scram
09-05-2007, 09:35 PM
Back in the day, when Chelsea tickets were affordable (no, really, ten years ago you could walk away with a pair of tickets with both your arm and your leg still in your possession) and my Dad and I used to see several games throughout the season, my life as a football fan was really kicking off. I loved the atmosphere that you got at the Bridge - it was like watching football with all the dials set to 11: emotion, humour, noise, colour, intensity. It was great. One of the things I also loved (being an early teenager and still giggling at piss and fart jokes... actually that hasn't changed much... but anyway...) was the chants that would spring up around the stadium. In those days, the Chelsea fans were even more vocal than they are now and you'd often leave the stadium hoarse from 90 minutes of non-stop singing. I loved it. One of the chants which I remember from those first few years concerned a referee who still referees now. If I recall it went like this:
"Oh Graham Poll, You're a fucking arsehole, you're a fucking arsehole, you're a fucking arsehole."
I happily sang along, enjoying the fact that I could yell profanity beside my father without repercussion, but it was years before I really thought to myself, "Hold on, we had, and still have, a valid point."
Through years of continued work, Poll has worked himself up to the heights of being the FA's "top" referee. He's represented the country in two World Cups and one Euro Tournament and continues to be handpicked for the "big" games - tonight's game between Manchester United and Chelsea being a prime example (don't forget that he was picked before the game effectively became meaningless in terms of the Championship race). But the question I keep asking myself is why.
He made a wonderful example of himself in the last World Cup in the Croatia v Australia match (3 yellows?) and showed how dreadful he is at keeping control of a game. This game was textbook Poll - it seems that his idea of controlling a testy situation is to march in there with a patronising look and dish out unnecessary fouls and cautions left right and centre. As that particular game shows, this style of refereeing only exacerbates a heated situation and, in some extreme cases, can get completely out of control.
You only have to look at the man when he's refereeing to see why people dislike him. He exhibits a flagrant disrespect for players on the pitch. Instead of talking to them as equals or engaging them in reasonable conversation to diffuse a situation you will more often than not see him rolling his eyes, make a "chat chat chat" gesture with his hands and eventually produce a card to a player who is understandably getting frustrated.
It's a fact of life, one which I have learned in the working world too, that if you feel patronised and disrespected then you will consequently feel angry and agitated at having to bow to that person's authority. Poll's attitude on the pitch and his enjoyment of the power he wields practically ensures that any game he referees, which would already have the potential to get tense (i.e. local derbies or grudge matches), ends up with a couple of red cards, a lot of angry players and a feeling of resent from the spectators. That being the case, why does he keep getting these games when he clearly doesn't have the ability to control them?
The sad fact is, that I think he enjoys the controversy. It reaffirms the power that he has and the knowledge that he rarely has to answer to anyone. He must have some friends in some high places.
I've left a poll (how could I not!?) for you to express your opinions. However, I would also like to see what the rest of you think about him.
Unfortunately now I can't afford the price of a ticket to Stamford Bridge and have to catch the action at home. I still enjoy the game and love listening to the chants from the stands. However, it was a chant which came up from the United fans which caught my ear tonight and made me smile:
"You're not fit, you're not fit, you're not fit to referee! You're not fit to referee!"
There's a first time for everything, lads. But for once, I'm with you.
"Oh Graham Poll, You're a fucking arsehole, you're a fucking arsehole, you're a fucking arsehole."
I happily sang along, enjoying the fact that I could yell profanity beside my father without repercussion, but it was years before I really thought to myself, "Hold on, we had, and still have, a valid point."
Through years of continued work, Poll has worked himself up to the heights of being the FA's "top" referee. He's represented the country in two World Cups and one Euro Tournament and continues to be handpicked for the "big" games - tonight's game between Manchester United and Chelsea being a prime example (don't forget that he was picked before the game effectively became meaningless in terms of the Championship race). But the question I keep asking myself is why.
He made a wonderful example of himself in the last World Cup in the Croatia v Australia match (3 yellows?) and showed how dreadful he is at keeping control of a game. This game was textbook Poll - it seems that his idea of controlling a testy situation is to march in there with a patronising look and dish out unnecessary fouls and cautions left right and centre. As that particular game shows, this style of refereeing only exacerbates a heated situation and, in some extreme cases, can get completely out of control.
You only have to look at the man when he's refereeing to see why people dislike him. He exhibits a flagrant disrespect for players on the pitch. Instead of talking to them as equals or engaging them in reasonable conversation to diffuse a situation you will more often than not see him rolling his eyes, make a "chat chat chat" gesture with his hands and eventually produce a card to a player who is understandably getting frustrated.
It's a fact of life, one which I have learned in the working world too, that if you feel patronised and disrespected then you will consequently feel angry and agitated at having to bow to that person's authority. Poll's attitude on the pitch and his enjoyment of the power he wields practically ensures that any game he referees, which would already have the potential to get tense (i.e. local derbies or grudge matches), ends up with a couple of red cards, a lot of angry players and a feeling of resent from the spectators. That being the case, why does he keep getting these games when he clearly doesn't have the ability to control them?
The sad fact is, that I think he enjoys the controversy. It reaffirms the power that he has and the knowledge that he rarely has to answer to anyone. He must have some friends in some high places.
I've left a poll (how could I not!?) for you to express your opinions. However, I would also like to see what the rest of you think about him.
Unfortunately now I can't afford the price of a ticket to Stamford Bridge and have to catch the action at home. I still enjoy the game and love listening to the chants from the stands. However, it was a chant which came up from the United fans which caught my ear tonight and made me smile:
"You're not fit, you're not fit, you're not fit to referee! You're not fit to referee!"
There's a first time for everything, lads. But for once, I'm with you.