Butcher's facing a one match ban due to his remarks about the referee after the Aberdeen game.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/19764140

While he may be right about the penalty claim, he is incorrect about the Jones sending off. It was a blatant red card.

Edited September 28, 201213 yr by Renegade

The ref may have got the sending off correct but got our penalty wrong ( wasn't a penalty to me) and has been vindicated by Anderson' s sending off being rescinded. However, there is then a strong case of the referee realising that he had got the penalty wrong and denied the blatant penatly with Doran. There cannot be any excuse from the SFA or the ref on the denial of that penalty.

So while Butcher may be correctly banned, what happens to the ref who did not perform well. Will the SFA tell us, will the feck. Until some referee gets obviously "disciplined" for poor performances, the standard of refereeing will continue to get worse

To clarify a couple of things:

1. The topic title is misleading, Butcher hasn't been banned. Not yet at least.

2. The rights and wrongs of the ref's decisions are irrelevant, the diciplinary is for his comments which were critical of the ref and refs in general.

Its stupid .... referees are one of the most inconsistent parts of our game ... not just in Scotland, yet the football authorities treat them like they are beyond reproach. Like players, refs can have a bad day at the office too and (all) managers should be free to criticise. If the criticism is too harsh or slips into libel/slander, then refs have the same protection from defamation that we do !

Whatever happened to that referee feedback site (whistleblower?) where they were allowed to respond to criticism ? That was actually a good idea.

It was the same in the amateur leagues as well, maybe even more harsh .... basically, if a referee report says one thing, and players and even independent witnesses say something completely different (as happened when I was on the disciplinary panel for the Inverness league), then we, as that panel were forced to accept the referee report as the truth by the SAFA (who get their rules from SFA). I even got a touchline ban for a month from the same committee I was a part of when I had the audacity to question a referee's eyesight and remonstrated with him on the sidelines ... getting 'sent to the stands' in the open fields of the the Bught Park is quite entertaining ... i just walked away from my team officials to another part of the park and continued shouting encouragement to the team as a member of the public on public land.The ref was livid

Why have the sfa waited till now to say this? Could they not have done it last week? Then it would be over with by now and the threat of butcher missing the derby wouldn't be hanging over our fecking heads!

It's a conspiracy I tell ya!

The ref was lousy that day and would try and balance out his errors by either ignoring fouls or giving fouls for next to nothing.

I thought that the Western world believed in freedom of speech but apparently not when it comes to the football judge.

You can be done for contempt of court during a trial, at a match the manager can be sent to the stand.

After a trial you are perfectly free to criticize a judge for the sentence he dishes,yet a football match official and his gang of officials standing behind him can hand out punishments for speaking your mind.

In a court of law you can apply for a retrial, in the football world if you are sent off you have to pay £1,000 for a retrial. In a court of law you only have to prove you are innocent to be acquitted, at a football tribunal its more about proving that the judge made a mistake as opposed to proving a players innocence.

Take the ban, as for some strange reason sporting officials seem to have more clout than our legal system.

Until that changes they cant be beaten.

Maby Butcher should try the Pa Broon approach praising the ref after the game it seemed to work in Andersons favour!

Many people on here won't agree with me but this is long overdue and is maybe what is needed to reign Butcher in a little bit and make him concentrate more on the important stuff that he can influence rather than referees and their decisions which ultimately he cannot. IMO he is losing focus of the problems that we face and also the good parts about our team and rather than spend his time discussing this in interviews he berates and blasts referees all the time.

For months now and including the end of last season the most consistent part of his post match interviews are his rants and raves about the referees and their performances and it's all a little embarressing now, yes it may be good entertainment and gives people and the press something to talk about but it's all negative and it's about time it was nipped in the bud as it is totally deconstructive.

When has anyone other than Rangers, Celtic or Alex Ferguson been able to influence a referee?

However, when Neil Lennon complained, Celtic got more than their fair share of pens and dubious decisions. But at the same time so did Rangers.

