I'm by no means a Spurs supporter (Hammer by birth, United by home) but I totally agree with Harry Redknapps decision to stop giving interviews if he is charged with misconduct following the weekend's bizarre goal.Firstly I think it was a goal, the ref didn't blow the whistle therefore no foul had been given. Presuming a foul was every bit as presumptuous as Nani had been in grabbing the ball.
However, and this is the big issue for me. What is the point in having interviews when the managers are unable to speak their minds? I'm not saying they should be able to abuse referees, but to not be allowed to criticise them is ludicrous. I don't want robots after a game, I want to see managers talking honestly about the game and the performance of all involved. How would we feel if managers were no longer allowed to criticise players?
There is a lot of talk about respecting the game and respecting the ref, yet it always feels as if the refs have no respect for the teams or supporters. (Obviously they do, but we never get to see it) They are immune from criticism and never have to justify their decisions. By locking them away as untouchable it just drives the resentment felt by supporters.
We understand that everyone has bad days, players, managers, referees alike. There would be so much more respect for the refs if they just came out for 5 minutes and explained their decisions. We would even understand fully if they came out and admitted their mistakes, we don't expect them to be perfect, but when a bad decision costs a team 3 points or a place in the next round of a cup; a simple apology might go a long way towards healing the wounds.
2 comments:
You mean you're a Laarndoner? Not a real oop Norther? ;)
Perhaps birth was wrong word. I was born in Peterborough, but most of my family comes from London, and most of them are Hammers. So I am a hammer by family!
I like to consider myself an adopted Northerner. All the friendliness of the mining communities but without the quirky accent ;)
Post a Comment