Stoke 2-2 Leicester
At half time in this game, when Stoke were 2-0, Leicester were down to 10 men with Jamie Vardy sent off, had no less than five players booked in less than ten minutes, and had conceded a penalty that had put Stoke 1-0 up, Leicester fans were angry. Their manager and players swarmed the referee and their fans hurled coins down on the referee, acts which will surely see the club hit with a two-pronged fine.
Personally, I thought it was disgusting behaviour. Pawson had had to hand out three yellow cards for dissent, as well as two for cynical fouls. He was getting salvos on all fronts, the players disrespecting him, the manager, one of the most mild-mannered managers in the league I might add, having to be restrained and Leicester's fans more than crossing the line with their coin throwing antics.
And yet, when you look on social media, even amongst some esteemed pundits, Leicester were being treated as the victims, not as the aggressors. As if somehow the referee's grievous errors somehow justified this almost unprecedented torrent of abuse from all corners, rather than the simple truth, which is that Leicester's players completely lost their heads, their discipline and were extremely fortunate to finish the game with ten men. As far as I'm concerned they thoroughly deserve whatever fines are slapped their way because they completely and utterly failed to control either their players or their fans.
And the thing that baffles me the most about this is that even if the referee had made an error (coming to the decisions themselves I promise), the overreaction was staggering. This was "an absolute joke of a performance" by the referee, "the worst referee in the Premier League", "he should get fined, not us". So many places to start. Well for starters, regardless of if the referee gets punished, Leicester earned those fines fair and square. Players acting disrespectfully towards the referee is one of the few areas where I acknowledge football could learn from rugby and Leicester learned that lesson the hard way.
So onto the two-fold main point. If Pawson had made two or three errors so egregious that he had severely blundered, that both the penalty and the red card were so blatantly wrong, would he have earned the staggering amount of abuse he received? Well yes and no. Comments like: "joke of a performance" would have more merit, and Leicester's right to be angry would be increased. It wouldn't justify Leicester's actions on or off the pitch, but it would help add some context to the victim idea that Leicester are very good at playing into.
But this isn't just Pawson. This is a general attitude towards referees that has been building and it's totally inconsistent, wildly over-reactive and inherently abusive. Earlier the same time, John Moss was labelled similarly: "the worst ref in the Premier League", "absolute joke of a performance". Moss' huge crime was failing to book N'golo Kante for a cynical pull back to stop a counter attack early in the game. It was a stonewall booking yes, but Moss clearly wanted to give the player the benefit of the doubt early on in the game. It was a mistake but hardly a disgrace.
Another bizarre point labelled against Pawson was that he failed in midweek to send off Rojo for a two-footed tackle and give Man United a blatant penalty for handball, yet this weekend he did both. How inconsistent of him. A referee cannot win, can he? Yes, Pawson had a stinker in midweek, and he will be aware of that, but you can't have it both ways. You can't absolutely slam a referee in midweek for making bad decisions and then when he realises he made a mistake and doesn't repeat that error on the weekend slam him for inconsistency. It's childish.
And that's what this all stems from. A childish bias and frustration that your team didn't get the decision your way, and what's embarrassing is how far up the pecking order it's gone, right the way up to the very top of punditry. And it's all inflamed because it's Leicester City, the club who can do no wrong. Now don't get me wrong, I absolutely love Leicester. I think their title win was incredible, and frankly, this whole refereeing issue is not a dig specifically at them, but at the increasing culture in the wider football world of insulting every single referee, week in, week out, for every single bad decision no matter how small and frankly, with no heed to whether or not it's actually a bad decision.
So finally, the decisions themselves. In my opinion, Pawson got everything spot on. The red card was a red card. Yes, it was a borderline decision, and it can be argued that it was a harsh call, but when you lunge into a tackle with two feet off the ground you are not in control of your body. Vardy's tackle ended up getting the ball and ended up not being overly dangerous, but it was certainly reckless and he could just as easily have snapped Diouf's ankle in two if the Stoke winger had been a little bit quicker or Vardy had slightly misjudged the tackle.
And the penalty was again, a borderline decision, but still a penalty. To suggest that Danny Simpson's hand was in a natural position is more of a reach than how high Simpson was reaching to stop the ball from going into the box. In the current climate, it was a handball, his arm was over his head, miles away from his body and the ball struck it. I've seen them given, I've seen them not given, and I don't think it's one of those where you can argue either way.
My underlying point is this. These were both marginal decisions and both cases were entirely Leicester's own fault. If you jump into a tackle with two feet, whatever happens after, you have absolutely zero right to complain when you're sent off, even when the sending off itself could be considered harsh. Because it was a stupid, reckless tackle, that on another day might have been dangerous. And you also cannot complain if your arm is way above your head and the ball strikes it and the referee decides it's a penalty. Your arm shouldn't be there. It's entirely your own fault.
And yet Pawson has been maligned, criticized, physically and verbally abused for these two at worst borderline wrong decisions, and Leicester fans are still able to paint themselves as the victims in this case. As if having seven of their eleven outfield players pick up a card is somehow the referee's fault, and not their players. As if their being fined for fans hurling coins at the ref is a disgrace because they were robbed by the ref.
What came next is what should be the story. A remarkable comeback as Leicester seized control of the game, Stoke weren't able to win the midfield battle or lower the tempo. Kasper Schmeichel kept his team in the game, as Stoke failed to kill it off, Ranieri got his subs spot on and Leicester snatched an unlikely and probably on balance undeserved draw. But instead, I'm so angry with the whole scenario: the increasing lack of respect for referees, the overreacting on social media, the whole sorry state of affairs as Leicester's players and fans reacted very very poorly, and how the whole thing has been twisted as if the referee deserved what he got.
So instead of celebrating what was a remarkable second half of brilliant football, I'm sat here complaining about Leicester's conduct. And that's a crying shame.
The Hard and Fast Section
- United saw off West Brom. Closing on UCL.
- Boro, West Ham and Sunderland picked up huge wins.
- Saints lost 60-13 and face an investigation. Brutal.
- India 372-4. England in trouble again.
- SPOTY tonight. Murray will win,
No comments:
Post a Comment