The FA and Dealing with unseen incidents

thorbarry

This is taken from an Arsenal blog * Apolagies* However I feel it is quite relevant.

Link to the article, it is a bout half way down the page

http://arseblog.com/2012/04/wolves-preview-the-fa-are-negligent-liars/

THE FA
The decision not to overturn Shaun Derry’s red card was absurd. Video replays show he hardly touched Young, it showed Young clearly offside, it showed Young dived. The FA’s decision to ignore the evidence and allow a cheat to prosper sends a terrible message and embarrasses the game of football.

Equally, their decision not to punish Mario Balotelli any further for his assault on Alex Song sends a similar, but more dangerous message. It says that it’s OK to commit acts of violence on the pitch and that you might as well take a chance because the ineptitude of officials might let you get away with it – even if video shows that the challenge is worthy of a ban far lengthier than even the mandatory punishment a straight red card for violent conduct brings.

This particular incident is particularly frustrating because the FA say:

Where at least one of the officials has seen the coming together of players retrospective action is not taken, regardless of whether they have seen the full extent of the challenge.

So what we have is a situation where one of the officials saw there was a challenge but not the challenge itself, because as rubbish as referees have been this season, I cannot believe that any official who sees a player go in on an opponent in a way that might break his leg wouldn’t take the appropriate action. If said official did see the full extent of the challenge yet failed to take necessary action, they should be demoted, if not sacked. The ludicrousness of this is highlighted by the fact a linesman who got an offside decision wrong is demoted at once, a team of officials who miss a potential leg-breaker are arbitrarily shielded and protected by the FA.

Referees have to make decisions in an instant. It is, sometimes, hard to get things 100% right. In an era of professional officials you would hope that acts of craven violence would be spotted and dealt with, but sometimes they won’t. So, where is the harm in a referee reviewing the video after the game and saying ‘I saw it, but didn’t realise it was that bad. Had I seen it I would have issued a red card’?

I said this on Monday, and many times before, but English football has an almost unique reluctance to deal with real violent conduct on the football pitch. The FA refuse to punish players for dangerous tackles and as such we continue to see two-footed lunges and leg-breakers, and the perpetrators of them banned for three games while injured players can be out for up to a year.

In their ruling yesterday, The FA did their usual trick of hiding behind FIFA laws, saying that because an official had seen the Song/Balotelli incident no further action could be taken:

In agreement with FIFA, this is how ‘not seen’ incidents are dealt with retrospectively in England. It is a policy that is agreed with all football stakeholders.

This is a lie. It’s false. In other countries referees can see an incident, deal with it at the time, but further punishment can be meted out to the player who commits the act of violent conduct. Some examples to follow:

Example 1: Hamburger SV v Stuttgart 03/03/2012 – Striker Paolo Guerrero is sent off for this nasty challenge. The automatic three match ban becomes an 8 game ban after the video is reviewed.

Example 2: Bordeaux vs Rennes 12/12/2010 – Jaroslav Plasil is lucky not to have his leg snapped in two by Rennes’ Tongo Doumbia. The referee sees the incident at the time and dishes out a yellow card. Subsequently, the LFP review the incident and a supplementary report from the referee (suggesting he himself looked at the video and made a recommendation), and impose a 4 game ban on Doumbia.

Example 3: Valenciennes vs St Etienne 10/3/2012 – Carlos Sanchez Moreno fouls Fabien Lemoine of St Etienne early in the game (incident at 25′ – turn your pop-up blocker to maximum) and is issued a red card. The LFP review, the outcome is a 9 game ban for Moreno.

Example 4: A player Arsenal were linked with, Emir Spahic, goes WWE on an opponent, laying him out with an elbow here. The ref doesn’t ‘see’ it or act on it, but on review he is handed 4 game ban. That does not act as a deterrent as he does it again 4′ into this video. Due to the seriousness of the incident he is handed a ‘preventative’ 1 game ban and after a hearing that ban is extended to 7 games including the one game he’s already served.

So, we have a range of incidents which referees have seen an acted upon (and ones which they didn’t like Spahic’s elbows) but were subsequently punished properly by using video evidence. So the question is: if the authorities in France and Germany – and I’m sure in other leagues – can deal with incidents that referees have seen and even issued cards for, why can’t The FA?

If it were against FIFA rules then those ruling bodies are acting contrary to them and would surely be penalised by an organisation that is so anal about said rules that it holds special meetings to ban the game from the creeping horror of things like the snood and players taking their shirts off after a goal.

