Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Referees: How can we stop utter in-competence throughout the game.

Announcements Posted on
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    Video replays should be introduced.

    Both teams are given 3 reviews per game and can ask for a decision to be looked at. If you're wrong then you lose a review. If you're right then you keep them.

    A lot of teams will only use for controversial decisions as they will not want to waste reviews on minor infringements.

    Referees should be given a rating out of 10 or a 100 after each game based on their decision making. When they are unsure of a result, they should ask for it to be reviewed (and thereby not harming their score unless frivilous and excessive reviews are asked for).

    The clock should be stopped for these decisions but in most cases I'd imagine it will take like 10 seconds.

    Once the technology is introduced it will quickly become cheaper over time and the technology will filter down the game.
    Absolutely this. I've wanted a hawkeye-esque system introduced for ages now.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/b...premier-league

    This article shows the ball in play statistic for last season. The average was 62 minutes and 39 seconds.

    And if you went to watch Blackburn-Stoke this season, you also got to watch Rory Delap repeatedly drying a ball. For about 10 minutes (in that match the ball was in play for only 50:04min).
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zerforax)
    If video refeering were to be introduced, should stop clock be introduced too, in order to get a full 90 mins of football?
    Would players be physically fit enough to handle 90 mins of actual playing? And if they were, would they be able to do it every week, often having midweek games too? I don't think so personally, unless they all fake the cramp they seem to get (which is definitely possible!). You'd need more subs in a game and larger squads.

    Also it'd be hard for television schedules I suppose, you'd have no idea when a game would actually end. I dunno how they deal with that in Rugby but maybe they have a way.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Independently appoint the referees, don't let known homers ref certain games and check the goings on of their bank account. Simple.
    • 29 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vintage)
    Games especially at this time of season can cost a club millions of pounds or even its very existance.
    Just a point on this. It doesn't really matter what time of the season it is - whether it's the ref or the players at fault for whatever happens, the consequences are the same regardless of whether the game is played in August or April, it's just that those consequences are a bit more obvious to see as the season draws to a close. I was watching the Man City game on Sunday and the commentator mentioned how City had dropped a couple of points very early on in the season and said something along the lines of "It might not have seemed like much back then, but I'm sure they'd love to have those two extra points now". (it was a 2-2 draw with Fulham back on Sept 18th where City had been up 2-0)

    But what can we do to help referees make the right decision and actually improve the quality of them as a whole.
    Technology would help to some degree and I've made my views on that matter crystal clear in the past, but having players that aren't seeking to con the referee at every possible opportunity would go a long way as well. FIFA as a whole need to stamp out things like the diving culture that is rife throughout the game. I'm certainly not going to say that referees are perfect (I don't know why Mark Clattenburg is still a Premiership ref, he makes so many wrong decisions each week :p:) but players seldom make the ref's job any easier.

    I've seen games where an attacker will charge into the box, look for someone to challenge him and if nobody actually does it, he'll stick his own leg out as he passes someone to deliberately make contact with a defender and fall over...and the ref awarded a penalty. Yes, there was contact, but only because the attacker stuck his leg out at an unnatural angle so he'd make contact with the defender.
    I get pissed off time and time again when I see a player dribble with the ball towards two defenders who are standing side by side and blocking his direct path to goal, only for the attacker to knock the ball in between them, run straight into them and fall on his arse, then get a free kick for obstruction or some pish - he had nowhere to go and he was never going to squeeze through the gap between the two players.
    And when players are diving or 'looking' for contact, Jesus Christ...if a Premiership player watches something like MotD and sees himself from multiple angles, in slow motion, kicking the ball away and then literally throwing himself over an opponent's exposed leg in the hope of getting a free kick or penalty, he must feel like such a tit. Especially when nothing's given for it. Ditto when there's minimal contact (or even no contact) but the player jumps up with his arms flapping in the air to try and catch the ref's attention - common sense ought to dictate that if a player has genuinely been caught, he's instinctively going to hold his arms out in front of him to break his fall, not have them flailing around in an attempt for everyone to see him fall flat on his face. This might seem a little harsh, but I think if the referee judges the player to have gone down under minimal contact and/or has made the most out of his dive to ground, no free kick should be awarded or it should be awarded the other way, but probably with no card being shown (as it's not quite as bad as intentionally diving with no contact, which currently does result in a free kick to the defending team and a yellow to the diver). If players stop getting free kicks for going to ground if they're knocked over by a feather then with their incentive for going to ground under minimal contact being taken away they'll gradually learn to cut that from their game.

