee isn't just about decision-making at specific points, like in boxing. It's about your whole attitude, demeanour and rapport with the players and coaching staff. Some of the most important things that the best refs do, like a quiet word in the ear of a petualant youngster, go unnoticed.

7) It's also not just about the percentage of correct decisions. Dermot Gallagher gets most decisions correct, but when he gets something wrong it's usually an absolute howler. Howard Webb quite possibly has a lower 'percentage score' in terms of decision making, but for his overall manner I rate him as the best ref in the Premiership at the moment.

To be honest, although not perfect I don't think the current assessment system for refs is too bad, but I don't think referees get the support they deserve from the FA. In particular, how can a referee keep control of a game when he and his linesmen are expected to take any foul-mouthed abuse thrown their way by the players without taking any action? Almost all our top players, from Wayne Rooney to nice old Alan Shearer, are guilty of this.

It is rare to see so much as a yellow card for dissent, even when the obscenities are clear for all to lip-read. If the FA issued an edict to Premiership refs that every instance of abusive language towards an official was an instant yellow card (and I know technically it should be a straight red), we would have a couple of weeks of players getting sent off all over the place and thereafter a higher standard of conduct by the players, which would make the officials' jobs so much easier, as well as sending out the right message to all the kids watching on TV. Graham Poll might have an inflated ego but he was correct to send Everton's James McFadden off for (allegedly) calling him a 'f***ing cheat' last week - but I still have some sympathy for Everton because no other referee would have taken this action.
by Villain - Fri 17th Nov 2006, 4:45pm
...This means that they get most things that matter wrong, like not selecting Martin "Come" O'Neill "Before Him" as England manager...
This was actually a very good decision: now he's managing Villa.
by Joff - Sun 19th Nov 2006, 4:46pm
Neil T said: ..Mike Newell was correct to say that women should not officiate in professional men's matches... ..Nor do I have any innate objection to women referees.
(Part of) what Mike Newell actually said :

"It is bad enough with the incapable referees and linesmen we have, but if you start bringing in women, you have big problems..
"This is Championship football. This is not park football, so what are women doing here? "

I don't at all agree with positive discrimination, which can really be pretty damaging since it means that people
get the impression that women/whichever group you're discriminating in favour of aren't capable of doing a given job, becuase they were put in that job as a pc statement rather than because of their ability. However, I don't agree that women are incapable of (potentially) officiating at men's matches. Fair enough if you think Amy Rayner and Wendy Toms are shite refs, but not fair enough for you to agree with a man who openly admitted that he was making a sexist comment, and didn't just state that women shouldn't be officiating in men's matches, but implied that women were worse than incapable referees and linesmen just by the virtue of being women.
Come on Neil, at least try and make some intelligent and balanced comment rather than a completely bald and inherently sexist statement. If you're not innately against women referees, then why shouldn't they be officiating in men's matches? I'm not saying that there should be women referees if they're not up to standard, but they shouldn't be excluded purely becuase of their sex. Seriously, wake up and give women a bit more respect.
Though I ought to tread carefully - next thing you know we'll see Munty reffing premiership matches..!
by Neil T - Sun 19th Nov 2006, 8:12pm
Joff said: "...not fair enough for you to agree with a man who openly admitted that he was making a sexist comment..." ... "Come on Neil, at least try and make some intelligent and balanced comment rather than a completely bald and inherently sexist statement ... wake up and give women a bit more respect"
Just before I put my spade away...

I don't agree with most of what Mike Newell said, or the way he said it. (Nor do I think he should lose his job over it, as it was said in a fit of pique in the immediate aftermath of a game that Luton unluckily, and arguably unjustly, lost by one goal, having been 2-1 up.)

The only bit I said I agreed with was that women should not, currently, be officiating in professional men's matches. I'm not innately against female officials, but the current evidence is that there are none good enough to officiate at anything close to League standard, so I don't think there should be any women refs or linesmen in League, let alone Championship, football at the moment. I don't think that's contradictory, or imbalanced, or disrespectful, or sexist. (It might be bald though - anyone?)

It is a shame that Wendy Toms and Amy Rayner have been promoted way out of their depth, because as you say it gives the impression that women in general are not capable of doing the job. They tried something similar in boxing; this was the farcical outcome.

Personally, for the reasons given above (primarily speed and absence of appropriate playing experience), I think it will be a long time before we see a woman good enough to officiate in men's football at the highest level, but I'm prepared to be proven wrong.

Applications for the positions of one referee and two linesmen for the inaugural First and Third vs BPBC football match (date TBC, but possibly the Sunday after the Lents dinner) are invited and should be sent to B Garrod esq, Trinity College, Cambridge, CB2 1TQ. The RAF is an equal opportunities employer. Your bumps position may go down as well as up.
by I don't get it - is Munty a football ref? - Sun 19th Nov 2006, 8:38pm
Neil T said: Applications for the positions of one referee and two linesmen for the inaugural First and Third vs BPBC football match (date TBC, but possibly the Sunday after the Lents dinner) are invited and should be sent to B Garrod esq, Trinity College, Cambridge, CB2 1TQ. The RAF is an equal opportunities employer. Your bumps position may go down as well as up.
I'll volunteer (if I'm free). I used to referee football matches at school (despite knowing nothing about it, having played rugby through school). No one died, which is my first test of whether any sport event I coach or officiate at is succesful. In a sign of how forward looking I was, I used to wear green instead of black as well.
(Seriously Neil/Bryn, if you send me the rules of football I'll learn them if you want me to do it.)

Going back to the "letting the crowd score the ref" proposal - I had the pleasure of watching Brighton's 8-0 win in the FA Cup a few weeks bag. The ref, who was excellent, spent 30 seconds talking to Brighton's Dean Cox after a heavy tackle midway through the first half (when Brighton were already 2-0 up), no doubt reminding him that his team was cruising against a non-league team and it wasn't necessary. Did the crowd like this proactive reffing? No, of course not - they booed the ref for holding up play...
by RTT - Sun 19th Nov 2006, 10:39pm
No one died
Presumably this was not in 1980? Was there an incident with a pigeon?
by Munty - Sun 19th Nov 2006, 11:18pm
Joff said: Though I ought to tread carefully - next thing you know we'll see Munty reffing premiership matches..!
Well, I was part of what is believed to be the first all female officials line up for a cup final in this country (U12 Mid Lincs Youth League no less). How much more difficult could an Arsenal v Chelsea style clash be?

Facebook Instagram Youtube LinkedIn
If you have any comments or suggestions please email the webmaster. Click here to switch between designs. If you log in as a First and Third member, you can set a preference for a color scheme on your profile.