Are the referees in these cases undermined? Absolutely not. There’s an acceptance that a referee gets one chance to see an incident and a little time to make a decision. He does not have the benefit of replays until after the fact. Reviewing video footage after the game doesn’t challenge his authority, it simply says that all available evidence will be used to punish a player guilty of violent conduct.

And in the long run, doesn’t it make a referee’s job easier? If players know that despite getting away with something on the pitch they’ll be banned for it afterwards, won’t most of them think twice before going in over the top, late, studs up, on somebody’s knee? We’re told that human error is part of the game, and it’s true for officials and players, so why not make video reviewing and disciplining of players post-game mandatory? Why not introduce a system as in rugby which would allow Arsenal, for example, to cite Mario Balotelli for his challenge on Song?

The bottom line is that The FA’s assertion that they are restricted by FIFA rules/guidelines is utterly false. The reason they don’t take action is because they don’t want to. I don’t know why. Maybe they think it will open a can of worms, maybe they don’t want to deal with the administration/cost of reviewing incidents, maybe they think they would undermine the authority of the referees. But whatever the reason, they’re wrong and they continue to get it wrong.

And the worst thing is we can say ‘Well, it’ll take a serious injury to a player for them to change their ways’, but the fact is they have had countless opportunities already – and too many serious injuries – to do something about it, and every time they bottle it. If they don’t have any will to police the game properly, for the good of football and all the players, then they’re guilty of neglect of the worst kind. They have abdicated responsibility and hidden behind a lie which will be of no comfort to the next player who has a leg snapped or a cheekbone smashed.

It’s about time somebody challenged them about it. It’s about time that fans refused to put up with their nonsense any more. Quite what can be done about it, I don’t know, but The FA made a mockery of English football yesterday. They sent a message that cheating is fine and that you can get away with acts of violence. They continue to sanitise the game for fans, in so many trivial, unnecessary ways, yet refuse to deal with the real issues on the pitch.

They are a joke and they should be, but won’t be, ashamed of themselves.

How can they not overturn Derry's red card? To me it does not make any sense. Young was offside! Even the decision not to punish Balotelli is crazy.

keano_afc

I think Young being involved might have swayed the decision. Had that been a dirty foreigner throwing himself to the ground, it might have been different.

The Song/Balotelli one is baffling really, and sets a dangerous precedent.

SantryRed

keano_afc wrote: »

I think Young being involved might have swayed the decision. Had that been a dirty foreigner throwing himself to the ground, it might have been different.

What a load of sh1te.

It was foul by Derry at the end of the day. Young made the most of it. Who would blame him, I'm not a fan of this but for a foul to be a foul in football you need to go to ground.

The not being allowed revisit any incident that the referee sees is pure bull though. They won't do anything which sees them undermining the referee's position. Balotelli should be getting a three match ban for that tackle.

DB10

SantryRed wrote: »

What a load of sh1te.

It was foul by Derry at the end of the day. Young made the most of it. Who would blame him, I'm not a fan of this but for a foul to be a foul in football you need to go to ground.

Young is a cheat, up there with the worst in the league. And before anyone starts it was well known before he even transfered to United, hes been at it since his Watford days.

It's not really relevant to the incompetence of the FA though. They are a disgrace.

ballsymchugh

whatever happened to drogba's feigning in the champions league against napoli(?) when he was looking up to see what was happening?
why wasn't video evidence used there, the same way it was used when uefa suspended dida, the AC milan goalie for feigning against celtic a few years ago?

GavRedKing

Rooney against James McCarthy anyone?

I'd hate to say its the FA looking after their own but, young and Rooney both English?

Ivanovic got a ban after striking out at Maloney a few days ago for a less serious incident then Rooney's one.

P.S. this has nothign to do what clubs the play with and I'd rather keep that out of it as its just conciedence in the two examples I'm using.

amacachi

The Balotelli one is an absolute joke. There should be no need for retrospective action anyway, most obvious doing of someone I've seen on TV in ages, ridiculous that none of the officials saw anything wrong with it at the time.

keano_afc

SantryRed wrote: »

What a load of sh1te.

It was foul by Derry at the end of the day. Young made the most of it. Who would blame him, I'm not a fan of this but for a foul to be a foul in football you need to go to ground.

The not being allowed revisit any incident that the referee sees is pure bull though. They won't do anything which sees them undermining the referee's position. Balotelli should be getting a three match ban for that tackle.

Its not ****e. The FA have a a history of looking after their own.

The Ferdinand incident aside, how much did Shearer get away with over the years because he was England captain? Likewise Gerrard. Its a lot easier to punish a foreign player than one of your own.

LuckyLloyd

The status quo exists because there is no real desire from the majority of football fans for it to be changed.

