Michael Oliver

SuzieQ said:
He’s behind both of them, how could he see the foot missing the ball when his view is obscured by the upper torso of the fouled player? He’s allowed to do what he did, as long as he makes contact with the ball. The push was less than what he had been waving away all game. So why was this special?
Click to expand...

Because he most likely saw the push, which happened from behind and is the actual infringement. Seeing that from behind still looks like a pen to me.

Plus the fact that he missed the ball is rather obvious, when you consider the ball did not change direction. You don't really need to see the foot missing the ball, to understand it did miss it.
 
I actually think Oliver was justified in giving both decisions within the realms of the laws of the game based his subjective opinion, however, as a referee he exudes an aura of 'this is my show, I am the star and people have come to see me' which is shared by Mark Clattenburg. The strutting around, as though with a stick up his backside, almost preening is what gets me. The notion of 'superstar referee' really gets under my skin, especially as their primary job is to officiate and facilitate the play. I bet he will proudly tell his story of how he sent Gianluigi Buffon off in his final Champions League game until the day he dies..
 
MUFC OK said:
I actually think Oliver was justified in giving both decisions within the realms of the laws of the game based his subjective opinion, however, as a referee he exudes an aura of 'this is my show, I am the star and people have come to see me' which is shared by Mark Clattenburg. The strutting around, as though with a stick up his backside, almost preening is what gets me. The notion of 'superstar referee' really gets under my skin, especially as their primary job is to officiate and facilitate the play. I bet he will proudly tell his story of how he sent Gianluigi Buffon off in his final Champions League game until the day he dies..
Click to expand...
Partly blame the English media for hyping certain refs as superstars. Telegraph has written a piece on how brave and elite Oliver is and should have been on the plane to Russia and is a sure-shot one for Qatar.
They did this with Clattenburg. He believed in his own hype. He even dared to accept that he had an preconceived agenda in the Spurs-Chelsea match.
 
harshad said:
Click to expand...

Thanks. Then fair enough about the push, honest guy.

Usually referees tolerates more outside the box in big games. That is a small foul outside the box which may even be waved on, so why give it inside the box, but only just one time for one team, just at the end?

People here are enjoying laughing at others with differing opinion, but it really is a debatable call. So why be so hipstery?

This is classic Oliver and whether or not you think it's a foul, the way he time and time again proves to be right at the center of attention should tell you something. It is not really about if it was a foul or not. As JPRouve sort of says, the refs decision is subjective. So if a ref deems stuff like that not a foul a whole game, then thats the rule he has set so if he then suddenly deems it a foul at the last minute, it's not the right call to make. It's about consistency and when a ref always seems to get in these types of situations, it is not coincidence. He looks for calls to make that are controversial, and he is almost good at it.
 
JPRouve said:
Seriously your first sentence is out of place, there isn't a moment where I insinuate that they are a "bunch of randoms", I just told you that a foul is subjective which isn't a pejorative word, two referees can and often will have two different interpretation of a challenge, some will be lenient others will be severe and as long as they are consistent, they are both correct. That's what I'm telling you.
On your second sentence, there is a reason why appeals panels read referees reports and don't revise things that the referee clearly saw and ruled upon. Also the way they work should tell you everything, they are three which prevents decision-less ties, they each review video footages independently, so it's their own opinion that matters.

So, in isolation I don't have a problem with the penalty, I just have doubts about the consistency which is a general concern and refereeing is subjective, so we can all argue all we want, the only decision that matters is the one that has been taken and doesn't go against the rules.
Click to expand...

What you said was that foul was undefined. It clearly isn't. There are three objective measures for the severity of a foul issued to a referee. Arguing otherwise is simply bending the truth to fit your argument.

Those measures are then reinforced by guidelines issued to referees, and situational examples demonstrating exactly which scenario conforms to what, and that's an absolutely fundamental part of the process.

