I frequently read our state's fanboy site, typically to answer and clarify rules questions. (Every little bit of understanding helps.) Of course, there's the usual ref-bashing, but there's a recent exception from a fan who abhors idiotic behavior, and yet wonders even if less idiotic behavior can have an effect on our work. His initial question:
Quote:
|
My question is does the "feedback" potentially do more harm than good if it's done in a civil way and more often than not is a matter of asking for fairness or equality in calls ???
|
My initial response was that I couldn't see how civility could do more harm than good. He offered an example from a game where he wasn't an biased fan (not a supporter of either team), and this clarification...
Quote:
|
I'm just wondering how much of the poor officiating may be due to conscious or subconscious decisions on the ref's part based on crowd/fan behavior ...
|
What he considers to be "poor" officiating is certainly speculation. That said, we kick stuff sometimes, and fan critiques of officiating are often done in superlatives -- either great or poor (seldom fair or mediocre). If it isn't the fans (and I think we all agree that it's not), what is it? Bad positioning/mechanics? Being straightlined? Rules misapplications? What else?