    Another thing I'd like to see in football that already works well in rugby. For those of you who watch rugby, when was the last time you saw a whole squad surround the ref after he's made a call? It just doesn't happen, does it? The ref has a quiet word with the player who committed a foul and/or the club captain, and that's it. Everyone else stays out of it. Commentators in football, on the other hand, all too frequently point out instances when a player is already on a yellow card and has run the length of the pitch to get gobby with the ref over a decision he had nothing to do with and was so far away from that he probably never saw the incident clearly anyway - he's just taking the opportunity to mouth off at the ref for giving a decision (rightly or wrongly) against his team. Exactly what could be done to combat this, I'm not sure - yellow cards for dissent might be a little extreme, but perhaps sanctions to the club as a whole might encourage the club execs to make sure their players keep out of incidents that don't involve them.

    (Original post by mynameisq)
    also Madrid, Barca, Valencia and Bilbao quite often and the refs are really good!
    Jose Mourinho might have something to say about that :p:
    This is worth a quick read as well :p: Slide 7 of that slideshow covers a bunch of refs in one go, and I think slide 8 (a quote from Gary Neville about Graham Poll) is rather apt for this thread
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    Another shocking decision last night. Skrtel's blatant foul by wrestling Grant Hanley to the floor in the box and keeping him there while Andy Carroll scored the winner. (Hanley played him onside - when if not for Skrtel would have been well clear for Carroll to be offside).
    • 29 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vintage)
    Another shocking decision last night. Skrtel's blatant foul by wrestling Grant Hanley to the floor in the box and keeping him there while Andy Carroll scored the winner. (Hanley played him onside - when if not for Skrtel would have been well clear for Carroll to be offside).
    That was brought up by the Sky pundits post-match, and to be honest I'm slightly inclined to side with them in saying it was six of one, half a dozen of the other. From what I remember, Hanley fell on top of Skrtel, they rolled over so Skrtel was on top, and he then held Hanley down for a second. I don't recall seeing a camera angle where it was clear that Skrtel brought Hanley down (in which case I would agree with you that the goal shouldn't have stood), but that's just my take on it. If they show the highlights of the match on tonight's MotD perhaps they'll have a better view of the incident between them.

    (Original post by Vintage)
    There was about seven straight red cards in the championship yesterday because of two-footed agressive tackles. 3 of them were more than harsh.
    And having had a chance to watch the football league show now...there were four straight reds in the Championship on Monday, plus one in League Two. My views on them all:
    Blackpool: Southern probably deserved his red. It was a 50/50 ball, and it looked like Foster was going to dive in with both feet, but he didn't when he realised he'd get to the ball first, and Southern went in late with his studs up. Not necessarily any intent, but still a reckless and possibly dangerous tackle. There was no question he'd get a card for it, it was just a question of what colour it'd be and the ref felt the red was more appropriate in that instance.
    Bristol City: Pitman's red was fully deserved. He lunged in with his foot raised and studs showing - didn't make contact with the ball, went over the ball and rammed his studs into the shin of Jordan Clarke.
    Leeds: Absolutely no question Michael Brown deserved his red card. Shoving his studs straight into the top of Theo Robinson's thigh, it was nothing short of idiotic.
    Nottingham Forest: McCleary's straight red was harsh. It was a late tackle, but not dangerous or anything. Should have been a yellow. Forest have appealed and the ref has told Forest boss Steve Cotterill that he'll look into it (which suggests he has doubts himself about whether he made the right call), so McCleary ought to have the card rescinded :yes:
    Crawley: Torres shouldn't have been shown a red. Perhaps the ball slightly obscured the ref's view of the actual challenge and he thought the studs were showing or something, and Kamdjo's reaction certainly made it look much worse than it was (rolling around in agony, holding his shin when (if there was any contact at all) contact was only to his foot, then once the red card was shown he got right back up to his feet :sigh:). If anything, it should have been a yellow, but I'm not sure it even warranted that.

