Perhaps trialing the third game at ANZ as a once off would be wise. Whilst insufficient crowds at ANZ would be a negative, hosting it there as a once-off would enable evaluation of three options:

1) The status quo
2) The proposed option of 1 home, 1 away, 1 neutral
3) Similar to Origin, a 3-year cycle of 2 home, 1 away; 1 home, 2 away; 1 home, 1 away, 1 neutral

This last option would enable a blockbuster game once every three years, whilst keeping the impact on home grounds quite minimal.

Every single argument that you make for professionalism in players applies to referees. Referees continuously have to practice and improve their skills, should be as fit as players, understand all the team structures and set plays that the players use so as to best position themselves, not to mention operating as a team themselves. Referees need to understand players more even than other players do (which would seem to be Ben Williams’ main problem). And referees need to perform as a team with their assistants as players do.

Just like when you are a player, as a referee team you need to train well together to referee well together. More training time together is a necessity. Just like as a player, you need to have regular game time. Referees do not get enough games. If anything, as the one who officiates the game, as opposed to “merely” plays in it, as someone who can affect the entire outcome of the game with a single decision, professionalism should be mandatory, even more so than for players.

As a personal aside, I’ll share an interesting conversation that I had with Tim Mander once (that there was a lot more to I won’t go into), in the lead up to an association football match Tim refereed the following day (long story). His opinion was that the very best thing that came out of the Super League war and its aftermath was the professionalisation of referees in the NRL. By paying them as professionals, increasing their workload, accountability, he felt that the quality of refereeing substantially improved, including the ability to make those snap decisions, because of the fact that better training (and being able to focus on the training) meant that better decisions were possible. It also gave referees both the motivation and the means to be their best.

Amateurs judging professionals is the single biggest problem in the A-League today. As long as the standard and professionalism of referees is consistently less than the standard and professionalism of players, this will be one of the biggest weaknesses in our game. Having full-time better trained referees make a world of difference to this. Some referees (and particularly AR’s) will be part-time. But at this level, if we actually value a professional Australian game, some should be full-time

What will they do during the off-season? Officiate NPL and local games? Yes – as many as possible – with the cost covered by their FFA salary, and the side benefits of training AR’s properly around the country. Visit other leagues to learn and officiate, so that they keep their high level skills current, and so we can have their top referees visit here also. Have a proper off-season fitness training regime, so referees can actually be as fit as the players, and be in the right positions to make decisions. And have proper holidays, rather than using their “time off” to be football referees.

“What about the assistant referees? They contribute to many of the poor decision making as well”, you are correct. There should be one full-time Assistant Referees boss, who is also a current AR at A-League level to ensure training of ARs and 4th Officials receives the attention it deserves, and these problems

You argue that this would be a total waste of time and resources. How ridiculous. Virtually nothing comparatively is spent on referees compared to the overall elite-level football budget. To argue that in a $160 million dollar TV deal there is insufficient money to make referees full-time is patently absurd.

The gains of a professional competition will always be held back, as long as the referees are not. If there is any lesson to take away from Barry Southcott’s time in Brisbane, it is that high standards and high degrees of professionalism result in an increase in standards across the board. This is what we need in A-League football.

No-one would do that on here after all 🙂

I think Mike Mulvey’s comments are also relevant to the above debate:

‘I think it was the wrong decision,’ said Mulvey. ‘Bes has seen his chance, he’s lunged for the ball, he’s made contact with the ball, he’s at full stretch, what’s he supposed to do? Seriously?’
‘I’d be having a go at him if he didn’t go for it because that’s the chance of a goal.’

I suspect there isn’t a coach in the league who would not want their striker to attempt a shot in these circumstances or who would train their striker to do any different, nor any goalkeeping coach, who wouldn’t train their keeper to lead with hands rather than head.

Though we may not agree about any Berisha-related refereeing decisions, I suspect we’d get on amazing irl, as you’d have me rolling on the floor due to your amazing dry sense of humour. electocutions… appendices… anaesthetic… lol 🙂

Who do you reckon we should start in BB’s spot?

I think we’ll do fairly similar with or without BB as long as we don’t start Henrique in his spot. It was so frustrating in the Victory game to see chance after chance wasted. Having said this he is an amazing super-sub that brings the X-factor at the end of the game, and often a goal.

