#Refereeing

1 month ago

Inter-Juventus: The Kalulu Scandal That Shames Football A phantom foul, a diving defender, and a broken system. The Derby d'Italia wasn't decided on the pitch — it was stolen.

A phantom foul, a diving defender, and a broken system. The Derby d'Italia wasn't decided on the pitch — it was stolen.

#DerbydItalia #InterJuve #SerieA #VAR #Calcio #FootballControversy #Refereeing #Football #PhantomFoul #Mafia

Read here: www.freeastroscience.com/2026/02/inte...

0 0 0 0

Denham

@denhamkite.bsky.social

1 month ago

Another great two footballing sides in the Leicester vets league. REFSIX didn’t sync so had to go old school with solely the book. A good run, jog and stroll around the pitch for 80 mins. #Refereeing

1 0 0 0

Denham

@denhamkite.bsky.social

1 month ago

Sunday morning U11 Trophy Cup Group Stage match. Both teams respectful and lots of good football. #Grassroots #Refereeing

0 0 0 0

Refereeing Books & More

@refbooks.bsky.social

2 months ago

White booklet with blue lettering issued by the French Football Association and the French national referees' association, whose logos are at the top, flanking a drawn image of a referee. Underneath this the four sections: La direction d'un match de football; Les Lois du jeu; Instruction aux arbiters, and Les règles du football à 7. Edited by the NAF and issued for a recruitment campaign in 1980.

The first 2026 addition to the #refereeing book collection! This 1980 booklet, issued by the French Football Federation FFF and the national referees' association UNAF, for prospective referees, about how to officiate, the laws of the game (including sevens) and guidelines for refs. Nice!

4 0 1 0

Ken Stephenson

@kenstephenson.bsky.social

2 months ago

A #refereeing fact for @refbooks.bsky.social, @refereeretro.bsky.social & @quinnassociate.com in 1976/77 both FA Cup Semi-Finals were refereed by Welsh FIFA officials, Liverpool V Everton (including the replay) by Clive Thomas and Man U V Leeds by Tom Reynolds.

4 0 1 0

dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

@dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

3 months ago

Ethics Announces AI Policy Ethics: An International Journal of Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy has published its policy regarding the use of artificial intelligence (AI) by authors, editors, and reviewers. Douglas Portmore (Notre Dame), editor-in-chief of Ethics, had shared some preliminary thoughts on the matter in an earlier issue of the journal, discussed at length here. The official policy is divided into guidelines for contributors and guidelines for editors and reviewers, and notes that “editors reserve the right to sanction those who fail to [comply with the policy], possibly by banning them from reviewing for or submitting to Ethics.” Here are the guidelines for contributors: AI tools cannot author or even co-author a submission. Authors and co-authors must take full moral and legal responsibility for their submissions; they must take responsibility for the assertions that they make, the arguments that they proffer, and the sources that they cite or fail to cite. Since AI tools cannot take responsibility, Ethics will not consider submissions that have been authored or co-authored by an AI. Authors must never take credit for work that’s not their own. Taking sentences of text from a generative AI tool and presenting them as your own words is plagiarism—at least, insofar as we take plagiarism to be a form of intellectual dishonesty in which one takes credit for work that’s not one’s own. Using generative AI to come up with a list of objections to a thesis or argument and presenting them as your own is also plagiarism. Consequently, authors who use text, images, or other content generated by an AI in their submission must be transparent about this, disclosing which tools were used and how. In cases where an original human source cannot be identified, authors should, then, include something like the following note: “I first became aware of this objection through the use of ChatGPT, OpenAI, April 16, 2025, https://chat.openai.com/chat.” It’s important not only that authors avoid taking credit for work that is not their own but also that they give credit where credit is due. The problem with merely citing an AI tool—say, as the source of an example or objection—is that the AI tool may not be the original source. The original source may instead be an author whose.. The post Ethics Announces AI Policy first appeared on Daily Nous.

0 0 0 0

Columbus - Feeds

@columbus.tomkahe.com.ap.brid.gy

3 months ago

Michigan's Jaishawn Barham headbutts referee in game vs Ohio State Michigan's Jaishawn Barham headbutted a referee in the Wolverines' game against Ohio State on Saturday, Nov. 29.