    So I make that two definitely correct decisions, one probably correct (but I can see it from both sides - it can be hard to judge the call on challenges made for 50/50 balls), one that was wrong but where the ref was conned by the opposing player, and one that was just plain wrong.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dalimyr)

    So I make that two definitely correct decisions, one probably correct (but I can see it from both sides - it can be hard to judge the call on challenges made for 50/50 balls), one that was wrong but where the ref was conned by the opposing player, and one that was just plain wrong.
    Yeah sorry i meant throughout Championship - League Two. I watched the highlights of all the games on SSN.

    I don't really want the game slowed down. But for red cards and general big decisions. The Ref should be able to look at a laptop (Or tablet for these modern times ) provided by the fourth assistant. See the replay and judge for himself.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    With the Hanley incident the guy never appealed or looked angry whatsoever after we scored, which would indicate that both were having a push at each other.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    sack willie collum
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dalimyr)
    Just a point on this. It doesn't really matter what time of the season it is - whether it's the ref or the players at fault for whatever happens, the consequences are the same regardless of whether the game is played in August or April, it's just that those consequences are a bit more obvious to see as the season draws to a close. I was watching the Man City game on Sunday and the commentator mentioned how City had dropped a couple of points very early on in the season and said something along the lines of "It might not have seemed like much back then, but I'm sure they'd love to have those two extra points now". (it was a 2-2 draw with Fulham back on Sept 18th where City had been up 2-0)

    Technology would help to some degree and I've made my views on that matter crystal clear in the past, but having players that aren't seeking to con the referee at every possible opportunity would go a long way as well. FIFA as a whole need to stamp out things like the diving culture that is rife throughout the game. I'm certainly not going to say that referees are perfect (I don't know why Mark Clattenburg is still a Premiership ref, he makes so many wrong decisions each week :p:) but players seldom make the ref's job any easier.

    I've seen games where an attacker will charge into the box, look for someone to challenge him and if nobody actually does it, he'll stick his own leg out as he passes someone to deliberately make contact with a defender and fall over...and the ref awarded a penalty. Yes, there was contact, but only because the attacker stuck his leg out at an unnatural angle so he'd make contact with the defender.
    I get pissed off time and time again when I see a player dribble with the ball towards two defenders who are standing side by side and blocking his direct path to goal, only for the attacker to knock the ball in between them, run straight into them and fall on his arse, then get a free kick for obstruction or some pish - he had nowhere to go and he was never going to squeeze through the gap between the two players.
    And when players are diving or 'looking' for contact, Jesus Christ...if a Premiership player watches something like MotD and sees himself from multiple angles, in slow motion, kicking the ball away and then literally throwing himself over an opponent's exposed leg in the hope of getting a free kick or penalty, he must feel like such a tit. Especially when nothing's given for it. Ditto when there's minimal contact (or even no contact) but the player jumps up with his arms flapping in the air to try and catch the ref's attention - common sense ought to dictate that if a player has genuinely been caught, he's instinctively going to hold his arms out in front of him to break his fall, not have them flailing around in an attempt for everyone to see him fall flat on his face. This might seem a little harsh, but I think if the referee judges the player to have gone down under minimal contact and/or has made the most out of his dive to ground, no free kick should be awarded or it should be awarded the other way, but probably with no card being shown (as it's not quite as bad as intentionally diving with no contact, which currently does result in a free kick to the defending team and a yellow to the diver). If players stop getting free kicks for going to ground if they're knocked over by a feather then with their incentive for going to ground under minimal contact being taken away they'll gradually learn to cut that from their game.

