[JohnG]

When will the FA get rid of that joke of a referee Uriah Rennie ? I don't want this to sound racist but I do believe that they are only letting him keep his Premiership status because of his colour. I'm sure any other ref would have been demoted ages ago.

[CFC1]

Originally Posted by JohnG

When will the FA get rid of that joke of a referee Uriah Rennie ? I don't want this to sound racist but I do believe that they are only letting him keep his Premiership status because of his colour. I'm sure any other ref would have been demoted ages ago.

Are you Jade Goody in disguise?

He was demoted a couple of years ago, as I recall! There is a lack of quality refs around, so I guess that helped him get back in. When I think about it, I could probably only name 5 or 6 premiership referees and that probably tells the story!

[Steven]

If you can't do your job, you should go. That's my thinking. He lets the ball through his legs, standing in front of the keeper, when its on target for the goal! How is that not affecting play?

Race doesn't come into it. Only idiots would play that card. Speaking of which, half the top flight "elite" refs are a joke imo.

[CFC1]

Maybe no one at the Ref HQ wants to upset him 'cos he's got a black belt in some martial art! Would you tell him he was a useless SOB?.... Nah, nor would I!

[Abbeygoo]

I have to agree that the majority of Premiership referees are useless.

Most are interested in starring in the match and being the big mate to all the players. Not one of them lets a crushing physical challenge go without feeling the need to blow the whistle, if someone falls over they feel compelled to give a free kick, they seem to have forgotten the advantage rule.

I would say Mark Halsey seems to be about the best, we miss Paul Durkin.

The clowns?

Graham Poll
Rob Styles
Howard Webb
Uriah Rennie
Phil Dowd
Alan Wiley

are some that spring to mind.....

[Badger0-0]

Originally Posted by CFC1

Maybe no one at the Ref HQ wants to upset him 'cos he's got a black belt in some martial art! Would you tell him he was a useless SOB?.... Nah, nor would I!

I don't know mate.
I'm sure loads of players have

[Badger0-0]

Originally Posted by Abbeygoo

I have to agree that the majority of Premiership referees are useless.

Most are interested in starring in the match and being the big mate to all the players. Not one of them lets a crushing physical challenge go without feeling the need to blow the whistle, if someone falls over they feel compelled to give a free kick, they seem to have forgotten the advantage rule.

I would say Mark Halsey seems to be about the best, we miss Paul Durkin.

The clowns?

Graham Poll
Rob Styles
Howard Webb
Uriah Rennie
Phil Dowd

are some that spring to mind.....

Halsey?
No way, IMO

[CFC1]

Originally Posted by Badger0-0

I don't know mate.
I'm sure loads of players have

In the safety of the pitch? ...yes! .... but in the carpark in the dead of night?....

[Tsunami]

The man is a menace. He did us a favour for once on Saturday as we would have lost otherwise. It was clearly off-side and interfering. This is no excuse but, so was Birmingham's 1st goal (of many it must be said) on Wednesday.

For Shearer to say it was off-side is all you need to know considering his history with Rennie. How about this for a straight red card from a few seasons ago; even the Villa players can not believe what he has done........Rennie has many more inexplicable decisions against the Toon to make amends all his past wrongs against us! .

[po_man]

Originally Posted by Tsunami

The man is a menace. He did us a favour for once on Saturday as we would have lost otherwise. It was clearly off-side and interfering. This is no excuse but, so was Birmingham's 1st goal (of many it must be said) on Wednesday.

For Shearer to say it was off-side is all you need to know considering his history with Rennie. How about this for a straight red card from a few seasons ago; even the Villa players can not believe what he has done........Rennie has many more inexplicable decisions against the Toon to make amends all his past wrongs against us! .

Yep, i remember that one. Rennie said that Shearer was backing into him which warranted the card!!!

What a joke that man is!!!

I dislike Rennie as much as the next Toon fan and would have to say he is a joke.

But I do not disagree with the decision on Saturday!! (am I the only one) I know what Mr. Shearer said on MOTD afterwards, but I do not think that the keeper was impeded in any way by the presence of Parker. The keeper saw it all the way from the time it left Milner's foot.

I am a Toon fan and may be accused of bias, my attitude is win some lose some. IMO he got it right for once!!

[DJT75]

Originally Posted by CFC1

Maybe no one at the Ref HQ wants to upset him 'cos he's got a black belt in some martial art!

Are you mad? You can't say that!!

He has a belt of the highest regard........if you don't mind

[Ultima]

He used to ref us on Sunday mornings and the last time he did he sent me off I know him well so he didn't send it in to save me the £12 fee but yes he's a martial arts expert so who would argue.

Martin

[Tsunami]

Originally Posted by woolytoon

I dislike Rennie as much as the next Toon fan and would have to say he is a joke.

But I do not disagree with the decision on Saturday!! (am I the only one) I know what Mr. Shearer said on MOTD afterwards, but I do not think that the keeper was impeded in any way by the presence of Parker. The keeper saw it all the way from the time it left Milner's foot.

I am a Toon fan and may be accused of bias, my attitude is win some lose some. IMO he got it right for once!!

Definitely win some lose some but Rennie got this wrong. This is an extract of the rule
"Interfering with an opponent means preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent’s line of vision or movements or making a gesture or movement which, in the opinion of the referee, deceives or distracts an opponent."

Parker by letting the ball go through his legs was both in the line of vision and making a movement to deceive or distract. I'm not saying Carroll would have saved it but that's not the point.

I watched the goal from the bar under the stand & everyone was falling about laughing when Rennie let it stand. I'll take decisions like that all day if they favour us but they make football a bit of a lottery.

