Blowing the Whistle

To say being a referee has never been an easy profession would qualify that assertion as a leading contender for understatement of the year. These last few weeks have been a wretched period for the men in black with yellow facings. The Dougie McDonald incident has turned into a saga with errors being compounded by admitted untruths and the integrity of the game - something football’s ruling bodies believe is sacrosanct - being tarnished some might say forever. However, it doesn’t help when some players add fuel to an already raging fire with comments that are, at best inadvisable.


I suspect I wasn’t the only one who read the comments made by Celtic’s Gary Hooper with a degree of incredulity the other week. The striker said at a press conference that he thinks referees "want" to give decisions against Celtic because they are 'one of the world's big clubs'.

"The referee wants to give a decision against us so he can say something after the game. I think all the big teams get it. Maybe because referees want to give decisions against Celtic, I don't know," he said.

Over the years football fans of clubs outside the Old Firm could write about so many decisions that have gone against their team it would destroy a a fair percentage of a Brazilian rain forest. Moreover, many of these decisions have been when their team has been playing Celtic or Rangers.

Now, with the greatest respect, I would venture the opinion that the standards of refereeing in Scotland may not be at its highest right now. In years gone by, I hurled verbal abuse towards the likes of Hugh Dallas, Willie Young and Brian McGinlay. It's only now that - and I never thought I would say this - I appreciate Dallas and co. for the qualities they had.

We all like to have a go at referees but no one can seriously believe they're biased towards the Old Firm. Gary Hooper might want to revisit his remarks when he stumbles in the penalty box, sixty thousand Celtic fans roar for a penalty kick and the referee duly obliges (as an example take Celtic’s recent 9-0 demolition of Aberdeen at Parkhead - three of the goals were penalties…)

It’s a terrible indictment on Scots society when a referee gets abusive telephone calls and an assistant referee sees his family targeted for verbal abuse just because they give decisions some fans don’t like. At the risk of sounding like an old-timer from days gone by, there seems to be a lack of respect throughout society these days. Officialdom seems to be a prime target. We hear more and more stories of fire fighters being attacked on their way to incidents, of nurses being attacked at hospitals and police also coming under attack. It is said football is a reflection of society. We may be dismayed by the lack of respect by some footballers to referees and their assistants, the haranguing of the men in the middle and the verbal attacks after the game, particularly through the media but should we really be surprised?

As in any other profession, referees can make mistakes. With the huge sums of money in the game, one can argue that such mistakes can prove costly, the difference between winning and losing, of winning trophies and not winning trophies. However, decision-making is what makes football the game it is. So a referee makes an error. Does it really need to be replayed again and again, analysed by pundits who have never refereed a game in their life, and dissected by feverish tabloid newspapers eager to sell copy? If so, what about the player who misses an open goal, misses a crucial penalty or the manager who selects the wrong team? This happens every week and is mentioned in dispatches but is generally considered part of the win as a team, lose as a team philosophy.

The authority of the referee has never been questioned as much as it is at present. Perhaps players, managers and fans should think back to the days of Tom ‘Tiny’ Wharton, a larger than life referee who stood no nonsense from the footballers of the 1960s and early 1970s. Celtic’s Bobby Lennox once chased after Tiny during an Old Firm game insisting he had been fouled and that he should be given a penalty kick. Wharton refused but Lennox continued his argument insisting it was a penalty.

‘I think you’ll find, Mr Lennox’ Tiny Wharton said firmly’ ‘if you check the newspapers tomorrow that it wasn’t…’

Get Intae Them? Not Any Longer

Perhaps it’s an age thing. Perhaps it’s just me. I was watching BBC One’s Match of the Day programme on Saturday evening. Much was made of Manchester City’s Wayne Bridge’s refusal to shake his former Chelsea team mate John Terry's hand just before kick off. However, I understand he did send him a text after the game - which City won 4-2 - which read 'Now that's how to play away from home...

However, the incident that had me shaking my head wasn’t at Stamford Bridge. It came during the Stoke City-Arsenal game when the home team’s Ryan Shawcross made a tackle on the visiting team’s Aaron Ramsey. The Stoke man was late on the young Welshman to the extent Ramsey suffered a broken leg. Shawcross’s challenge was mis-timed and clumsy but it wasn’t malicious. Nevertheless the reaction from the Arsenal players was of collective fury - how dare the Stoke player make such a challenge on such a talented young player? Didn’t they know they were playing against The Arsenal? Born again Gooner Sol Campbell led the indignation and almost pleaded with the referee to send Shawcross off. Not that the referee needed any persuasion - he showed the Stoke player a red card.

The BBC, ultra cautious these days for fear of causing offence, didn’t show a replay of the incident until the highlights of the game were over and host Gary Lineker was able to warn ‘those of a squeamish nature’ to look away as messrs Alan Hansen and Alan Shearer analysed the tackle. The camera then scanned to a waiting ambulance as a distraught Ramsey was stretchered off and straight on to the emergency vehicle for immediate transportation to hospital. The consensus of feeling was that ‘all our thoughts are with young Aaron Ramsey’.

Now I may be accused of looking at the past through rose-tinted spectacles. But in years gone by such an incident would be barely worthy of a mention, especially north of the border where such challenges were made on a weekly basis. I have mentioned before on these pages about Hearts legend Drew Busby who was fully committed in every challenge he made three decades ago. Indeed, there is an iconic image of the aforementioned Alan Hansen in the days when he played for Partick Thistle, cowering from a Busby shot at Tynecastle. Dreadful defending as Hansen himself might say, but no one got in the way of a Drew Busby pile driver! In the 1960s and 70s almost every team had at least one player who thrived on the ‘meaty challenge’. It was a more physical game in those days but the fans who stood on the terraces appreciated the more physical side of the game and expected their players not only to contest fifty-fifty balls but to win them.

On the same day as the Shawcross incident at Stoke, Hearts had taken three points at Pittodrie on a pitch more suitable for donkey riding than professional football. Larry Kingston went for a fifty-fifty ball with Aberdeen's Fraser Fyvie. Both had their feet high and there was an inevitable collision. Referee Willie Collum showed Kingston a red card when a yellow would have been more appropriate. Kingston’s challenge would have been the norm a few years ago but was now worthy of a straight red card.

I have a fair degree of sympathy for referees (honest!) FIFA bring in so many changes - for example does anyone totally understand the offside rule nowadays? - and there are phrases used such as 'active' and 'inactive' meaning there is far more probability of refs getting things wrong than was the case in years gone by. A couple of others things that have changed since the 'good old days' of Tom Tiny Wharton and his ilk. Firstly, players are now far more likely to try and con the referee to gain an advantage. Behaviour such as diving, faking injury and over reacting to challenges are commonplace no matter where you go. The waving of an imaginary card from some players really irritates me. Sadly this is a sad reflection on society in general and youngsters watch players feigning injury etc. and think it's acceptable.

Secondly, the pace of the game now is far quicker than in days gone by. Referees can get decisions wrong simply because they're not up with play - and not many assistant referees dare to suggest the man in charge has got it wrong (although it has happened on occasion as Hearts fans can testify!) I think everyone in football has a duty to improve the game - including refereeing standards. Full-time referees, more honesty from players and a simplication of the rules would help.

But don’t hold your breath…