    Another thing I'd like to see in football that already works well in rugby. For those of you who watch rugby, when was the last time you saw a whole squad surround the ref after he's made a call? It just doesn't happen, does it? The ref has a quiet word with the player who committed a foul and/or the club captain, and that's it. Everyone else stays out of it. Commentators in football, on the other hand, all too frequently point out instances when a player is already on a yellow card and has run the length of the pitch to get gobby with the ref over a decision he had nothing to do with and was so far away from that he probably never saw the incident clearly anyway - he's just taking the opportunity to mouth off at the ref for giving a decision (rightly or wrongly) against his team. Exactly what could be done to combat this, I'm not sure - yellow cards for dissent might be a little extreme, but perhaps sanctions to the club as a whole might encourage the club execs to make sure their players keep out of incidents that don't involve them.

    Jose Mourinho might have something to say about that :p:
    This is worth a quick read as well :p: Slide 7 of that slideshow covers a bunch of refs in one go, and I think slide 8 (a quote from Gary Neville about Graham Poll) is rather apt for this thread
    Diving is a scourge on the game however the issue is that clubs will only screech about diving which goes against them - Harry Redknapp once criticised a player for diving and costing Southampton a point (the season they went down) - however when questioned whether he would punish one of his own players for diving if it earned them something he went quiet and admitted he probably wouldn't

    Regarding diving - I actually find dives one of the easiest things to spot as a referee. Any player who has their arms in the air before they go to ground is diving as the speed of a 'foul' would give them little time to cushion any fall. Reading the rules carefully; there's a case to make diving a 'red card' offence as it can be judged that diving in an attempt to earn an advantage - both the penalty and a man advantage in some cases can be adjudged as serious foul play. Someone said referee's are reluctant to give 2nd yellows for diving - personally I think any referee who does that isn't doing the job properly.

    There's some talk amongst the refs about some potential new changes that could be introduced to try and eliminate diving - namely an honesty system. Now I know that seems absurd on paper but in the detail is a really good proposal.

    If a player goes down and the referee is stuck on what decision to give; he can approach the player and ask whether he was fouled or not. If he claims he was fouled then he can have the penalty but if it's revealed that he has lied then he receives a 3 match ban - 4 match ban for second offence and so on. Repeat offending clubs will be subject to point deductions.

    The idea is that a chairman wont want to be paying players thousands if they keep being suspended.

    Any cheating has got to be alleviated from the game; but in some cases it's harder to introduce than what we have already got - namely the Uruguay-Ghana World Cup quarter-final when people said Ghana should be awarded penalty goals - I disagree totally with any rule like that being introduced.
    • Thread Starter
    • 2 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Matthew_Lowson)

    Regarding diving - I actually find dives one of the easiest things to spot as a referee. Any player who has their arms in the air before they go to ground is diving as the speed of a 'foul' would give them little time to cushion any fall. Reading the rules carefully; there's a case to make diving a 'red card' offence as it can be judged that diving in an attempt to earn an advantage - both the penalty and a man advantage in some cases can be adjudged as serious foul play. Someone said referee's are reluctant to give 2nd yellows for diving - personally I think any referee who does that isn't doing the job properly.
    Yep. But people have to actually notice the difference between diving and going down when contact has been made. A couple of times when i've been playing i've been fouled but could stay up and keep the ball but ive went down because i had nowhere to go with the ball


    I think you should create a thread and as a referee give your view on controversial decisions etc.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    If people want me to I would.

    If you have got nowhere to go with the ball then the question raised is that have you actually got an advantage? From what you describe I would not say you have got one.

