Antrim Football Thread

[Saffron_sam20]

This is getting silly, I responded to your post which you deleted after you questioned my performance, that's when I said your head is lit, uou took the 'hump' first you were the one that asked about had anyone watched the games.

You didn't like the response threw out that the ref wasn't competent and was unfair on me to be asked, I'll say no the next time. You are going to send me the video, classy. Then go on about Gough did a game and he was brilliant, was there linesmen and umpires at these other games?

As I said I'll look forward to the feed back from the board/supporters on how the 'professional' refs do this year when they are all mic'd up with 8 officials on board.

Be interesting the games at Corrigan this year

That's some spin on it 😂😂😂

I said Gough had more exposure and experience at it. I'd said it was obvious your first time. I ensured the post was respectful but deleted them after because I didn't want for you to be offended or for anyone else to come in and read it for sound bites to be taken.


Again, those are all opinions and perspectives which have been misinterpreted....... But the one thing remains MR2

Let's keep this really simple. You thought it was ok to apply judgment when players (not nominated) speak to you.

You failed to advance the free 50m because you didn't know this rule and thought it was open to judgement.......

You didn't apply the rules of the game. True or false?

Come back to me on that single point once you fact check it! I'll share the link if it helps

to be fair MR2 on another thread said hed no issue with chatting to players and it was discussed that it was fine as long as it wasnt abusive. that is 100% the best way to referee and as long as players dont over step the mark its fine. again theres a difference between abuse and genuinely asking a question.

I dont think there is anyone in the country will have a problem with referees using this logic.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that on a personal level but the rules state no player other than the captain or nominated player should speak to the ref.

When you apply common sense you've different people applying different rules.

What happens when one ref (MR2) decides it's ok to speak to players and another doesn't?
You could be giving away 4 or 6 points every other game. 

The rules, if we agree or not, are there to be applied across the board and remove those judgement calls in order to have a more balanced game.

Most of the complaints around refs come from either people not understanding the rules or refs making a judgment call which sometimes they get wrong!

Why have the issue? If a player speaks 50m, if he doesn't hand the ball back 50m

Again they might not be the best rules but it's what's past and unless refs all get on the same page it'll be them that suffer the (wrongful) abuse

ask the referee before the game? players know what referees they can talk to and those that cant, same way some refs are harder on certain rules etc, youll see some refs blow every small jersey tug others let a bit more go. You adapt to the ref

[FactCheck]

This is getting silly, I responded to your post which you deleted after you questioned my performance, that's when I said your head is lit, uou took the 'hump' first you were the one that asked about had anyone watched the games.

You didn't like the response threw out that the ref wasn't competent and was unfair on me to be asked, I'll say no the next time. You are going to send me the video, classy. Then go on about Gough did a game and he was brilliant, was there linesmen and umpires at these other games?

As I said I'll look forward to the feed back from the board/supporters on how the 'professional' refs do this year when they are all mic'd up with 8 officials on board.

Be interesting the games at Corrigan this year

That's some spin on it 😂😂😂

I said Gough had more exposure and experience at it. I'd said it was obvious your first time. I ensured the post was respectful but deleted them after because I didn't want for you to be offended or for anyone else to come in and read it for sound bites to be taken.


Again, those are all opinions and perspectives which have been misinterpreted....... But the one thing remains MR2

Let's keep this really simple. You thought it was ok to apply judgment when players (not nominated) speak to you.

You failed to advance the free 50m because you didn't know this rule and thought it was open to judgement.......

You didn't apply the rules of the game. True or false?

Come back to me on that single point once you fact check it! I'll share the link if it helps

to be fair MR2 on another thread said hed no issue with chatting to players and it was discussed that it was fine as long as it wasnt abusive. that is 100% the best way to referee and as long as players dont over step the mark its fine. again theres a difference between abuse and genuinely asking a question.

I dont think there is anyone in the country will have a problem with referees using this logic.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that on a personal level but the rules state no player other than the captain or nominated player should speak to the ref.

When you apply common sense you've different people applying different rules.

What happens when one ref (MR2) decides it's ok to speak to players and another doesn't?
You could be giving away 4 or 6 points every other game. 