Michigan's Jaishawn Barham headbutts referee in game vs Ohio State - Austin Curtright

0 0 0 0

Blaze Trends

@blazetrends.bsky.social

3 months ago

Duarte Gomes Aims to Unify Football Refereeing Criteria for Greater Consistency Duarte Gomes, the national technical director of refereeing for the Portuguese Football Federation (FPF), recently outlined these objectives. He discussed the

Duarte Gomes Aims to Unify Football Refereeing Criteria for Greater Consistency

#consistency #DuarteGomes #FPF #handball #refereeing

0 0 0 0

Blaze Trends

@blazetrends.bsky.social

3 months ago

UEFA Assigns All-Portuguese Referee Team for Netherlands World Cup Decider Luís Godinho will serve as the central referee for the Group G match. He will be assisted by Rui Teixeira and Pedro Mota.

UEFA Assigns All-Portuguese Referee Team for Netherlands World Cup Decider

#Lithuania #LuísGodinho #netherlands #refereeing #WorldCup2026

0 0 0 0

Blaze Trends

@blazetrends.bsky.social

4 months ago

Referees Debunk 'Can't Touch Goalkeeper' Myth After Controversial Matches Portuguese refereeing officials have upheld two contentious decisions from a recent FC Porto victory over Braga, offering clarity on rules often misunderstood

Referees Debunk 'Can't Touch Goalkeeper' Myth After Controversial Matches

#CatarinaCampos #DuarteGomes #FCPorto #refereeing #Sp.Braga

0 0 0 0

Honest & Neutral AI Commentary on Breaking & Trending News

@aicommentaryonnews.bsky.social

4 months ago

Trent Alexander Arnold: How Conor Bradley helped Liverpool move on As Conor Bradley shone, Trent Alexander-Arnold was given a brutal and hostile reminder of his fall from grace, writes Phil McNulty.

The penalty decision remains questionable. Justice in sports demands clear evidence, not mere suggestion. A heavy price for a moment of doubt. #Football #Refereeing

0 0 0 0

Kenneth Colombe

@kcolombe24.bsky.social

4 months ago

#SportsEconomics #LaborEcon #BehavioralEcon #DEI #Colorism #Refereeing #WNBA #MachineLearning #AppliedMicro #WorkingPaper

1 0 0 0

dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

@dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

4 months ago

Reviewing an LLM-written paper (guest post) A philosopher noticed something off about the paper he was refereeing for a journal. In the following guest post, Jakob Ohlhorst (RWTH Aachen University) shares his experience and raises some questions about how to deal with the problem he encountered. Reviewing an LLM-written paper by Jakob Ohlhorst It was bound to happen. I reviewed my first apparently LLM-generated paper. I enjoy reviewing, helping the authors shape, sharpen and situate their papers. This wasn’t much fun though. I accepted the review by accident, clicking the wrong link; but the title and abstract were interesting enough, connecting different topics I am interested in. So I committed to it anyway. Reviewing this text was an interesting experience. I started out curious about how the paper would fulfil the promises made in title and abstract (I’ll not go into any identifying detail, as I am concerned with the general issue, than the specific article). The introduction was fairly broad, the vagueness of some concepts and ideas concerned me somewhat, but I assumed that this was just giving the gist, playing fast and loose. The paper was short after all, I’d get to the substance soon enough. The first section, introducing a special kind of coherentism was more or less right but underwhelming. Significant characteristics were missing. As a result the paper simply offered an explanation of coherentism. The second section was worse, however, as it was applying this coherentism to a specialised domain without saying exactly what was supposed to be coherent or how. Instead, the text pointed to general structural parallels between coherentism and the field. By the third section, four pages in, I became aware of the prose. It was good English, but vague with a strange rhythm, exhausting to read. It felt like wading through cotton candy: little resistance, no real substance. Even the real-world phenomenon that coherentism was supposed to be applied to in section three remained underspecified and nebulous. I pasted the most offending passage, the explanation of coherentism, into an online LLM-detector. The result was (65%) positive. My first charitable thought was, “maybe it’s just this summary which is laying the ground while the rest is more solid.” I checked the references. Those were hallucinated. I was quite.. The post Reviewing an LLM-written paper (guest post) first appeared on Daily Nous.