Dubious decisions tend to go the way of the loudest fans, hence why we get a whole lot fewer, and have less divers, sorry cheats.

Maybe the answer is for the affronted Manager to praise the ref to the skies. To thepoint where , grudgingly, the public say to themselves "methinks he praises too much"

Thus we all get his message but no one in authority can hurt him... but by then his irony has done its job.....

Jeez, Scotty, I have just been blinded by the colorful stuff at the bottom of the thread.

What a nice job you do --- now I am off to click on both these links to see what the Mrs has been doing behind me back,,egad and forsooth, wonders never cease.

It's all tricky dicky stuff in our family. No wonder sometimes older Scarlet disnae ken whit the richt haun is doing to the left leg. Never a dull moment .

As has been said this is a long time in coming. Whether refs are to blame or not it became a consistent habit that it ALWAYS seem to be their fault and sadly that is not always the case and that kind of attitude will feed onto the players and build up this "everyones out to get us" attitude. While it might be a good motivator sometimes it is no excuse for recklessness on the pitch.

Hopefully Butcher will take this ban on the chin and start concentrating on where his own team should be improving.

Maby Butcher should try the Pa Broon approach praising the ref after the game it seemed to work in Andersons favour!

That is exactly what I would be advocating from a psychological perspective. Sarcasm is an art form and it allows you to have a "pop" whilst using praiseworthy words whils adopting appropriately contradictive tone and body language. Terry certainly has the ability to carry this out but unfortunately his aim with these outbursts - towards officials, players, fans, injuries, suspensions conditions etc, - is part and parcel of his self defence mechanism of always projecting the blame on to any other subject than his own failings.

Maby Butcher should try the Pa Broon approach praising the ref after the game it seemed to work in Andersons favour!

That is exactly what I would be advocating from a psychological perspective. Sarcasm is an art form and it allows you to have a "pop" whilst using praiseworthy words whils adopting appropriately contradictive tone and body language. Terry certainly has the ability to carry this out but unfortunately his aim with these outbursts - towards officials, players, fans, injuries, suspensions conditions etc, - is part and parcel of his self defence mechanism of always projecting the blame on to any other subject than his own failings.

Then to follow on from that it shows shades of a manager that is feeling the pressure and is synonomous to the position we find ourselves in without a win this season in the league. It is a self defence mechanism that every manager unfortunately finds themselves slip into when in his position but when faced with adversity he needs to come out and be positive and resist the urge to critisise. It's very bad press and should he get the ban the talk won't be all about the first Highland derby in the SPL but more about TBs ban and how he misses out being on the touchline. I know what I would rather talk about.

Lets hope this slippery slope doesn't continue because when you start and keep critising tohers historically any manager that has cannot turn it around, he has to change his approach and I for one genuinly hope that he does because I and I'm sure a lot of others don't want to hear it all the time and I want to see a TB led team that is successful and is making progress.

The issue is not about whether Terry was right or wrong, it's about the fact that he chose to be critical of the refs performance....in short, he gave his opinion.

Right, wrong or indifferent, everyone is entitled to an opinion and so long as the SFA/SPL etc insist on having the press stick mics/cameras in the faces of managers and players immediately after a game then they have to accept that these people will not have had the chance to look at video evidence etc and can only base their opinion on what they believe they witnessed at the time....will deliver that opinion in the heat of the moment and not always in measured fashion.

Refs need to accept that criticism comes with the territory....and they are well paid for the jobs they do. Perhaps if they spent more time ironing out their own faults instead of running around moaning when people choose to criticise them then it they wouldn't get criticised so much and everyone would be a winner.

At the end of the day it is "handbags" and it should be more about closer analysis of referees overall performances.

At the end of the day it is "handbags" and it should be more about closer analysis of referees overall performances.