The rules, if we agree or not, are there to be applied across the board and remove those judgement calls in order to have a more balanced game.

Most of the complaints around refs come from either people not understanding the rules or refs making a judgment call which sometimes they get wrong!

Why have the issue? If a player speaks 50m, if he doesn't hand the ball back 50m

Again they might not be the best rules but it's what's past and unless refs all get on the same page it'll be them that suffer the (wrongful) abuse

ask the referee before the game? players know what referees they can talk to and those that cant, same way some refs are harder on certain rules etc, youll see some refs blow every small jersey tug others let a bit more go. You adapt to the ref

You don't adapt to the ref! You play the game by the rules

You're opening yourself up there!

What if a ref doesn't like a particular player or club? Jesus man come on here!

 

[Saffron_sam20]

This is getting silly, I responded to your post which you deleted after you questioned my performance, that's when I said your head is lit, uou took the 'hump' first you were the one that asked about had anyone watched the games.

You didn't like the response threw out that the ref wasn't competent and was unfair on me to be asked, I'll say no the next time. You are going to send me the video, classy. Then go on about Gough did a game and he was brilliant, was there linesmen and umpires at these other games?

As I said I'll look forward to the feed back from the board/supporters on how the 'professional' refs do this year when they are all mic'd up with 8 officials on board.

Be interesting the games at Corrigan this year

That's some spin on it 😂😂😂

I said Gough had more exposure and experience at it. I'd said it was obvious your first time. I ensured the post was respectful but deleted them after because I didn't want for you to be offended or for anyone else to come in and read it for sound bites to be taken.


Again, those are all opinions and perspectives which have been misinterpreted....... But the one thing remains MR2

Let's keep this really simple. You thought it was ok to apply judgment when players (not nominated) speak to you.

You failed to advance the free 50m because you didn't know this rule and thought it was open to judgement.......

You didn't apply the rules of the game. True or false?

Come back to me on that single point once you fact check it! I'll share the link if it helps

to be fair MR2 on another thread said hed no issue with chatting to players and it was discussed that it was fine as long as it wasnt abusive. that is 100% the best way to referee and as long as players dont over step the mark its fine. again theres a difference between abuse and genuinely asking a question.

I dont think there is anyone in the country will have a problem with referees using this logic.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that on a personal level but the rules state no player other than the captain or nominated player should speak to the ref.

When you apply common sense you've different people applying different rules.

What happens when one ref (MR2) decides it's ok to speak to players and another doesn't?
You could be giving away 4 or 6 points every other game. 

The rules, if we agree or not, are there to be applied across the board and remove those judgement calls in order to have a more balanced game.

Most of the complaints around refs come from either people not understanding the rules or refs making a judgment call which sometimes they get wrong!

Why have the issue? If a player speaks 50m, if he doesn't hand the ball back 50m

Again they might not be the best rules but it's what's past and unless refs all get on the same page it'll be them that suffer the (wrongful) abuse

ask the referee before the game? players know what referees they can talk to and those that cant, same way some refs are harder on certain rules etc, youll see some refs blow every small jersey tug others let a bit more go. You adapt to the ref

You don't adapt to the ref! You play the game by the rules

You're opening yourself up there!

What if a ref doesn't like a particular player or club? Jesus man come on here!

 

You dont adapt to the ref? well agree to disagree

[Spike]

I think they have brought in too many rule changes in once.  Remains to be seen how they affect the overall game but it is going to take a while for Refs and players to adapt and understand all of them.  could be carnage for the first half of the league until it beds down a bit

[Milltown Row2]

Small man syndrome

 

Old age syndrome now

[statto]

This is getting silly, I responded to your post which you deleted after you questioned my performance, that's when I said your head is lit, uou took the 'hump' first you were the one that asked about had anyone watched the games.

You didn't like the response threw out that the ref wasn't competent and was unfair on me to be asked, I'll say no the next time. You are going to send me the video, classy. Then go on about Gough did a game and he was brilliant, was there linesmen and umpires at these other games?

As I said I'll look forward to the feed back from the board/supporters on how the 'professional' refs do this year when they are all mic'd up with 8 officials on board.