I’d probably start Petratos in BB’s spot. What do you think?

I certainly agree that by the nature of his being an intense player, he tends to get real close to the line, and more easily slips over it. And he does need more control. I certainly would love to see him tone it back in some challenges so we can see him the whole match. However, it seems to me that officials shouldn’t only assume that he has gone massively over the line warranting a red, when he, in fact, has.

lol. I’ll pay such a stinging, if quite witty, retort.

No worries, Hanish Alcom. It’s an easy mistake to make.

I’m thinking there will be a few marquee and new players generally for your starting squad, now that they have the Manchester City bucks flowing in. JVS should also be good for finding and trying some youth. But the reality is, that in a salary capped league, you can’t just buy a full squad of replacements, as existing players have contracts. So you will have most of the same starting 11. And this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, as continuity can be helpful. JVS is getting some good performance out of players who were quite ordinary under Aloisi. So I think the aim should be to supplement and complement the existing side anyway, rather than make wholesale changes.

Engelaar and Broich are both real quality, aren’t they?

Hey mate. I am indeed a Roar fan. I suspect that your right that our differing conclusions do flow from our differing interpretations of the rules… and possibly allegiances, though that’s always hard to tell. 😉 Good description and analysis above, though obviously we came to different conclusions on this one.

I do agree with you that Berisha is at fault (having watched it over and over again myself, I would have given the free kick against him and given him a yellow), yet disagree that it warrants a red. However this is not to say that Ryall isn’t at fault also.

Ryall was closer than Berisha. An he was (just) first to the ball. These are the things in his favour. However, his studs out into Berisha’s leg are not in his favour, as is the fact that he also lunged into the tackle, and the fact that unlike Berisha, he seems to be paying more attention to the player than the ball.

The facts that you list are detailed and essentially correct. You mention though that as far as actual contact goes, “Berisha makes almost none whatsoever”. This is relevant to mention, as it seems Berisha pulls out of the tackle and folds up his left leg so as to minimise damage rather than cause damage to his opponent, which is relevant in determining sanctions. Similarly, the fact that “both players were both able to move unhibited directly after contact showed that contact was not so much that either player was in pain” would argue that the contact was not so serious as to merit a red.

You’re probably right that to the referee “Berisha’s jumping up with both feet looks a lot worse than Ryall’s sliding lunge”. I’m just not sure that his judgment of a red based on that appearance was right.

I’m also interested as to what Ryall was given the yellow for, as it was unclear as to whether it was for the initial challenge or the retaliation.

I freely admit that the referee in charge of the game was a far higher quality ref than I ever was, but I have the advantage of watching replays on my TV set. Not as good for my fitness I know, but helpful in these situations 🙂 As such, maybe I give Berisha too much credit but I don’t think he just happened to be ‘lucky’ and ‘missed’ with his tackle. I think he tried to get to the ball first, realised he would fail and went into harm minimisation mode. I would have given the free against him, but don’t think it merited a red.

Besides the only injuries I know of that Berisha gives out is in stadium tunnels 😛

+1

Well, finally an author response for you!

As many of the contributors above have argued, alot of the problems in interpreting particular incidents is that different referees can interpret things differently. So, in spite of the title of my article above, I would have been fine with a yellow for both or a red for Ryall (given the violent retaliation) and a yellow for Berisha.

You’re right. Ryall was closer than Berisha. An he was (just) first to the ball. These are the things in his favour. However, his studs out into Berisha’s leg are not in his favour, as is the fact that he also lunged into the tackle, and the fact that unlike Berisha, he seems to be paying more attention to the player than the ball. Perhaps why he goes around the ball studs up into Berisha.

Berisha does lunge in initially carelessly and probably recklessly, so the free kick and a yellow should go against him. However after the initial lunge he folds his left leg under so as to not cause injury to his opponent and he seeks to go away from Ryall towards the ball. The Berisha-Ryall challenge was not a two-footed challenge by Berisha, despite wide reporting of this – his right foot is away, his left foot under his legs cf. Ryall who puts his left foot around the ball studs up. The only studs up in the Berisha-Ryall challenge were Ryall’s into Berisha as Berisha’s studs up were facing away from Ryall.