Sure on Sunday afternoon there was a thread started here arguing that football would be less enjoyable if officials got all decisions correct - and a bunch of people agreeing with the idea.

The FA (or FIFA) will only change how things are done if people want things changed.

thorbarry

I understand the "English" argument, however the thing that gets me most annoyed is the lack of consistency. Fair enough Balotelli didnt get a ban, however Alex Song received a 3 match ban back in August for a stamp on Barton!

If Balotelli had of tackled an English player as he did Song, would he have gotten away with it? Its hard to answer because the FA make a joke out of everything!

28064212

keano_afc wrote: »

Its not ****e. The FA have a a history of looking after their own.

The Ferdinand incident aside, how much did Shearer get away with over the years because he was England captain? Likewise Gerrard. Its a lot easier to punish a foreign player than one of your own.

Point to an incident that an English player got away with that a foreign one didn't. Rooney's elbow was seen at the time (even if it wasn't punished properly). So was Balotelli's. What happened? No punishment for either. The setup of the appeals process might be a joke, but claims of bias need some actual evidence

28064212

thorbarry wrote: »

I understand the "English" argument, however the thing that gets me most annoyed is the lack of consistency. Fair enough Balotelli didnt get a ban, however Alex Song received a 3 match ban back in August for a stamp on Barton!

If Balotelli had of tackled an English player as he did Song, would he have gotten away with it? Its hard to answer because the FA make a joke out of everything!

Oh FFS. Song got a ban because the ref did not see it at the time

citytillidie

thorbarry wrote: »

I understand the "English" argument, however the thing that gets me most annoyed is the lack of consistency. Fair enough Balotelli didnt get a ban, however Alex Song received a 3 match ban back in August for a stamp on Barton!

If Balotelli had of tackled an English player as he did Song, would he have gotten away with it? Its hard to answer because the FA make a joke out of everything!

Sure he nearly knocked out Scott Parker and nothing happened its just the FA are dumb

Will I Amnt

keano_afc wrote: »

I think Young being involved might have swayed the decision. Had that been a dirty foreigner throwing himself to the ground, it might have been different.

The decision was whether to uphold a red card for Derry,an Englishman.
They could have rescinded the card and kept everyone happy.

DoctorGonzo08

amacachi wrote: »

The Balotelli one is an absolute joke. There should be no need for retrospective action anyway, most obvious doing of someone I've seen on TV in ages, ridiculous that none of the officials saw anything wrong with it at the time.

The exact same can be said of Johnsons two footed lunge on Lescott that didn't even warrant a yellow card?

Picking Balotelli's kick out as the worst ever is ridiculous. There has been a collective of horrid challenges that have been overlooked all season. Albeit the majority of them would be English players. Lampard, Rooney, Barry, etc.

Also, in the same vein, anyone believing Young was fouled needs to kop themselves on. I presume these are the same people branding Suarez. Big teams attract more attention. Pennant was worse this weekend where Villa were robbed of a point because of a ridiculous dive and fouling a defender from the resulting free kick for Huth to equalise.

citytillidie

The FA just make hypocrites of themselves for anything they uphold after going all guns blazing at UEFA to get Rooneys ban reduced for the Euros.

amacachi

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

The exact same can be said of Johnsons two footed lunge on Lescott that didn't even warrant a yellow card?

Picking Balotelli's kick out as the worst ever is ridiculous. There has been a collective of horrid challenges that have been overlooked all season. Albeit the majority of them would be English players. Lampard, Rooney, Barry, etc.

Also, in the same vein, anyone believing Young was fouled needs to kop themselves on. I presume these are the same people branding Suarez. Big teams attract more attention. Pennant was worse this weekend where Villa were robbed of a point because of a ridiculous dive and fouling a defender from the resulting free kick for Huth to equalise.

I didn't see the one you're talking about but Balotelli's is one that there can be no debate about. With the two-footed stuff there's some who say it's fine because they're "going for the ball" or whatever. With the Balotelli one it was ridiculously obvious even in the way he went into it. I'm not saying it was the worst tackle ever or anything, just the most obvious non-ball-playing one I've seen in ages.

ricero

the fa have really outdone themselves this season. from the poor handling of the racism scandals of suarez and terry and by sending lawyers over to uefa to get rooney of with his ban for england in the euros . there hypocrites of the highest order

DoctorGonzo08

ricero wrote: »

the fa have really outdone themselves this season. from the poor handling of the racism scandals of suarez and terry and by sending lawyers over to uefa to get rooney of with his ban for england in the euros . there hypocrites of the highest order

I think they handled the case with Suarez OK. Could have been better but I agree with the result. However, why is Terry allowed to play all season without recieving a ban for his case? It will more than likely be postponed until after the Euros as well. So will it then be forgotten and he recieving nothing? Again, not a great case for anyone believing English players don't recieve preferential treatment.

theoneeyedman

SantryRed wrote: »

keano_afc wrote: »

I think Young being involved might have swayed the decision. Had that been a dirty foreigner throwing himself to the ground, it might have been different.