If you had referees turning up with wildly different interpretations week to week there would be riots. Even the lowest rung of accredited referee has been instructed as to what situation should be governed by what law they might not be very good and have forgotten what they were taught, but them being wrong doesn't make them right.

Some cowboy system where every referee is always correct and wildly different interpretations are possible would be impossible: the logical endpoint of your argument is that one referee could consider a two footed hip high lunge to not be endangering a players safety and be perfectly correct to do so; that is patently nonsense.

Now sure, on borderline cases there can be some disagreement about whether a tackle should be considered careless or reckless and so on, and in some cases there will be disagreement. That makes the interoperation of the event subjective, not the laws themselves which was your original claim. This is not a borderline case.

I've been in the referee system. The idea that there is a great deal of interoperation of the laws themselves is simply wrong, you are told what is and what isn't a foul and you accept the definition or you don't and get shit reviewer marks and don't advance. Inconsistency comes from difficulties arising from refereeing games played at speed with only one look (and because referees are human and capable of making mistakes) not vastly different interpretations of the laws of the game.

Fwiw I've said in the past, and will say it again, that I don't think the Laws are particularly well written and could be clarified to codify some of the interpretations referees are taught to referee with, but they're still almost universally understood by referees.
 
Last edited:
RedDevil@84 said:
Partly blame the English media for hyping certain refs as superstars. Telegraph has written a piece on how brave and elite Oliver is and should have been on the plane to Russia and is a sure-shot one for Qatar.
They did this with Clattenburg. He believed in his own hype. He even dared to accept that he had an preconceived agenda in the Spurs-Chelsea match.
Click to expand...
All refs have an agenda. They are human.
A lot of them hate us because of SAF’s past history with refs. Thankfully the newer bunch seem unconcerned
 
Inigo Montoya said:
All refs have an agenda. They are human.
A lot of them hate us because of SAF’s past history with refs. Thankfully the newer bunch seem unconcerned
Click to expand...
Of course all refs would have an agenda. But Clattenburg openly bragging about one particular match where he let Spurs players have a free go at Chelsea players because that is how he had the match in his mind, was down to his superstar status given by media and FA.
Oliver is an incompetent ref. His performances in PL are hardly better than other refs in the league. Writing articles on his elite status is hardly warranted.
 
It's one of those where I'd be distraught if it was given against us, but equally as distraught if it wasn't given in our favour. I'm not fan of Oliver at all, but I do sympathise with him for the beating he's taking over the decision. I think it's just about the right call, but it's definitely a tough decision. He'd be taking a beating whichever way he called it, especially if it resulted in a Juve winner in extra time.

MUFC OK said:
I actually think Oliver was justified in giving both decisions within the realms of the laws of the game based his subjective opinion, however, as a referee he exudes an aura of 'this is my show, I am the star and people have come to see me' which is shared by Mark Clattenburg. The strutting around, as though with a stick up his backside, almost preening is what gets me. The notion of 'superstar referee' really gets under my skin, especially as their primary job is to officiate and facilitate the play. I bet he will proudly tell his story of how he sent Gianluigi Buffon off in his final Champions League game until the day he dies..
Click to expand...

Personally I've never gotten that vibe from Oliver. He just always looks like a deer in the headlights to me. Mike Dean however...

91e162bae38643749e6f3155c95be5ed.jpg

That face. Don't you just want to put on a pair of running spikes and stand on it?
 
SuzieQ said:
Because Oliver didn’t have multiple Angles, he had one from the back and wouldn’t have seen what we all saw. If he doesn’t see it he can’t give it, and I may be mistaken, but he didn’t consult his assistants, he just gave it.
Click to expand...
This post is on a Trump level of bullshit. :wenger:
 
SuzieQ said:
Except for the fact that being right or wrong isn’t as clear cut as you pretend it is, if it was there wouldn’t be 12 hour conversation about it going on. Your opinion, is just that, as is mine.