Be interesting the games at Corrigan this year

That's some spin on it 😂😂😂

I said Gough had more exposure and experience at it. I'd said it was obvious your first time. I ensured the post was respectful but deleted them after because I didn't want for you to be offended or for anyone else to come in and read it for sound bites to be taken.


Again, those are all opinions and perspectives which have been misinterpreted....... But the one thing remains MR2

Let's keep this really simple. You thought it was ok to apply judgment when players (not nominated) speak to you.

You failed to advance the free 50m because you didn't know this rule and thought it was open to judgement.......

You didn't apply the rules of the game. True or false?

Come back to me on that single point once you fact check it! I'll share the link if it helps

to be fair MR2 on another thread said hed no issue with chatting to players and it was discussed that it was fine as long as it wasnt abusive. that is 100% the best way to referee and as long as players dont over step the mark its fine. again theres a difference between abuse and genuinely asking a question.

I dont think there is anyone in the country will have a problem with referees using this logic.

I don't think anyone would disagree with that on a personal level but the rules state no player other than the captain or nominated player should speak to the ref.

When you apply common sense you've different people applying different rules.

What happens when one ref (MR2) decides it's ok to speak to players and another doesn't?
You could be giving away 4 or 6 points every other game. 

The rules, if we agree or not, are there to be applied across the board and remove those judgement calls in order to have a more balanced game.

Most of the complaints around refs come from either people not understanding the rules or refs making a judgment call which sometimes they get wrong!

Why have the issue? If a player speaks 50m, if he doesn't hand the ball back 50m

Again they might not be the best rules but it's what's past and unless refs all get on the same page it'll be them that suffer the (wrongful) abuse

ask the referee before the game? players know what referees they can talk to and those that cant, same way some refs are harder on certain rules etc, youll see some refs blow every small jersey tug others let a bit more go. You adapt to the ref

You don't adapt to the ref! You play the game by the rules

You're opening yourself up there!

What if a ref doesn't like a particular player or club? Jesus man come on here!

 

Referee's will always have particular things they are strict on e.g. Gough is a stickler for holding inside.  Some refs let the game go and plenty of physical contact others are more whistle happy.  There are different styles of how to ref the game that was the case before the rule changes and will no doubt be the case going into this season. 

[FactCheck]

So in short, the refs being in consistent and not applying the rules isn't helping them.

[Would ye whist]

I get the whole judge it on a case by case basis, however I assume a ref's tolerance is much higher a the start of a game when less tired and without meaning to will be inconsistent later in the game when more tired with moving the ball for chatting.

I get it, a player talking is ok, however is a ref not opening himself up for criticism of being 'inconsistent' by being seen to allow one player to talk and moving the ball when another talks (remember most players and supporters, managers etc cannot hear what a player is saying most times)

[Milltown Row2]

I get the whole judge it on a case by case basis, however I assume a ref's tolerance is much higher a the start of a game when less tired and without meaning to will be inconsistent later in the game when more tired with moving the ball for chatting.

I get it, a player talking is ok, however is a ref not opening himself up for criticism of being 'inconsistent' by being seen to allow one player to talk and moving the ball when another talks (remember most players and supporters, managers etc cannot hear what a player is saying most times)

So lets be straight going into the the new year, I'm at a club match, and one person speaks to me that's not a club captain I'm moving the ball 50 meters? Because I can't use common sense, I've just got to apply the rules.

Now if I'm hearing chit chat from near the sidelines when giving a foul, I can't make out who's saying it, for all I know it could be a player the manager, water boy or hell someone hanging over the fence, I can move the ball 50 meters?

[statto]

So in short, the refs being in consistent and not applying the rules isn't helping them.

So in short, the refs being in consistent and not applying the rules isn't helping them.

The referee is not a robot. There has been and always will be variations in how particular referee deals with the game. Surely you have watched enough football to understand this?

You have never been in a changing room where a manager/selector/team mate has said ref x "doesn't like holding inside" or ref y "is very strict with the number of steps you take"?

[Saffron_sam20]

So in short, the refs being in consistent and not applying the rules isn't helping them.

So in short, the refs being in consistent and not applying the rules isn't helping them.