Both players go for the ball, not head on or even side on. Both jumped towards the ball. So I don’t accept it was entirely Berisha’s fault. The difference in the initial challenge is that Ryall goes around the ball with his tag first left foot and it goes into Berisha’s leg. His tags are up and his challenge went for the player more than the ball. Conversely, if you look at Berisha all the way to the challenge he is aiming for the ball. And he pulls back the left leg to minimise the damage to the other player.

30.8% of Roar goals were scored in the 75th to 90th minute and 61.5% were scored in the second half. Only 18.8% of Sydney FC goals were scored in the 75th to 90th minute and 53.2% scored in the second half. (Ref: http://au.soccerway.com/teams/australia/sydney-fc/4295/statistics/; http://au.soccerway.com/teams/australia/brisbane-roar-fc/4321/statistics/). This suggests to me that the Roar are fitter and finish better than Sydney FC generally. And this goes a long way in explaining why the roar finished the match better, despite being a man down.

Saying football in australia would make a lot more sense to avoid confusion, or if one is specifically comparing codes (which wasn’t being done) “association football” or “soccer” might be necessary. But the meaning was surely clear from the context and thread.

But it seems very odd to post the above comment, unless one is fishing for a code war. Personally, I find it very odd to talk about Australian Rules Football as football, as it involves carrying the ball and passing it with the hands, and less than .5% of the world has even heard of it let alone considers it football; but I say live and let live, and would never get on the Roar AFL thread and say it’s real odd they call things footy or football there when they mean AFL. By the way, I live in Australia but the part of australia that soccer/football was far less foreign than AFL. I also live in the world. Which world do you live in, to think it odd to refer to the game the world knows as football as football on a thread talking about said game.?

I’m pretty sure it’s generally between 999,997 and 999,995 times less than that, though hyperbole is always the best.
And I do agree with both points you make, as they are quite valid, though using somewhat florid prose in it’s rhetoric.

@ Arto . Very insightful. Particularly with the lack of recent match fitness due to his ban, I think a deep DM playmaker role alongside Jedinak would be very well suited for Bresc, particularly in Ange’s system. I agree Kennedy would do well off the bench, but suspect Rogic might be better used off the bench as well.

“There’s too many grenades being lobbed”, says the chief grenadier.
And on that bombshell, good night!

We had our best squad on in the first, they had theirs in the second. And I’m pretty sure we’d have won if Ryan would have kept in the second, as I’m sure he would have gone for the ball rather than karate kicking the player. But the purpose of the friendly for both teams wasn’t to win, but to test out players for the world cup. And for that purpose, the game was quite successful.

With regards to David Williams, the real problem in deciding is whether you use form or consistency to decide. His form at the moment is brilliant, he goals great and the technique leading up to them laudable. He is a true striker who’s a danger up front – and I’m not just saying all this because my sister was a schoolfriend of his. His form of late is amazing, but his consistency under Aloisi was minimal and his play was somewhat mercurial also for the Fury. So – do you decide based on current form or a previous lack of consistency?

If Taggart is not included in the WC squad and the South Africa match, I will be really surprised. He is a true striker, gifted and a creator of chances where there were none. He also provides the scoring X-factor on the ground that Timmy Cahill provides in the air. And he’s 20, so he’ll be around for a long time yet.

Isn’t Troisi an attacking midfielder – a position which we have in abundance?

Casper, the point you make above is probably the most salient point in the whole debate. There is no point in a team whose bowling attack is based around quick bouncy bowling when playing another side with quick bouncy bowling (with both teams claiming the world’s best quick bowlers) to make a pitch that is flat and unsuitable to quick bowling. Furthermore, if it was so unsuitable for fast bowling, teams could always play more spinners in the lineup. The difference in results in the two tests seemed more to do with a difference in batting than bowling anyway.
I also gather that it’s usually a much flatter, deader pitch anyway. Thus the claims about doctoring would seem to be as ridiculous as claiming the SCG and MCG are “doctored” because they don’t bounce like the ‘Gabba or WACA.

I didn’t use to be a huge fan of his either. And then I saw how he plays for Palace and that he was their player of the year in 2013. I actually think he is at the peak of his form, and we’re lucky to have him. He did have some issues previously, but seems to be playing better these days.

I’m a queenslander and I’m very surprised that abysmal display didn’t make the cut

Totally agree. Mile Jedinak is definitely the right choice.