Refs get respect when they are consistent. Oliver isn’t consistent, and as such he he doesn’t get respect. Refs need to take control of games through communication and personality. Understanding rules and applying them fairly in a highly passionate atmosphere doesn’t allow for black and white handling of the rules. If it did, there would be a player left on any pitch at half time.
Click to expand...
Good post
 
Charles Miller said:
It was a soft penalty. I doubt that in the same context he would call that pk against Real Madrid. Its inconsistent with what is considered fault in the Premiere League too, what makes it even more annoying.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that. I’ll look at replays later - but the incident clearly divides opinions in the Caf.
 
Carolina Red said:
I’ve read a whole lot of responses basically saying, “it was a penalty but shouldn’t have been given because it ruined a great story”...

Is it just me, or wasn’t there a thread on here giving Clattenburg up the river because he basically admitted that “protecting a great storyline” entered into his refereeing decisions?
Click to expand...
I believe within the referee profession, there are classes of quality, respect which they can earn. And there are different profile of games. See it like this. A great defense concede a soft goals, the manager and the fan would be frustrated. It's not because soft goal never happens, but the expectation ofdefense

Similar with referee. In high profile game, refs are to expected to not make their decisions to decide game when it comes to 50/50 situation. Stonewall, blatant fouls are one the refs are expected to catch; AND the ref would be able to control the game, not having both teams players get overemotional. We're talking about big games where the 2 teams involved have the ability to see thing out between themselves, and most people (big games attract neutral fans which is more than both teams' fan bases) want to see it like that. Not having the game decided by ending call on 50/50 situation.

I questioned people using the "stonewall" term to describe that penalty yesterday. These kinds of penalty is as 50/50 as you can get. There are plenty of time the ref would wave to play it on, in regular game let alone high profile games.
 
I don't know why anyone would want to be a football referee these days.

It's guaranteed that you will be hated no matter what and get death threats all year long.

I can only imagine that their salary is fecking fantastic.
 
Easily my favourite headline in a long time.

Buffon says "Oliver has a bin for a heart"

Say that out loud without sniggering to yourself it's impossible.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ti vu said:
I believe within the referee profession, there are classes of quality, respect which they can earn. And there are different profile of games. See it like this. A great defense concede a soft goals, the manager and the fan would be frustrated. It's not because soft goal never happens, but the expectation ofdefense

Similar with referee. In high profile game, refs are to expected to not make their decisions to decide game when it comes to 50/50 situation. Stonewall, blatant fouls are one the refs are expected to catch; AND the ref would be able to control the game, not having both teams players get overemotional. We're talking about big games where the 2 teams involved have the ability to see thing out between themselves, and most people (big games attract neutral fans which is more than both teams' fan bases) want to see it like that. Not having the game decided by ending call on 50/50 situation.

I questioned people using the "stonewall" term to describe that penalty yesterday. These kinds of penalty is as 50/50 as you can get. There are plenty of time the ref would wave to play it on, in regular game let alone high profile games.
Click to expand...

Can you explain what you're seeing here to call this 50/50?

 
MikeKing said:
Thanks. Then fair enough about the push, honest guy.

Usually referees tolerates more outside the box in big games. That is a small foul outside the box which may even be waved on, so why give it inside the box, but only just one time for one team, just at the end?

People here are enjoying laughing at others with differing opinion, but it really is a debatable call. So why be so hipstery?

This is classic Oliver and whether or not you think it's a foul, the way he time and time again proves to be right at the center of attention should tell you something. It is not really about if it was a foul or not. As JPRouve sort of says, the refs decision is subjective. So if a ref deems stuff like that not a foul a whole game, then thats the rule he has set so if he then suddenly deems it a foul at the last minute, it's not the right call to make. It's about consistency and when a ref always seems to get in these types of situations, it is not coincidence. He looks for calls to make that are controversial, and he is almost good at it.
Click to expand...