What a load of sh1te.

It was foul by Derry at the end of the day. Young made the most of it. Who would blame him, I'm not a fan of this but for a foul to be a foul in football you need to go to ground.

The not being allowed revisit any incident that the referee sees is pure bull though. They won't do anything which sees them undermining the referee's position. Balotelli should be getting a three match ban for that tackle.

It wasn't a foul it was a touch ...young cheated by throwing himself to the ground . Contact is not a foul, ref was conned and everytime someone uses terms like making the most of it they are condoning the action .

thorbarry

28064212 wrote: »

Oh FFS. Song got a ban because the ref did not see it at the time

What does that have to do with anything? Regardless of whether the Ref seen it or not, you should be allowed to increase or decrease a ban after the match after reviewing video evidence. They do it in other countries.

28064212

thorbarry wrote: »

What does that have to do with anything? Regardless of whether the Ref seen it or not, you should be allowed to increase or decrease a ban after the match after reviewing video evidence. They do it in other countries.

I said the appeals process was a joke. The only thing I was addressing were the claims of favouritism towards English players. Balotelli didn't get a ban because the ref saw it. Song got a ban because the ref didn't see it. It's that simple

thorbarry

28064212 wrote: »

Balotelli didn't get a ban because the ref saw it. Song got a ban because the ref didn't see it. It's that simple

How is it that simple? So because the Ref saw it when it happened (and for some reason decided not to punish the player), he cant take action after the game. The ref made the wrong decision, he should be able to overturn that decision after the game.

28064212

thorbarry wrote: »

How is it that simple? So because the Ref saw it when it happened (and for some reason decided not to punish the player), he cant take action after the game. The ref made the wrong decision, he should be able to overturn that decision after the game.

How are you not getting this? The appeals process doesn't allow for Balotelli to be retrospectively punished, it did allow for Song to be punished. That is why Song was punished and Balotelli wasn't. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Song's tackle was on an English player

DoctorGonzo08

thorbarry wrote: »

How is it that simple? So because the Ref saw it when it happened (and for some reason decided not to punish the player), he cant take action after the game. The ref made the wrong decision, he should be able to overturn that decision after the game.

OK, so where do you draw the line?

Young takes a dive in the box whilst offside, QPR captain sent off and penalty awarded. Ref sees he made a mistake, how do you overturn the decision?

Chelsea beat Wigan thanks to two offside goals that the officials apologise for afterwards, how do you overturn the decision?

Pennant dive reults in free kick. Huth climbs on top of Collins and scores equiliser, how do you overturn the decision?

All are obvious mistakes once reviewed after the game.

Gringo180

Horrendous decision to let Ballotelli away with that tackle, if you did that to somebody in a nightclub you'd be done for GBH :rolleyes:

DoctorGonzo08

Gringo180 wrote: »

Horrendous decision to let Ballotelli away with that tackle, if you did that to somebody in a nightclub you'd be done for GBH :rolleyes:

Hahahahahaha. What nightclub do you go to? In what world would that be GBH? Is it a case where someone is running past you and you stamp on his leg?? What an absolutely ridiculous (and original) comment.

Guy:Incognito

keano_afc wrote: »

I think Young being involved might have swayed the decision. Had that been a dirty foreigner throwing himself to the ground, it might have been different.

The Song/Balotelli one is baffling really, and sets a dangerous precedent.

This come sup plenty on here.How can it be a case of "if it was a foreginer" for the first one, but the 2nd one was 2 foreginers and nothign was done?

Ever thought maybe they are just imcompetant all round instead of looking for some Xenophobic angle?

SantryRed wrote: »

It was foul by Derry at the end of the day. Young made the most of it. Who would blame him, I'm not a fan of this but for a foul to be a foul in football you need to go to ground..

It was in its arse a foul. He brushed his side with his hand. If thats a foul then every bit of contact is a foul. There would literally be a penalty every single time a player gets touched in any way in the box.

Will I Amnt

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

OK, so where do you draw the line?

Young takes a dive in the box whilst offside, QPR captain sent off and penalty awarded. Ref sees he made a mistake, how do you overturn the decision?

Chelsea beat Wigan thanks to two offside goals that the officials apologise for afterwards, how do you overturn the decision?

Pennant dive reults in free kick. Huth climbs on top of Collins and scores equiliser, how do you overturn the decision?