Yes you are right, the ref at todays game was fantastic

I just don't think that there are so many experienced refs for the SPL that the SFA can afford to keep suspending Managers who exercise their rights to free speech.

Terry may be very passionate but what if he is right in his statements...what then--is stifling free speech the answer? You tell me,.

Either he puts on an air of complete indifference after the match regardlesss of how bad the refereeing performance is and affected the outcome of the match or he expresses his feelings and avoids a heart attack.

Personally speaking I would prefer that he expresses his emotions because then I know he cares; Except that he can do it in an ironic way as above suggested. Then he is untouchable. May need a bit of preparing of speeches before each game, though, like an actor may do.

Maybe he could even put on an 'After you Claude' accent e.g. "After that uttely deserved penalty lost us the match I had to cry and it was just too, too much . It was all about fair play, don't you know , and when that brilliant, never outclassed forward of theirs was soooo wrongly accused of diving ..then....why....I was just black affronted. And when that fan in row F kept shouting .."You should be on the Olympic diving team, buddy" , many many many times during the match I really cannot tell you how upset I became. The very least he could have shouted was 'You will have to work on stopping clipping your own heels, Buddy, get a smaller pair of boots.'

" Oh, wait, there's the ref approaching. I must get my cloak off and lay it on the ground in front of such a fair and fine person as your Eminence.... There you go, Mr Right-as-Rain. Fantastic performance, SIRE, pity we lost ,eh? Wish us better luck the next time. I put your drammie on your table , m'lud, and you can wash it down with a wee drop of cocoa and no, I did not put Ex-Lax in the cup. ........this time ."

The nicest story I ever heard about letting officialdom know of your displeasure relates to the great Yorkshire and England fast bowler Fred Truman. A forthright character and full of agression he was an intimidating figure. The story goes that one day he was bowling at his firey best on a helpful wicket when he got one to skip through low and hit the batsmen on the pad - plumb LBW. Truman turned to the umpire and gave him his usual loud, aggressive appeal. The umpire was unmoved and just slowly shook his head. Truman walked back to his mark giving the umpire a hard glare but says nothing.

Fired up by the injustice he sends the next ball down short and fast. The batsman tries to fend the rising ball away but gets an edge which the keeper catches. Truman wheels round and appeals louder than ever, staring at the umpire. Again the umpire is unmoved and shakes his head. Again Truman glares at the umpire on his silent walk past.

The next ball is faster still and the batsmen is completely beaten by the pace. The ball hits the wicket; the bails fly over the wicketkeeper's head and the middle stump is ripped out of the ground and goes cartwheeling over the grass. Truman turns and trudges back slowly, looking down at the pitch and shaking his head. As he passes the umpire he says "Nearly got t'bugger that time!"

If Terry thinks referees make poor decisions then he is right to express his opinion. He just needs to be more careful as to the where and how he expresses those views.

Some interesting debate on this but the bottom line is that refereeing performances are getting worse, not just in Scotland, but nothing seems to be done to discipline or improve the referees. I think managers should have the right to comment on referee's performance as it can have a huge impact on games.

The referee yesterday was hopeless, easily the worst I have seen at home this season but fortunately we won so not much comment on this from posters. Despite a very very poor performance, he walks off the park smiling, pockets more than a lot of the players and faces no comeback on his many poor decisions. Something has to be done on the standard of refereeing otherwise most managers will be sent to the stand.

Huisdean - from the referees perspective !!

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1961&newsCategoryID=1&newsID=10710

Butcher accepts 1 match ban

Rule 68 ... what a crock of sh**. You cannot make a comment that suggests bias or incompetence .... !!! what if the feckers are biased or, as happens almost weekly, completely incompetent ?

No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA, shall in an interview, a ‘blog’ on the internet, on a social networking or micro-blogging site, or in any other manner calculated or likely to lead to publicity (i) criticise the performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character. For the avoidance of doubt this rule applies (i) whether reported to the Scottish FA by a referee for misconduct or otherwise, and (ii) where remarks are brought to the Scottish FA’s attention, or of which the Scottish FA becomes aware, by whatever manner or means. There shall be a presumption that any material published in such manner was published in the name of and/or with the authority of the person or body bearing to have published the material.

