[The Only Way Is Up]

When a referee favours your opponents by letting them get away with obvious dives, niggling challenges and a blatant disregard for the rules, while you and your team are punished by him at every opportunity - especially those that are questionable, it's easy to see how teams either become mouthy, or shy away from situations where challenges are required but fear of being unfairly penalised steps in. We saw both of those at times over Easter. While it isn't a good excuse for players failing to deliver what supporters of a team aiming for promotion expect, it is inexcusable for a referee to be so bad at his job that an entire season's aspirations can be destroyed by him at a stroke.

Have we reached the stage that football needs to reconsider the application of its rules and remember that it is not a ballet dance? The likes of Joey must think the game's become a farce in comparison with his era - when men were men, and refs were less like a bunch of baby minders crossed with star struck prima-donnas. Or maybe it is simply high time that refs were subject to far greater scrutiny of the matches they take and the decisions they make. Why is it that the media never challenges refs about their decision-making or their control of the game? Why are they elevated to god-like status where they can't be challenged about decisions they make - on the day they make them?

Over the weekend, one commentator stated that a penalty or a sending-off can be a game-changer, and that there must be certainty on the part of the ref before making such a decision. He MUST see the offence before making that decision, and if he is unsighted or unsure then he MUST NOT be influenced by players, the crowd, or even the other match officials, instead allowing the game to continue uninterrupted.

There is still no guarantee that justice will be done, one way or the other, but such one-sided decisions as led up to Roberts' red card yesterday must not cause matches to become a parody.