Officiating in Sports

NBA: Joey Crawford

BPL: Howard Webb

This post is more of an observation on a great debate going on across major sports right now in one form or another. This is the role of officiating in games/matches. In each sport, there has been cries for more technology, more replays, etc. At the surface, I am in complete agreement with this. People don't want to get slighted in major competitions by a sudden (or sometimes consistent) incompetence of an official. No-one want to miss becoming division champs because of a bad call or get to a final game only to feel like the match was given to the other team.

Each league has its examples of refs that will make the headlines. In the NBA, there is Joey Crawford. This is a man that is able to even evoke the wrath of Tim Duncan (which is quite hard to do). In the Premier League, there is Howard Webb who many think is really a Manchester player in disguise. NFL had the replacement refs most recently (though that was to different circumstances). Funny enough, people complained about those refs but when the regular ones came back the complaints did not cease.

But then after hearing the point of view of former players and coaches in each league, some of them are actually proponents of leaving things the way they are. They don't want goal line technology or replays on demand. Initially, I thought this was them being stubborn but then it started occurring to me that they actually have a point. If you think of sports as source of entertainment, then allowing many decisions to fall on the human refs keeps a factor that could be missed if everything was enforced by technology. Think of how many games are infamous and talked about years or decades later because of mishaps or things not caught at the time by the officials. Without this aspect, people would not have much to talk about and there would not be as many memorable competitions. It may be nice to say "every time we lost it was because we were the worst team" but fans may get tired of continually saying that. It injects a little something, gives some teams a little hope when there is the officiating factor.

Now I'm not saying refs should come in untrained and with biases, but if they know the rules and are making the effort to have an even fair match then maybe from an entertainment standpoint that is enough. If anyone has comments on this, feel free to comment below.

Daniel

NFL: Replacement refs

TooSmooth

I just want to go ahead and give a shout out to a guy I wen to high school with. I mentioned him earlier in the blog but he has a new music video on his Vevo out called "Future Dreams" so check it out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuDJdu-NljQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

You can follow him on Twitter: https://twitter.com/lightsoutentloe
You can also like his Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/L.O.ENTERTAINMENT?fref=ts

Cheers,

Daniel

Chelsea Woes in the Roman Empire

I've posted before about my history with both clubs I support. I'm not ashamed to say I started supporting because of Mourinho's squad. They exhibited the game play traits of a team I would love to be part of as a defensive minded person. Since most of my family that watches the sport and many friends are Arsenal fans, I'm still getting into the Chelsea history and such myself since I didn't grow up with it. I'm generally not a huge history buff with things like sports. Squads change, managers change, etc. I like the now and the future. I like seeing the strategy. I was a football fan way before I was a Chelsea or a Charlton fan because I played and liked watching it from a neutral standpoint. A lot of this lack of bias allows me to be civil with other fans as well as be able to question things in the teams I support.

When I started supporting Chelsea, the Roman era was fresh. This was one of the beginnings of apparently when money came into football (because it wasn't before apparently). Over the years, the revolving door that is the Chelsea managerial spot has been a point of ridicule for other supporters. Initially, after RDM's sacking I was disillusioned about the way Roman is running things because of what RDM has done for the club. But after some time I can really see it from both sides. It is still not really what I like in a team and I think some of the criticism of Chelsea as a football organization is warranted. I will put both the good and the bad into sections titled "bad Roman" and "good Roman."

Bad Roman:
I think the biggest pet peeve for me and what may get a lot of people is the dissonance between Roman and the fans. He doesn't even give the impression that he cares about anything but anything fan related but their money. This is a big no in the English game as most people who make themselves a name in a team generally at least act like they appreciate the fans. To be fair, these people are rarely owners because owners rarely draw attention to themselves. Roman has clear agendas and will do everything in his power to get it. The problem is now it is beginning to disrupt the team. Tabloids have talked of a rift developing in the locker room because the team thinks that Roman is making major decisions based on what is best for some ideal Torres form rather than the well-being of the team or making use of the loaded midfield available to him. His agendas also show when Chelsea has transfer rumors despite not having a manager. I do not like the revolving door and would love to have a manager to attribute to an era that lasts more than two years. A manager would also be nice because transfers without a strategy or direction are pretty pointless. A player like Torres wasn't meant for a set up like Chelsea that devalues and striker that isn't a target man in favor of a strong midfield.

Good Roman:
As many old school fans will remind you, without Roman there would probably be no Chelsea. He has put a lot of personal money into the club. I'm sure many fans would prefer to be annoyed by an owner in the Premier League than suffer the fate of Rangers and have to start from a low league. Also, as a business man he is not actually being too crazy in some aspects. Roman has had a goal of Champion's League, wins and great-looking football. He has already decided he wants a top manager that has shown they can win and play good football. The tools are in place in this current squad (bar maybe a striker) and frankly Di Matteo did not cut it in either end of the pitch. We would have loved to see him finish up the season but realistically he may not have had a great season and he was headed out as soon as someone like Pep or Mourinho are available. Benitez, like RDM, knows he will not have a long stay. In Roman's eyes, he may have saved Chelsea a trophy or two but at the same time his end goal is beyond either men.


