That would be "they're" too by the way.





And I'm not cornered in the slightest. I've given my opinion, you've given yours. I have nothing more to say on the matter. I don't continue a debate when I've nothing more to say, otherwise I'm just repeating the same point over and over.

People are confusing the issue. AFAIK Mikalauskas hasn't been on here whingeing so whether or not he can "take" the criticisms is a non-point.



At games, most partisan fans encourage the officials to make decisions in their team's favour. That's stating the bleedin obvious too. Nobody would be surprised nor object.



All this is about, is not whether a particular ref had a poor game or games ( he did), but whether, overall, as an actual ref, he is irredeemably incompetent and total rubbish and should be sacked. It's that last bit I object to, for reasons I've set out. His history and background are clear evidence that he has done very well in his early days of officiating. Whether he can make the steps up to Championship and beyond is always the question for any new official - but they must all surely be given full credit for how they've got to that level, which boils down to controlling a whole bunch of competitive games consistently very well, over a long period of time, and earning promotions. Green he is, and whether he will make a SL ref remains open, but that's a different issue. Hyperbolic claims of utter crapness and boo, hiss, get rid, sack him, he's totally incompetent etc. are simply ridiculous and unfair.

I love the weird belief that being in the middle, surrounded by several players running around, causing confusion, and obviously simply blocking one's line of sight, actually affords a better position to make decisions. I guess that is why coaches sit high in the stand and don't view the action at pitch level, and why the video referee, from a camera in the stand, is used so much.



As for not being able to do it myself - I can't build a house but if a builder does a rubbish job I reserve the right to have a view on the matter.

TBF the cameras most used for the contentious VR decisions are those carried on the shoulder by the mobile cameramen.

:1jzdvbfw





Some of them are FA, I guess that's fair comment, but they usually only use the shots from ground level where there are fewer players milling about spoiling the view, and crucially they are outside the pitch, which to be fair only improves the argument about often getting a better view from [i:1jzdvbfwoff[/i are also badly treated by the authorities and pitched into a level they are not yet equipped to deal with. I think we have every right to point out when this occurs.



I do wonder if the, "you can't do the job yourself", brigade would just accept any shoddy job from a tradesman on the basis that, "well, I couldn't do it better myself"? I assume they must.

You surely can't be such a tender soul that sees personal affrontery and Vaderesque evil in every word? One of us needs to calm down but it's not me. I was, and am, objecting to hyperbolic writing off of match officials, and in particular even writing down a theory that a ref might be given a Final despite being useless, just to somehow post a "success story". The most bizarre part being the failure to explain how appointing a known total incompetent to make a porridge of a big game might work as a "success story" to post.



There were until recently I think only 4 full-time refs, and now Cobb (and Smith) have been promoted, but Mikalauskas is still part-time. There's no reason or justification for writing him off (or Cobb, for that matter). I remember a very similar situation with James Child when he first came on the scene, but he has grown into the job and I think he's a highly competent ref now.



I have no time for silly conspiracy theories, so I do tend to ridicule them. You try to make it sound like a reasonable thing to suggest; it wasn't.



Dealing specifically with the Final, having watched it again, I think he made the vast majority of decisions well enough, and it was only several inconsistencies (aided and abetted on occasion by his touchies) that were the problem. But, I disagree that this means he was promoted beyond his ability, overall the game flowed reasonably, there was not one single major mistake, the players were kept under control and he kept a lid on things, and the key point is he didn't have any influence on the outcome.



Whilst it was a Final, and so a step up, it wasn't the Superbowl. There was no reason not to give him the game and with hindsight I still say the same. Hopefully he'll have watched the video and gone through it inside the department, and will come on for it.

Did I mis-read the story then that Mikaluskas was promoted to full time along with Smith? Or am I mis-reading your post?

No I think you're right, I was mixing up Cobb with Mikalauskas. I think Cobb went full time a couple of years back. At the time these two were promoted I think they were down to just 4 f/t refs

While you're probably right, I have never seen either have a good game, and therefore I will not accept that they're good enough. I suppose that's fair