    Players don't need to fall over to get a foul.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Not only should there be in-game technology, but a panel who re-watch games and punish players who dive or shout at the referee and linesmen.
    • 19 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    On a similar note, how would we go about improving consistency?
    You see yellow cards given for things like kicking the ball away every now and again, but see the same things go unpunished the vast majority of the time.
    Surely if kicking the ball away is a yellow card, then it is a yellow card all of the time? (I don't buy the "not seeing it" argument, there are four officials - and you are telling me none of them is looking where the ball is?).
    • 19 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dalimyr)
    Another thing I'd like to see in football that already works well in rugby. For those of you who watch rugby, when was the last time you saw a whole squad surround the ref after he's made a call? It just doesn't happen, does it? The ref has a quiet word with the player who committed a foul and/or the club captain, and that's it. Everyone else stays out of it. Commentators in football, on the other hand, all too frequently point out instances when a player is already on a yellow card and has run the length of the pitch to get gobby with the ref over a decision he had nothing to do with and was so far away from that he probably never saw the incident clearly anyway - he's just taking the opportunity to mouth off at the ref for giving a decision (rightly or wrongly) against his team. Exactly what could be done to combat this, I'm not sure - yellow cards for dissent might be a little extreme, but perhaps sanctions to the club as a whole might encourage the club execs to make sure their players keep out of incidents that don't involve them.
    I think for that to work, the referees have to actually explain the decisions though. Something which seemingly never happens in football.
    But I do agree, I think having the referee talk to the captain, and say this is why I gave what I did is the best way to go about things.
    How we get to that state - I have no idea.
    Yellows cards for dissent should already be given. Indeed it is something linked to what I mentioned about about consistency. Some refs will give yellows for dissent, and some will not.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amhorangerdgerriug)
    Not only should there be in-game technology, but a panel who re-watch games and punish players who dive or shout at the referee and linesmen.
    I genuinely don't get why they don't do this, if you keep punishing players for diving sooner or later players won't do it anymore.
    • 29 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Matthew_Lowson)
    There's some talk amongst the refs about some potential new changes that could be introduced to try and eliminate diving - namely an honesty system. Now I know that seems absurd on paper but in the detail is a really good proposal.

    If a player goes down and the referee is stuck on what decision to give; he can approach the player and ask whether he was fouled or not. If he claims he was fouled then he can have the penalty but if it's revealed that he has lied then he receives a 3 match ban - 4 match ban for second offence and so on. Repeat offending clubs will be subject to point deductions.

    The idea is that a chairman wont want to be paying players thousands if they keep being suspended.
    I have to say, I rather like the sound of that :yy: I'm not sure it'd stop people from flinging themselves at opponents to ensure that there's contact as they go down or where they go down at the slightest little touch, but if there were measures in place to cut that nonsense out as well as blatant dives where there's no contact made then it sounds like something that could work :yes: The clear-cut cases of diving, something like that would work a treat, but there's a horrible mire of a grey area where players like to bend the rules as far as they can and, for the moment at least, they're getting away with it so often that it's a complete farce.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    On a similar note, how would we go about improving consistency?
    You see yellow cards given for things like kicking the ball away every now and again, but see the same things go unpunished the vast majority of the time.
    Surely if kicking the ball away is a yellow card, then it is a yellow card all of the time? (I don't buy the "not seeing it" argument, there are four officials - and you are telling me none of them is looking where the ball is?).

    I agree regarding consistency - the problem raised at meetings and it is the same at grassroots is that because referees are human and I have different perceptions as to what is a foul and what colour card should be given - take the Blackburn-Liverpool match - watched it with two other refs and both said the Liverpool keeper should have been sent off for the second penalty - I thought it was a yellow. The problem naturally is that it means that we have different perceptions and we in our mind will treat different situations differently. The comment that comes back from the clubs and tbh is quite fair is that they feel the goalposts shift from one weekend to another.

    When directives are brought in at major finals - its still difficult because if you dont think it was a foul - or shouldn't be a yellow / red card then you are still going to be doubting yourself even if you follow a directive. Hence why we see over strict interpretations of the rules at any tournament.

    There is only one way to guarantee total consistency - and that is to make every single infringement a yellow card offence. Which means a lot of abandoned games.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mynameisq)
    The standard of refereeing in the prem has steadily been getting worse, ... There's no real solutions apart from hire better refs from other leagues.
    The real solution is introduce effective technology (NOT the goal-line crap) and to train the refs and linesmen properly in its use. While they're at it, part of the solution would also be to improve the level of training (initial and ongoing) for refs in all other aspects of the game.