The referee is not a robot. There has been and always will be variations in how particular referee deals with the game. Surely you have watched enough football to understand this?

You have never been in a changing room where a manager/selector/team mate has said ref x "doesn't like holding inside" or ref y "is very strict with the number of steps you take"?

that was the point I was making, all teams play to the ref style and adapt. it would be foolish not to

[SaffronSports]

I get the whole judge it on a case by case basis, however I assume a ref's tolerance is much higher a the start of a game when less tired and without meaning to will be inconsistent later in the game when more tired with moving the ball for chatting.

I get it, a player talking is ok, however is a ref not opening himself up for criticism of being 'inconsistent' by being seen to allow one player to talk and moving the ball when another talks (remember most players and supporters, managers etc cannot hear what a player is saying most times)

So lets be straight going into the the new year, I'm at a club match, and one person speaks to me that's not a club captain I'm moving the ball 50 meters? Because I can't use common sense, I've just got to apply the rules.

Now if I'm hearing chit chat from near the sidelines when giving a foul, I can't make out who's saying it, for all I know it could be a player the manager, water boy or hell someone hanging over the fence, I can move the ball 50 meters?

This part is black and white, that's what the rule says so you do it. People want consistency from referees so when there's a rule you apply it. It's not for you to decide what rules suit or don't.

[Milltown Row2]

I get the whole judge it on a case by case basis, however I assume a ref's tolerance is much higher a the start of a game when less tired and without meaning to will be inconsistent later in the game when more tired with moving the ball for chatting.

I get it, a player talking is ok, however is a ref not opening himself up for criticism of being 'inconsistent' by being seen to allow one player to talk and moving the ball when another talks (remember most players and supporters, managers etc cannot hear what a player is saying most times)

So lets be straight going into the the new year, I'm at a club match, and one person speaks to me that's not a club captain I'm moving the ball 50 meters? Because I can't use common sense, I've just got to apply the rules.

Now if I'm hearing chit chat from near the sidelines when giving a foul, I can't make out who's saying it, for all I know it could be a player the manager, water boy or hell someone hanging over the fence, I can move the ball 50 meters?

This part is black and white, that's what the rule says so you do it. People want consistency from referees so when there's a rule you apply it. It's not for you to decide what rules suit or don't.

That's grand, and when any player that doesn't retrieve the ball or there is someone questioning a call other than the captain, lets move it 50 meters..

Sure there will be no complaining this season, suits me in the end, I'll be looking the extra meters for the marathon this year

[FactCheck]

Almost correct 👍

At least now your seeing it as a rule and not a judgement call

Glad you came to see you made a mistake but that's learning! Well done 👍


It's not an easy job, but it can be made easier

 refs can make the job a lot easier by being consistent. If a player other than the nominated person speaks then apply the rule and move the ball on. After one or two 2point scores on the back of a 50m advance players will know they are the problem and not you.

If you decide to apply "common sense" you open not only yourself but you're colleagues in a worse of position

You'll get dogs abuse

If you don't apply the rules as guided and next week, someone will does do right by the rule applies it, imagine the abuse he will get!

"MR2 doesn't do that. So why's it cost us a county final because different ref decides to advance it 50m?"

The rules there to help refs. Use it to do so

[Milltown Row2]

Almost correct 👍

At least now your seeing it as a rule and not a judgement call

Glad you came to see you made a mistake but that's learning! Well done 👍


It's not an easy job, but it can be made easier

 refs can make the job a lot easier by being consistent. If a player other than the nominated person speaks then apply the rule and move the ball on. After one or two 2point scores on the back of a 50m advance players will know they are the problem and not you.

If you decide to apply "common sense" you open not only yourself but you're colleagues in a worse of position

You'll get dogs abuse

If you don't apply the rules as guided and next week, someone will does do right by the rule applies it, imagine the abuse he will get!

"MR2 doesn't do that. So why's it cost us a county final because different ref decides to advance it 50m?"

The rules there to help refs. Use it to do so

You have put in players talking, I think its anyone outside of that, sidelines, waterboys, and lads behind the wire, as its difficult to determine who is saying it don't you think?