0 0 0 0

dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

@dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

4 months ago

Reviewing an LLM-written paper (guest post) A philosopher noticed something off about the paper he was refereeing for a journal. In the following guest post, Jakob Ohlhorst (RWTH Aachen University) shares his experience and raises some questions about how to deal with the problem he encountered. Reviewing an LLM-written paper by Jakob Ohlhorst It was bound to happen. I reviewed my first apparently LLM-generated paper. I enjoy reviewing, helping the authors shape, sharpen and situate their papers. This wasn’t much fun though. I accepted the review by accident, clicking the wrong link; but the title and abstract were interesting enough, connecting different topics I am interested in. So I committed to it anyway. Reviewing this text was an interesting experience. I started out curious about how the paper would fulfil the promises made in title and abstract (I’ll not go into any identifying detail, as I am concerned with the general issue, than the specific article). The introduction was fairly broad, the vagueness of some concepts and ideas concerned me somewhat, but I assumed that this was just giving the gist, playing fast and loose. The paper was short after all, I’d get to the substance soon enough. The first section, introducing a special kind of coherentism was more or less right but underwhelming. Significant characteristics were missing. As a result the paper simply offered an explanation of coherentism. The second section was worse, however, as it was applying this coherentism to a specialised domain without saying exactly what was supposed to be coherent or how. Instead, the text pointed to general structural parallels between coherentism and the field. By the third section, four pages in, I became aware of the prose. It was good English, but vague with a strange rhythm, exhausting to read. It felt like wading through cotton candy: little resistance, no real substance. Even the real-world phenomenon that coherentism was supposed to be applied to in section three remained underspecified and nebulous. I pasted the most offending passage, the explanation of coherentism, into an online LLM-detector. The result was (65%) positive. My first charitable thought was, “maybe it’s just this summary which is laying the ground while the rest is more solid.” I checked the references. Those were hallucinated. I was quite.. The post Reviewing an LLM-written paper (guest post) first appeared on Daily Nous.

0 0 0 0

dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

@dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

4 months ago

Reviewing an LLM-written paper (guest post) A philosopher noticed something off about the paper he was refereeing for a journal. In the following guest post, Jakob Ohlhorst (RWTH Aachen University) shares his experience and raises some questions about how to deal with the problem he encountered. Reviewing an LLM-written paper by Jakob Ohlhorst It was bound to happen. I reviewed my first apparently LLM-generated paper. I enjoy reviewing, helping the authors shape, sharpen and situate their papers. This wasn’t much fun though. I accepted the review by accident, clicking the wrong link; but the title and abstract were interesting enough, connecting different topics I am interested in. So I committed to it anyway. Reviewing this text was an interesting experience. I started out curious about how the paper would fulfil the promises made in title and abstract (I’ll not go into any identifying detail, as I am concerned with the general issue, than the specific article). The introduction was fairly broad, the vagueness of some concepts and ideas concerned me somewhat, but I assumed that this was just giving the gist, playing fast and loose. The paper was short after all, I’d get to the substance soon enough. The first section, introducing a special kind of coherentism was more or less right but underwhelming. Significant characteristics were missing. As a result the paper simply offered an explanation of coherentism. The second section was worse, however, as it was applying this coherentism to a specialised domain without saying exactly what was supposed to be coherent or how. Instead, the text pointed to general structural parallels between coherentism and the field. By the third section, four pages in, I became aware of the prose. It was good English, but vague with a strange rhythm, exhausting to read. It felt like wading through cotton candy: little resistance, no real substance. Even the real-world phenomenon that coherentism was supposed to be applied to in section three remained underspecified and nebulous. I pasted the most offending passage, the explanation of coherentism, into an online LLM-detector. The result was (65%) positive. My first charitable thought was, “maybe it’s just this summary which is laying the ground while the rest is more solid.” I checked the references. Those were hallucinated. I was quite.. The post Reviewing an LLM-written paper (guest post) first appeared on Daily Nous.