    (Original post by Electronica)
    Video cameras all around like in rugby or tennis, stop the clock while decisions are being carefully made. Although part of me thinks that football fans appreciate criticising the referee as part of the game itself, which might mean it never changes.
    Why? What makes you think that rugby fans don't have arguments? Trust me, there are still plenty of England fans complaining about the video ref disallowing an England try v SA in the World Cup final in 2003.

    (Original post by Zerforax)
    Video replays should be introduced.

    Both teams are given 3 reviews per game and can ask for a decision to be looked at. If you're wrong then you lose a review. If you're right then you keep them.

    A lot of teams will only use for controversial decisions as they will not want to waste reviews on minor infringements.

    Referees should be given a rating out of 10 or a 100 after each game based on their decision making. When they are unsure of a result, they should ask for it to be reviewed (and thereby not harming their score unless frivilous and excessive reviews are asked for).

    The clock should be stopped for these decisions but in most cases I'd imagine it will take like 10 seconds.

    Once the technology is introduced it will quickly become cheaper over time and the technology will filter down the game.
    Why give the teams the option of calling for a review? That'll just become a manager's tactic and will damage the game. Give the refs the proper training in when they should go to the video ref (same as in cricket and rugby) and the technology will work fine. As you say, most decisions will only take a matter of seconds and the really close ones that take a bit longer will just build the sense of anticipation.

    (Original post by KyraBloke)
    I'd find the game quite boring if they spend a few minutes deciding for a booking or not. It won't be half as fun knowing everything is 100% correct. Would have nothing to talk about.
    Both sides have the same refs + lines(wo)men.

    Only thing i would like is goal line technology because that's a case of yes or no. Even with replaying all penalty shouts + analysing them, some refs will have different ideas of whether or not it's a foul.
    If refs have different ideas then it won't all be 100% correct and you will have something to talk about. More to the point, the video ref will rarely be consulted for a booking and, when he is, it will be for a matter of seconds. The video ref should be used for offside decisions just before a goal / penalties / handballs in the area etc.

    (Original post by xDave-)
    Referees and linesmen do an impossible job. They can't see everything and it's unrealistic to expect them too. Even the so called "easy" decisions; how can a linesman look at the furthest back defender, the striker AND the player passing the ball? And in that time he has to be perfectly positioned too.
    One might equally ask how a cricket umpire looks at a bowler's front foot, the angle of delivery AND the position and stroke of the batsman, all at the same time but he does it for hours on end. What's more, your average cricket umpire has a much greater percentage of correct decisions than most football referees. It's just down to the quality of training and making sure that the officials are regularly checked for their ability to do their job.

    (Original post by xDave-)
    Would players be physically fit enough to handle 90 mins of actual playing? And if they were, would they be able to do it every week, often having midweek games too? I don't think so personally, unless they all fake the cramp they seem to get (which is definitely possible!). You'd need more subs in a game and larger squads.

    Also it'd be hard for television schedules I suppose, you'd have no idea when a game would actually end. I dunno how they deal with that in Rugby but maybe they have a way.
    Yeah, they allow enough time and if the action goes on longer than expected and they have to cut down on the amount of time given to the endless pundits' platitudes and managers' mouthing-off, that's a sacrifice that I, for one, am willing to make.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    It's like this in every league every league in the world complains that they have the worst refs but in reality the job they do is very hard under all that pressure the dinasours in charge of FIFA/UEFA have given no valid reason as to why there shouldn't be video's and technology used to help the refs they are a bunch of corrupt ********s who are desperate to hang onto power we should just put them down.

    In my opinion an official should be in room in the stand with access to TV and replays and he should be relaying the correct desicion into the refs earpiece it would make 99.9% of decisions correct and it wouldn't hold up the game much either. There is no reason to adopt a Tennis style limit to video replays there are allot more than 3 wrong desicions each game we could minimise that to 1 or 2 a year if a 5th official is sitting in the stand giving the ref the correct decision.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 12, 2012
New on TSR

Find out what year 11 is like

Going into year 11? Students who did it last year share what to expect.

Article updates
Useful resources

Quick link:

Unanswered football threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.