Well, you will never get consistency with any refs, to be honest, that is human nature. They are not computers. However, I believe that if VAR had been used last night the penalty would still have been given. But hey, that is an opinion nothing else.
 
spiriticon said:
I don't know why anyone would want to be a football referee these days.

It's guaranteed that you will be hated no matter what and get death threats all year long.

I can only imagine that their salary is fecking fantastic.
Click to expand...
Id do a Clattenburg and feck off to the Middle East as well.
Its the examples that are getting pulled from thin air that gets me. Has he ever let a challenge like this go? Where are the inconsistency accusations coming from?
At worst its 50/50 and even then the decision should be accepted. 50/50 doesn't mean its wrong to give it.
50/50 is being very generous as well
 
NinjaFletch said:
Can you explain what you're seeing here to call this 50/50?

Click to expand...


The the contract force is enough?

I am against VAR to be clear and this is one of those instance where video review gives a different feel on the situation than when watching at full speed.
harshad said:
Click to expand...


http://www.goal.com/en/news/benatia...d-of-football-after/qhwd54p9l8w51m7fvm453fz83

“I’ve seen it in the match, I’ve seen it on the TV, you can’t whistle for a foul on this kind of action,” Benatia fumed to beIN Sports France.

“When you put in that much effort, against a great team like this, you can’t have a referee whistling for a penalty like that in the 93rd-minute, because honestly this is a game which should have ended in extra-time.

“I’m proud of my team, but I’m more and more disgusted by the world of football.

"What I say might seem harsh, but when you make an effort like that you can't afford to have the referee give a penalty kick in the 93rd minute and crush the hopes of the people. There's some work behind all that.

If I’d made a clear foul I’d have said it honestly: ‘I touched him, but otherwise he’d have scored into an empty goal’. But that’s not the case!

“I did everything I could not to touch him, but at the end of the day football is still a contact sport. So it’s possible my right thigh touched him, but I didn’t shove him or anything.

“There it is, it’s bad, it’s bad. We’re disgusted, but that’s life, that’s football.”

I noticed the quote often being taken in isolation by Twitter recently. And seems to be very different from some full(er) interview the players gave. In this instance you thought Benatia admitted his foul by the tweet isolated quote, when on the other hand, he was saying pretty much similar to what other people say about 50/50 situation in big profile game and expectation for the ref.
 
People will hate MO and also that Madrid always is getting decisive calls in their favour to help them along. But you shouldn’t let how you feel about MO or how you feel about RM cloud your judgement.

Based on the incident alone, that’s a penalty, no doubt. He kicks his midrift from the side and that’s when the player goes down.

Buffon’s behaviour was OTT and he fully deserved the red. He should also show some maturity and apologize to MO for the comments he made last night. Terrible way to end his carreer.
 
ti vu said:
The the contract force is enough?

I am against VAR to be clear and this is one of those instance where video review gives a different feel on the situation than when watching at full speed.
Click to expand...

What 'contract force (?)' are you referring to here though, the shove in the back or the leg coming through?

The shove itself might be a bit debatable, but I think it's pretty clear he wipes him out with his leg whilst getting either very little (or, I think, none) of the ball at, at best, the same time he's wiping the player out.

VAR would 100% confirm this decision, the decision would have to be clearly wrong for it to change it and I think everyone agrees that it's not clearly wrong, even if they think it is debatable.

And the full Benetia quote just makes him look like a moron. Admitting to fouling a player but asking that the referee apply different rules for you is the peak of stupidity.
 
Last edited:
ti vu said:
“I did everything I could not to touch him, but at the end of the day football is still a contact sport. So it’s possible my right thigh touched him, but I didn’t shove him or anything.
Click to expand...
Running at someone in speed and touching their back with both hands would result in a shove, regardless of whether you meant it or not
 
NinjaFletch said:
What 'contract force (?)' are you referring to here though, the shove in the back or the leg coming through?