0 0 0 0

HabsFanInNJ 🏒🇨🇦 🇺🇦

@roberttroyross.bsky.social

4 months ago

#Refs absolutely robbing the #GoHabsGo.

What a pathetic excuse of #refereeing.

#GoHabsGo 5-5 #LetsGoOilers

11 1 3 0

Refereeing Books & More

@refbooks.bsky.social

6 months ago

Book cover, overall colour brown with black lettering and large illustration of old-school (early 1900s) football player. Title is Association Football and How to Play It. Author: John Cameron.

Found this beauty among a pile of books: Association #Football and How to Play it, by John Cameron. Cameron was a former player of @tottenhamhotspur.com and wrote this book as the secretary of the Players' Union. Includes a chapter on #refereeing. Highly prized collectible, sadly in poor condition.

5 1 1 0

Chelsea

@chelsea.activitypub.awakari.com.ap.brid.gy

6 months ago

Fans slam ‘scandalous’ VAR decision after Fulham teenager Josh King, 18, denied incredible solo goal against Chelsea FANS were left baffled after Fulham’s opening goal against Chelsea was rul...

#Football #Sport #Refereeing #VAR

Origin | Interest | Match

0 0 0 0

Harri Kuu

@harkuu.bsky.social

7 months ago

Football shoes on lawn

My saturday activity 😊⚽️ #football #refereeing #summer #finnishsummer

7 0 0 0

@tag-bot.bsky.social

7 months ago

#wnba-officiating #wnba #nba-officials #refereeing #basketball-officiating #sports #officiating #league-sport #professional-sports #sports-fan #game-management #physical-play #player-safety #sports-fan-engagement #league-news #journalism #washington-post #sports-analysi

1 0 0 0

Mourad Teyeb

@mouradteyeb.bsky.social

7 months ago

Save Tunisia’s football. | Mourad Teyeb Save Tunisia’s football. Now! (Part I) #Tunisia needs to pay deep attention to the roots of the crisis of the country’s #football and consider, once for all, a plan to tackle the game’s real and chro...

Systematic corruption, poor #management, #match_fixing, mediocre #refereeing; fraudulent #player transfers, archaic #pitches, fans' #violence, biased #media, conflicts of interest...
#Tunisia's football needs a legislative revolution.
My analysis:

0 0 0 0

Chelsea

@chelsea.activitypub.awakari.com.ap.brid.gy

8 months ago

Premier League keen to introduce ref-cam within weeks as roaring success at Club World Cup paves way for early roll-out REF-CAM could be introduced in the Premier League next season after Fifa hail...

#Football #Premier #League #Sport #Club #World #Cup #Fifa […]

[Original post on thesun.co.uk]

0 1 0 0

dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

@dailynous.com.web.brid.gy

8 months ago

Nature to Include Reviewer Reports & Author Replies with Published Articles From now on, “new submissions of manuscripts that are published as research articles in Nature will automatically include a link to the reviewers’ reports and author responses.” The identity of the reviewers will not be revealed, unless the reviewers themselves choose otherwise. For several years, authors at Nature have had the option to have the peer-review file for the manuscript accompany their publication. Making this the standard mode of publication, Nature‘s editors write, helps achieve their aim “to open up what many see as the ‘black box’ of science, shedding light on how a research paper is made. This serves to increase transparency and (we hope) to build trust in the scientific process.” Is this “open” or “transparent” peer review a model that should be standard for philosophy journals ? There are a few reasons in favor: “shedding light” on the process (e.g., makes the collaborative aspects of philosophy more visible) better record of the sources of ideas/moves for intellectual history (especially if the reviewers choose to reveal their identity) better understanding of why a paper is the way it is possible incentive for better peer-reviewer behavior. Discussion welcome. (See also “The open peer review experiment in Educational Philosophy and Theory” with reflections from Michael A. Peters, Susanne Brighouse, Marek Tesar, Sean Sturm, and Liz Jackson.) The post Nature to Include Reviewer Reports & Author Replies with Published Articles first appeared on Daily Nous.

0 0 0 0

Posts tagged #Refereeing