Huisdean - from the referees perspective !!

Only a yellow, I genuinely don't know if that is good or bad from you IHE!!

Rule 68 ... what a crock of sh**. You cannot make a comment that suggests bias or incompetence .... !!! what if the feckers are biased or, as happens almost weekly, completely incompetent ?

No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA, shall in an interview, a ‘blog’ on the internet, on a social networking or micro-blogging site, or in any other manner calculated or likely to lead to publicity (i) criticise the performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character. For the avoidance of doubt this rule applies (i) whether reported to the Scottish FA by a referee for misconduct or otherwise, and (ii) where remarks are brought to the Scottish FA’s attention, or of which the Scottish FA becomes aware, by whatever manner or means. There shall be a presumption that any material published in such manner was published in the name of and/or with the authority of the person or body bearing to have published the material.

You can follow procedures and make a complaint to the SFA through the referee supervisor instead of through the press.

Rule 68 ... what a crock of sh**. You cannot make a comment that suggests bias or incompetence .... !!! what if the feckers are biased or, as happens almost weekly, completely incompetent ?

No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA, shall in an interview, a ‘blog’ on the internet, on a social networking or micro-blogging site, or in any other manner calculated or likely to lead to publicity (i) criticise the performance(s) of any or all match official(s) in such a way as to indicate bias or incompetence on the part of such match official; or (ii) make remarks about such match official(s) which impinge on his character. For the avoidance of doubt this rule applies (i) whether reported to the Scottish FA by a referee for misconduct or otherwise, and (ii) where remarks are brought to the Scottish FA’s attention, or of which the Scottish FA becomes aware, by whatever manner or means. There shall be a presumption that any material published in such manner was published in the name of and/or with the authority of the person or body bearing to have published the material.

You can follow procedures and make a complaint to the SFA through the referee supervisor instead of through the press.

And the end result? The SFA will side with the referees 99.999999% of the time, even if they think they are wrong. There seems to be something 'sacred' about referees and their reports. They are seldom held accountable for errors, and if proved to be incompetent - usually based on numerous media reports rather than the referee supervisors - are quietly dropped from the top tier or given lower league games.

I know reffing is a hard job, and they are forced to make split second decisions without the benefit of TV replays, and from an angle of view that may be worse than most of the people watching from the sidelines so it is inevitable that they will make mistakes .... but I would just like to see them admit to an 'honest' mistake from time to time which would be much more palatable than their governing body always putting them on a pedestal as bastions of neutrality who never get things wrong. Given that their fees are now so high, I would also like to see them actually sit down with the two managers at the end of a game and have a full and frank discussion behind closed doors about any decisions where either manager wants clarification without the spectre of the manager being red carded in the referee's room. As it stands, the managers cant really speak freely as the ref can issue a card right up until they leave the stadium !!!

As I mentioned before, I have experience of this as part of the IDAFA exec, and a member of our disciplinary committee, (as well as being mentioned in referee reports a couple of times!) I can think of more than one occasion where we had a referee's report one one hand, and the 'offending' player's account on the other both of which were completely different. One at least two occasions I can recall independent (or opposition) witnesses backing up the player's account rather than the referee's, and on one of those occasions it was a fellow committee member who sided with the player as he had been watching this game from the sideline, but on every occasion, we had to take the referee report as 'gospel' and sanction the player based on the recommended minimum punishments under SAFA guidelines, which are of course trickled down from the SFA .... One one occasion where we did not do that, and dismissed the case based on eyewitness reports, the decision was returned to us by the SAFA and we were told to find in the other direction and apply the 'recommended' sanction ....... (never quite got my head round how 'recommended' actually morphed into mandatory punishment, but thats another story).