The shove itself might be a bit debatable, but I think it's pretty clear he wipes him out with his leg whilst getting either very little (or, I think, none) of the ball at, at best, the same time he's wiping the player out.

VAR would 100% confirm this decision, the decision would have to be clearly wrong for it to change it and I think everyone agrees that it's not clearly wrong, even if they think it is debatable.

And the full Benetia quote just makes him look like a moron. Admitting to fouling a player but asking that the referee apply different rules for you is the peak of stupidity.
Click to expand...

I have to agree particularly on the rule point....

He literally thinks that because it's big comeback against Madrid in CL knockout that it's a fecking free for all moshpit after 80 minutes.

Blatant/stupid foul no sympathy
 
He made a big mistake in sending Buffon off, he assumed it was Buffon that pushed him but it was actually Douglas Costa

He just guessed which a ref should never do

Also allowed the Madrid players to dive all game without booking them

Penalty decision seemed correct though, if that had of happened in the Real Madrid box I would have been screaming penalty
 
Vialli_92 said:
He made a big mistake in sending Buffon off, he assumed it was Buffon that pushed him but it was actually Douglas Costa

He just guessed which a ref should never do

Also allowed the Madrid players to dive all game without booking them

Penalty decision seemed correct though, if that had of happened in the Real Madrid box I would have been screaming penalty
Click to expand...

Buffon looked like he was a second away from biting his face.
 
Good grief, on what planet is that not a penalty, it's about as clear a penalty as you are going to get, and the way Buffon was berating the ref, I don't blame him for sending him off.

10 pages on this (5 before anyone even posted a video of the incident).
 
RedDevil@84 said:
Are we going to analyze the strengths of fouled player every time there is a penalty. Because that is never the case. Many players are built like tanks. That doesn't mean that you dont give penalties until you see someone get two footed in the box or punched hard on the face.
Click to expand...

But that is happening already otherwise every contact (no matter how small) where a player goes down would be penalty. The referee has to judge for each situation if the contact was enough to hinder the players action in a way that is sufficient for awarding a penalty. This is of course subjective and also very difficult. But it's generally frustrating seeing players get rewarded for going down on the slightest contact where they could have easily stayed on their feet.
 
Vialli_92 said:
He made a big mistake in sending Buffon off, he assumed it was Buffon that pushed him but it was actually Douglas Costa

He just guessed which a ref should never do

Also allowed the Madrid players to dive all game without booking them

Penalty decision seemed correct though, if that had of happened in the Real Madrid box I would have been screaming penalty
Click to expand...
We must have watched different games, I saw Juve players not getting booked for hacking away at RM players.
 
Vialli_92 said:
He is the captain he is entitled to talk to the ref

It's up to the ref to take control and get the other players away from him
Click to expand...

He wasn't talking to him. He was in his face and moving closer, shouting at him. I hate Oliver as much as the next guy, but you can't do that to the ref.
 
Last edited:
VeevaVee said:
He wasn't talking to him. He was in his face and moving closer, shouting at him. I hate Oliver as much as the next guy, but you can't do that to the ref.
Click to expand...
He sent him off for pushing him when it wasn't Buffon, he didn't send him off for shouting
 
Vialli_92 said:
He sent him off for pushing him when it wasn't Buffon, he didn't send him off for shouting
Click to expand...

He was aggressive in general. He also did push him at one point, semi-accidentally. I say 'semi' because if he hadn't lost it it wouldn't have happened. Justified sending off.
 
VeevaVee said:
He was aggressive in general. He also did push him at one point, semi-accidentally. I say 'semi' because if he hadn't lost it it wouldn't have happened. Justified sending off.
Click to expand...
He still made a huge error and assumed it was Buffon that had pushed him when it wasn't

That doesn't excuse a poor decision by the ref when he didn't see who pushed him
 
You must log in or register to reply here.