[Badger0-0]

Originally Posted by woolytoon

I dislike Rennie as much as the next Toon fan and would have to say he is a joke.

But I do not disagree with the decision on Saturday!! (am I the only one) I know what Mr. Shearer said on MOTD afterwards, but I do not think that the keeper was impeded in any way by the presence of Parker. The keeper saw it all the way from the time it left Milner's foot.

I am a Toon fan and may be accused of bias, my attitude is win some lose some. IMO he got it right for once!!

As a neutral, you're having a laugh mate.
Major, blatant mistake, IMO.

Not joking, I still think it was the right decision.

As you say Tsunami when you quote the rule "in the opinion of the referee", whenever it is a human being making a decision, opinions will always be different.
Just so happens that about 99% of people will say that Rennie got it wrong. I say well done to my Uncle Uriah, I agree with you on this one.

[CFC1]

Originally Posted by DJT75

Are you mad? You can't say that!!

He has a belt of the highest regard........if you don't mind

***! It's PC gone mad! First we have to call a blackboard a chalkboard, then we have to call a black bin bag a refuse sack, now this.... madness... nice alternative though DJT!

[Steven]

Of course the keeper saw the ball from when it was struck. That isn't the point. The point is when Parker is standing in the path of the ball inside the area he is in play from the keeper's point of view! You can't say just because he let it through his legs and didn't touch it he wasn't affecting the play. How could he have not been?! The linesman correctly waved his flag. Parker wasn't in the area to admire the job done by the grounds keeper!

Had he been on the other side of the field tying his laces, then he wouldn't have been affecting play. Or doing a Nistelrooy and walking back from a goal kick only to find his team mates have the ball (and horseface always made sure he was back onside before turning around to join in)

[JohnG]

I know that other referees make mistakes as well, but it seems to me that every week you hear about some silly decision that Mr Rennie has made. You even hear the ex-pros and pundits who quite often stick up for referees moaning about him all the time.
I do think that he's the worse of the lot.

[RMCF]

No-one seems to be mentioning the linesman here.

It is shocking that he didn't have a say in the Newcastle goal. There was 2 offsides in that move !!

But I agree that the refs are getting too big now. They love the cameras, the jokes with the players, the limelight.

[JohnG]

The linesman did flag for offside but was overruled

[Geordie Bry]

i think he is a fantastic ref haha

Just looked at it again and IMO Parker did not in anyway change the outcome of what happened and therefore did not affect the play. He wasn't stood right in front of the keeper and did not impede his vision.

That is my opinion. I am not a referee and I am not saying that I am right and everyone else are wrong. I do try to be a (veteran) goalie every week and normally I am on the keeper's side.

The Ref over ruled his assistant, so, must have considered his decision even more than usual.

[MonkeyKnuckle]

I think Rennie is summed up by the fact he forgot to bring his cards onto the pitch with him!

[RMCF]

Originally Posted by JohnG

The linesman did flag for offside but was overruled

In that case, you're a tube Rennie !!!!!!

As for woolytoon - you say that Parker did not affect the outcome of the move. Of course he did !! Although he did not touch the ball and technically wasn't in the line of sight of the keeper, his movement still was seen by the keeper who would have had it in his mind that Parker may have decided to kick the ball. So he was probably thinking that Parker might strike the ball towards the near post or the far post. So he was affecting the situation.

[Steven]

Again, I have to repeat the point isn't whether he impeded the GK's vision, which he didn't. The point is Parker was affecting play. When Milner whips the ball in from the right into the area, the whole defence steps up and plays Parker offside. Parker plays the dummy, deliberately affecting the GK's judgement on what will happen. That is the difference

But the keeper dived as soon as Milner shot and was beaten by the pace and accuracy of the strike, whether Parker was there or not, off or on side. The keeper reacted to the shot and tried his best to stop it.

[JohnG]

Hmm, I think we'll have to agree to disagree with you on that one mate I beleive that any time a player is in your vision then he must be interfering with play.
It's about time they put the offside law back to something that can be understood by everyone, it really does make a mockery of the game

[DJT75]

D'oh, you've done it again CFC!!

Originally Posted by CFC1

***! It's PC gone mad! First we have to call a blackboard a chalkboard, then we have to call a black bin bag a refuse sack, now this.... madness... nice alternative though DJT!

You can not change the word black with chalk, that's bordering on terrorism! Please....a simple "board" will suffice....

[rio1981]

Right, I've only just seen this thread so now for my tuppence-worth!

We got stitched up royally by Rennie on Saturday. Much as has been pointed out above, Carroll saw the shot take place, but by stepping over the ball Parker IS interfering with play - the lino got it right BUT (and this is the big issue with Rennie) the ref took centre stage by overruling him.

A good referee is one that you don't notice, you can't say that about Rennie and you can't say that about Graham Poll (we've had both in the last two games, both to our detriment). Ultimately it completely changed the face of the game, and from cruising at 2-0 we were ultimately left hanging on for a point.

Saying that, Davenport's "goal" that was chalked off.... what was the difference between that and Peter Crouch's against Trinidad & Tobago in the World Cup?

He did however get the penalty decision spot on - but that wasn't exactly the toughest decision of the afternoon!

As for the offside rule as a whole, I know a lot of rules have been changed to try and make the game more entertaining, and more attacking, but there is such a grey area with offside now that I for one would like it to go back to what it was - if you're in an offside position, no matter where you are on the field of play, then you are offside, interfering or not.

Not exactly rocket-science now is it?!