With both sides in mind I can only hope that in a few seasons Roman can resolve the Torres problem and find a permanent manager as what is currently happening goes against what I like about football. I can understand treating it as a business and you need to to a large degree but I think he needs to give the fans some assurance that they are even remotely involved in the club. If that will never be the case then I find it hard to be more interested in the club (call me a plastic if you will but I don't like the idea of putting money into a billionaires own real life football manager game when he is not a former player but makes decisions that the manager should be making). Chelsea was earning respect with RDM and that is the biggest shame of seeing him go. The brutal and abrupt ending of his Chelsea managing career was representative of the lack of respect for the fans as he is considered one of us. Only time will tell though. If all goes according to plan, next season or so should be the start of the first consistent managerial era under Roman. Maybe the return of the special one. Whoever it is must be ready to live with Roman breathing down there neck unless he has a change of heart. But he'd have to use his heart once for the club for that to happen.

Daniel

First Match Under Rafa

Haven't blogged in a while so I figured, since I'm on break, I would post after several big things have happened for the club. I will talk a bit about the match and a bit about the possible future. Basically just what I'm seeing.

Reception:
I think all the events about RDM were warranted and show that fans generally have respect for someone who has been a great servant to the club as player and as manager. I may not be a fan of Benitez and I understand people not foreseeing the possibility of ever warming up to him (I doubt I will) but I don't think booing helps anyone. He knows many fans don't like him and that he is an interim but he has the job.

Match:
I think the match was a safe match for a man who just got hired on Wednesday. City's league form is very good and Benitez had very little time to start developing the team. What stood out to me is that defense. Luiz acted like a defender for once. I'm sure Benitez had to have sorted him out after watching Chelsea matches in the last year or so. Solid defending is one of the qualities I liked about Chelsea that initially made me a fan so it was not fun to see that disappear. Ivanovic in side with Azpilicueta out on RB is my ideal right defense and it worked wonderfully. Azpi should in all honesty be starting because he controls most of that side of the field. I am waiting to see another Torres performance or two before starting to judge for two reasons. One is that Torres was fighting for the ball but City may be one of the if not the physically biggest defense in the league and Torres is not a target man. Second was that Mazacar was not exactly firing on all cylinders. All in all, a tie against City is a fair result.

Season:
I don't see Benitez becoming a fan fave. I think he will be super careful about the Torres situation but he will probably fair better than RDM simply because he can sort out a defense. This will be big for cup competitions. When Mazacar are all in sync, the attack will not need a crazy amount of coaching due to the high amount of creativity. If Benitez can convince Roman to allow him another striker I think he has the experience to bring a double of some sort.

This is all obviously my analysis but I think for a lot of it, this was a general impression. Feel free to comment.

Daniel

Arsenal vs Chelsea Match Analysis

Chelsea Starting XI: Cech; Ivan, D Luiz, JT (c), Cole; Ramires, Mikel; Mata, Oscar, Hazard; Torres

Formation: 4-2-3-1

First Half:

10 min

17 Min Early sub as Ox-Chamberlain comes on for Diaby for Arsenal

20 Min: GOAL Torres in off a set piece for his 3^rd season goal

AFC 0-1 CFC

26 Min: Possession is even

30 Min

35 Min: Ramsey with the first yellow of the match for a foul on Oscar

39 Min: Oscar yellow card; Oscar has been putting in a physical, defensive shift this match

40 Min

42 Min: GOAL Gervinho from a turn around shot in the box; sub Oxlade-Chamberlain with the assist

AFC 1-1 CFC

Arsenal seem to have woken up after that goal

HALF TIME: AFC 1-1 CFC

• Chelsea end with 52% possession
• Arsenal still with more shots and pass accuracy
• General feel is Chelsea was on better until the Arsenal goal

Second Half:

48 Min: Luiz yellow card for diving

52 Min: Vermaelen yellow card for foul on Torres

53 Min: GOAL Mata off a freekick

AFC 1-2 CFC

60 Min

Chelsea yet to make a sub while Giroud and Walcott are warming up for Arsenal

70 Min

73 Min: Moses ON Oscar OFF

80 Min: Chelsea has slowed down the game

81 Min: Cahill ON Luiz OFF

85 Min: Bertrand ON Mata OFF; Both teams have used all 3 subs

90 Min: Chelsea have been content to give possession but now just keeping the ball as 4 minutes of added time is shown

90 Min +2: Ramires yellow card

FULL TIME: AFC 1-2 CFC

Positives

• Moses will look to be a crucial sub this season as he adds pace and width late in the match
• Torres scoring
• Chelsea the first team to beat arsenal three times at the Emirates
• Only have dropped 2 of the first 18 available points and lie in first place for the weekend
• Passing play had some very good moments

Negatives

• A lot of offside and foul trouble

MOTM: Juan Mata

• This battle was won in the midfield
• 1 goal
• 1 assist
• 2 shots (1 on target)
• 92% passing accuracy
• 72 touches (most on team)