Blueprint for Better Refereeing, Part 2

Hopefully, by now, you’ll have read Part 1 of my Blueprint for Better Refereeing. If you have, it may come as a surprise that there will be no more criticism of referees - at least directly. That’s it. No more. From here on in, it’s all about fixing the problems, not identifying them.

At this point, take it as read that I’ve highlighted the lack of quality of refereeing in English football, and suggested that we need a whole new approach to officiating in order to achieve some level of improvement. It’s not about castigating referees, it’s about helping them to earn the Respect which is being asked for on their behalf by inadequate authorities.

Please note: the proposed framework within applies, at this stage, only to the Premier League. And yes, I’m aware there is football outside the top flight.

The central fixture in the proposed solution is a full-time, permanent review and assessment panel. In order to maintain a sense of diversity, perspective and consistency, the panel would be made up of two ex-referees (for expertise on rules and refereeing experience), one ex-player (for playing experience, obviously) and one independent adjudicator.

The adjudicator would come from the Football Association and the Premier League. He (or she) would be elected by the 20 Premier League managers from a pool of nominees, and stay in post for one season. The other three panel members are permanent.

Clearly, any full time employees which result from this proposal would require a salary, and I suggest that they are offered a generous one. After all, we’re asking them to do a pretty important job, and a not particularly attractive one. The funding? The clubs want improvements, so the clubs can help fund them. Whether this is channelled through the Football Association or the Premier League is a decision for a brighter man than me.

I’ll go into the details of the review process in the next instalment, but here’s the nutshell. The panel would watch all 90 minutes of every Premier League game the day after it is played. It would record errors and assess the general performance of the referee and his assistants, and file a report.

With help from that report, the panel would then feed back to the officials on their performance.

Barring an absolute clanger, the feedback should be always constructive and advisory. Stuart Attwell and Mark Halsey have found themselves shoved out in public and openly flogged this season, and I want an end to that. The full time panel would mean that the authorities no longer have the ability to be a closed shop one minute and scapegoat one of its own the next.

As I said, there will be more detail on the proposed review and assessment process to be undertaken by the panel in my next instalment. Until then, if you have any comments, ideas or criticisms, please feel free to air them.