YOU have to be a special sort of thug to threaten a referee with death.

It’s impossible to imagine how any spectator could wield a knife or point a firearm at a man because he disagrees with a football decision.

But it does happen and in this mixed-up world no threat to kill should be ignored.

Several football officials have been murdered by bullet or blade in the US, Colombia, Somalia, Argentina and several other countries in the last dozen years.

And we should not assume it could not  happen here, evidence of more than 2,500 reported assaults recently in grassroots football points to the grim possibility.

Believe it or not, one recent attack followed an Under-7s game and another was on a 17-year-old assistant ref.

Football is a passionate game. It is mostly played fairly on the pitch.

In the professional game fortunately there are precautions in the ground and outside, supervised by the police and stewards.

And Premier League chief football officer Tony Scholes recently claimed that the rest of the world regarded our refereeing as “a model they would like to follow”.

Correct this may be but Scholes would not wish any country to approve of the treatment of referee Michael Oliver who suffered “death threats” after Arsenal’s game against Wolves at Molineux.

Oliver sent off Myles Lewis-Skelly for a foul on Wolves defender Matt Doherty.

VAR supported the call, leading to fury among Arsenal supporters.

The red card was controversial but could not excuse threats of physical attacks of any type.

Refs in all sports must be a protected species from violence or gross abuse.

Oliver’s response has been restrained and next week he is in charge of Wednesday’s Merseyside derby between Everton and Liverpool.

Fortunately there have been no threats towards the VAR assistant ref Darren England.

He supported Oliver’s decision — one that, to be honest, seemed perhaps a notch above the  usual verdict for similar offences.

A point to be made here — football is a game of great passion but when players’ react angrily to refs decisions, it does stir the rage of a number of hot-blooded supporters.

And a few of them are evil enough to threaten refs with injury and even death.

My view is that overall the Premier League refereeing standards are high, although conclusions involving VAR are over-elaborate — as if the ref were a chess master studying a key move.

Commenting on a new report on Premier League refereeing, Scholes said that the vast majority of decisions were being made more quickly.

Notably, VAR was faster and in use less often than in past seasons.

Sixty-four errors had been made by refs in key incidents after 23 matchweeks this season, down from 80 in 2023-24 over the same number.

Only four of 70 VAR interventions were incorrect — four too many in my book.

For spectators, protracted delays are the most irritating part of VAR.

And that has long made me wonder whether VAR is good value — even with the alleged improvement in accuracy and delivery at only 20 seconds.

Can we be confident this figure is stopwatch precise?

It wouldn’t feel like it for many of us sitting in the stands awaiting the VAR decisions.

The general tone of Scholes’ comments seems fair, though and he will surely agree with the view that refs must remain aware that the drama of actual play should not spoiled by repeated stoppages, or incorrect calls.

The importance of accurate refereeing should never be underestimated, either.

One bad decision can lead to some serious repercussions.

Lost points, relegation, missing out on Europe, and, god help us, death threats — none of which are welcome.