RBSC

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Good riddance, Howard

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Good riddance, Howard

    Good riddance, Howard
    on the sporting edge
    Paul Reid
    Thursday, January 29, 2009

    Last week's year-long suspension of referee Howard Stennett which prompted his resignation is a welcome move by the Jamaica Football Referees Association (JFRA) and the Jamaica Football Federation (JFF).

    It is good to see these two bodies finally getting the intestinal fortitude to do what is necessary to start cleaning up this vital area of the game that has suffered for a long time.

    Despite Jamaica's success in having several referees and assistant referees officiate at several international levels including the FIFA World Cup, there is still a lot to be done at the local level to raise the standard of the officials.

    Stennett was a prime example of what not to be as a referee, one of those who came to games thinking that the paying patrons came to see him and not the players.
    He is not alone in this regard either, as too many of the referees want to be stars.

    Western Jamaica is not exempt when it comes to referees who just don't fit the bill and one can count the number of decent officials on one hand, with fingers left over.

    The last time we had a FIFA-certified official from these parts was more than five years ago when one of our assistant referees was recognised by the parent body.

    What we have here are a number of people who seem more interested in what they can get out of the game than any serious long-term success.

    One does not get the impression that most of our football referees and assistant referees have much ambition to advance to the international stage.

    This is a pity since one can make a decent living from football as the game is played year-round here and there are more than ample opportunities for travel in the region as well.

    One of the messages sent from last week's action was that the JFRA is no longer going to shield their members who flout the rules of the profession.

    We can only hope those who are still in the field will take heed from this action and realise they are not untouchables.
    But I suspect we are still a far way off from this happening as two recent incidents tell me those in charge of our referees are not capable of thinking on their feet.

    During the recent daCosta Cup season, the start of a double header at Jarrett Park was held up for more than 45 minutes despite the presence of three qualified referees. The reason we heard for the delay was that the referee who would be in the middle was on his way.

    That made no sense as the game could have started with the three referees who were present instead of making the hundreds of fans and the two teams wait around in the boiling sun.

    Some years ago the start of the daCosta Cup final between Frome Technical and Glenmuir High was held up for nearly an hour as the officials had met in an accident on their way and had to turn back to change the motor vehicle.
    Fifteen minutes into the game, the referee sent off two or three of the Frome players as their tights did not match the colour of their shorts as the FIFA rules state.

    The question was then, what exactly was the fourth official doing while they were waiting for the arrival of the other referees? If any of the players had been wearing earrings or necklaces would they be told to remove them?
    Interestingly one of the players who was sent off then,
    O'Brian Woodbine, played for the Reggae Boyz in a World Cup qualifier against the Bahamas and it was obvious then that once again the colour of his tights and shorts did not match. However, no one sent him off the field to change.

    Referees in England and elsewhere in Europe do not waste time on such matters.

    Why then are we here majoring in the minor?
    Solidarity is not a matter of well wishing, but is sharing the very same fate whether in victory or in death.
    Che Guevara.

  • #2
    .. I'm aware that this is about referees, but all now I haven't seen anyone express their outrage about the spectator going on the field. Stennett may have been an arrogant prick, but damn ... should he have raised his hands to the heavens in anticipation of the slap from the umbrella?

    Once again, they got it wrong.
    "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

    Comment


    • #3
      I understand the spectator is contemplating civil action against the former referee, heard he was a sponsor who was given access to a VIP tent and said he was just going on the field to ask questions...that's what I heard.

      The report from the JFF did say that neither Stennett's or the match commissioner's report said the spectator had behaved in any aggressive or threatening manner to the referee.
      Solidarity is not a matter of well wishing, but is sharing the very same fate whether in victory or in death.
      Che Guevara.

      Comment


      • #4
        Right on point about referees needing to keep as low a profile as possible.

        re: Colour of Players clothing
        It is important for the refs to ensure as far as humanly possible any clash colours does not present possibility of causing mistaken ref's, assistant ref's and 4th man's/reserve ref's calls, ...or opposing player or players passes...or even those who act as match inspectors and or referees' assessors arriving at wrong conclusions.

        Allowing clashes of colour can lead to 'unfairness' to all concerned ...including the spectators, who turn out to see a 'fair' match...not one where calls are being made incorrectly or passes are going to the wrong party by the refs, refs assistants and or players being deceived by 'colour clash'.

        I would very much doubt referees anywhere would allow 'confusion to reign' on the field, after all the 'first rule' refs must obey is 'fairness'.

        Yet...in the instance mentioned of one of the referee team being at the venue, knowing of the rest of his 'team's' delay, not doing the pre-match check is not understandable. That check should have been done even if the officiating ref could be presumed to possible doing a 'do over'. Commonsense suggested the ref on spot should have acted.
        "Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Sickko View Post
          I understand the spectator is contemplating civil action against the former referee, heard he was a sponsor who was given access to a VIP tent and said he was just going on the field to ask questions...that's what I heard.
          He does not belong on the field during the game, after him nuh name Renato Decordova Valentino Adams? As a sponsor any questions or concerns should be addressed to the JFF. Furthermore the Observer stated, "The sending-off of the player sparked a protest from the home team and its spectators, one of whom left the VIP area, approached referee Stennett on the field with an umbrella in hand and hurled abuse, only to be kicked - martial arts style apparently on the hand - by the official. The spectator was restrained by security and other personnel and eventually ejected from the venue."

          What action has the JFF taken against this spectator? Apparently your source is a good one. That would explain why no action was taken.
          "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Lazie View Post
            He does not belong on the field during the game, after him nuh name Renato Decordova Valentino Adams? As a sponsor any questions or concerns should be addressed to the JFF. Furthermore the Observer stated, "The sending-off of the player sparked a protest from the home team and its spectators, one of whom left the VIP area, approached referee Stennett on the field with an umbrella in hand and hurled abuse, only to be kicked - martial arts style apparently on the hand - by the official. The spectator was restrained by security and other personnel and eventually ejected from the venue."

            What action has the JFF taken against this spectator? Apparently your source is a good one. That would explain why no action was taken.
            Bway Lazie I'm forced to agree with you here. Is every spectator now allowed to go on the field when they feel like? Or only the VIP ones. I would like to see what the basis of the spectator's law suit would be?

            Comment


            • #7
              Oh I never said he had any right to go on the field at all...dont get me wrong and think I am agreeing with his behavior
              Solidarity is not a matter of well wishing, but is sharing the very same fate whether in victory or in death.
              Che Guevara.

              Comment


              • #8
                check this out Lazie...I got it from the Track and field site...

                elmo
                So who is lying ??
                Fri Jan 30, 2009 02:42
                72.27.22.15



                When the Gleaner and the Observer printed the story that a fan walked onto the field (in a threatening manner)with an umbrella, spouting profanities at referee Stennett, there was no doubt in my mind that the story was accurate. After all, the media did not report that Stennett said...

                From observer writer Haile Mika'el
                ------------------------------------
                The sending-off of the player sparked a protest from the home team and its spectators, one of whom left the VIP area, approached referee Stennett on the field with an umbrella in hand and hurled abuse, only to be kicked - martial arts style apparently on the hand - by the official.
                ----------------------------------

                My major question here is:

                Were members of the media present and reported what they saw or did they just printed what Stennett said allowing readers to thing that the report was coming from a neutral media?

                Sickko !!!

                Help me with this please.


                In listening to Stennett on Radio and TV and listening to Reno give its side of the story, clearly someone is lying.

                And I think that Stennett is playing fast and loose with the truth, so I have to eat crow and agree with Sickko on this one.

                The Reno Official spoke on Klas FM, and explained that the incident occurred when a player wanted to re-enter the field of play and Stennett came to the sidelines and gave him a red card for a previous foul. A Reno fan (we now know is a sponsor) walked to the sideline protesting the card but did not enter the field. Stennett then kicked the man who was actually standing beside a police outside of the playing area. The police quickly prevented any further incidence.

                The Reno official then asked, if Stennett felt threatened so close to the sideline, should he not have walked to the center of the field with both linesmen and signal for security?

                Stennett in his interview said he did not report that the man came on the field, because an official told him what to write on the report.


                Sickko you are right !!!

                Stennett looks to be guilty as charged and it really looks like "good riddance to bad rubbish".

                Now what about that Observer Report?
                Solidarity is not a matter of well wishing, but is sharing the very same fate whether in victory or in death.
                Che Guevara.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I am sending this post to the top for Lazie to see....also those who were opposed to the ban on Stennett
                  Solidarity is not a matter of well wishing, but is sharing the very same fate whether in victory or in death.
                  Che Guevara.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Sickko View Post
                    I am sending this post to the top for Lazie to see....also those who were opposed to the ban on Stennett
                    Never said he shouldn't have been reprimanded or fined, the fact is the spectator nuh business pon the field, again I ask what action was taken against the spectator?
                    "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Did u miss the part where the report said the spectator NEVER went on the field in the first place? he was standing by the touch line when he was attacked by the referee.
                      Solidarity is not a matter of well wishing, but is sharing the very same fate whether in victory or in death.
                      Che Guevara.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Sickko View Post
                        Did u miss the part where the report said the spectator NEVER went on the field in the first place? he was standing by the touch line when he was attacked by the referee.
                        So did the Observer reporter misinform the public then? Did the Observer make an official correction?
                        "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          OK then blame the reporter, yes he did get it wrong but neither the referees report nor the match commisary's report said anything about the spectator going on the field.
                          Solidarity is not a matter of well wishing, but is sharing the very same fate whether in victory or in death.
                          Che Guevara.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Sickko View Post
                            OK then blame the reporter, yes he did get it wrong but neither the referees report nor the match commisary's report said anything about the spectator going on the field.
                            Jose Bosingwa stepped in Benoyon (sp) back, was it in the match reports? Does that mean it didn't happen?

                            I'm not blaming anyone Sickko, I got my info from a newspaper, until I see a retraction I'll have to believe that reporter versus what is said in a "rum bar".
                            "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              What 'rum bar'? You seems to need a shot of the strongest thing from the rum bar...if the man had encroached and the ref beat him ass why wasnt that in the report and why didnt the match com misary report that the man had encoached, that is the report i am talking about not what was said in the T&F forum or here...
                              Solidarity is not a matter of well wishing, but is sharing the very same fate whether in victory or in death.
                              Che Guevara.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X