All are obvious mistakes once reviewed after the game.

You obviously can't reverse the effect of a red card or cancel a penalty decision after a game but you can change the punishment if it's deemed a mistake.

Gringo180

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Hahahahahaha. What nightclub do you go to? In what world would that be GBH? Is it a case where someone is running past you and you samp on his leg?? What an absolutely ridiculous (and original) comment.

You should get that fixed

DoctorGonzo08

cambo2008 wrote: »

You obviously can't reverse the effect of a red card or cancel a penalty decision after a game but you can change the punishment if it's deemed a mistake.

So do you give a suspension to Young, Pennant and Huth for their behaviour?

DoctorGonzo08

Gringo180 wrote: »

You should get that fixed

Are you referring to my mis-spelling of stamp as 'samp'?

tayto lover

The standard of the officials currently in the Premier League is a joke.
Wigan were cheated by the officials only last week. Then the referee in the Man Utd game couldn't get his red card out fast enough for a nothing foul which followed an obvious offside. If that foul was in the other box he wouldn't have blown at all.
There's a Specsavers Advert there somewhere starring Premier League officials.

Gringo180

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Are you referring to my mis-spelling of stamp as 'samp'?

No your sarcasm detector.

Will I Amnt

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

cambo2008 wrote: »

You obviously can't reverse the effect of a red card or cancel a penalty decision after a game but you can change the punishment if it's deemed a mistake.

So do you give a suspension to Young, Pennant and Huth for their behaviour?

They would all have gone down as seen by an official and got wrong and therefore couldn't really be challenged.

It would take a complete(and much needed) overhaul of the reviewing process to punish incidents like that.

Edit:Not very much you could do in Huths case anyway.

DoctorGonzo08

tayto lover wrote: »

The standard of the officials currently in the Premier League is a joke.
Wigan were cheated by the officials only last week. Then the referee in the Man Utd game couldn't get his red card out fast enough for a nothing foul which followed an obvious offside. If that foul was in the other box he wouldn't have blown at all.
There's a Specsavers Advert there somewhere starring Premier League officials.

While I don't completely disagree with you, I think there has to be some defence for officials. There are alot more cameras, and plenty more instant replays for us to see whats happened. How many of this incidents would you see at the game? I was at the City game at the weekend and I couldn't make out if there was anything in it. Or the tackle on Yaya either. To be honest, Mario's last tackle, for which he got sent off for looked very dangerous to me there. But when I watched MOTD afterwards I saw what happened. (I know this doesn't help the argument of the poor video ref).

In the case of Derry's sending off, he was the last man and if the ref thought it was a foul on a goalscoring oppurtuniy it was a red card. If it happened in the other box there is no garuntee he wouldn't do the same.

DoctorGonzo08

cambo2008 wrote: »

They would all have gone down as seen by an official and got wrong and therefore couldn't really be challenged.

It would take a complete(and much needed) overhaul of the reviewing process to punish incidents like that.

Edit:Not very much you could do in Huths case anyway.

SOz, didn't check who I was replying to. I agree with you. I was just putting the case to torberry who is saying all decisions should be challenged.

DoctorGonzo08

Gringo180 wrote: »

No your sarcasm detector.

Reacted too quickly. Sorry.

Gringo180

DoctorGonzo08 wrote: »

Reacted too quickly. Sorry.

Haaa no worries

Adolf Hipster

Ben thatcher was booked when he tackled mendes but had received a ban then afterward.

citytillidie

Adolf Hipster wrote: »

Ben thatcher was booked when he tackled mendes but had received a ban then afterward.

But that is simalar you what you hear the United fans go on about Cantonta the club banned him 1st before the FA did.

It also followed complaints to the Police who were going to investigate it

And a statement on City's website said: "Ben Thatcher has been suspended from first-team action.

This is pending the results of the club's internal investigation into the incident involving Pedro Mendes during the game with Portsmouth on Wednesday

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/5281686.stm

Adolf Hipster

citytillidie wrote: »

Adolf Hipster wrote: »

Ben thatcher was booked when he tackled mendes but had received a ban then afterward.

But that is simalar you what you hear the United fans go on about Cantonta the club banned him 1st before the FA did.

It also followed complaints to the Police who were going to investigate it

And a statement on City's website said: "Ben Thatcher has been suspended from first-team action.

This is pending the results of the club's internal investigation into the incident involving Pedro Mendes during the game with Portsmouth on Wednesday

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/5281686.stm

My point was that action was taken by the ref and then further action was taken bu the fa afterwards, they can break their own rules if they want to.

dunno what united or cantona has to do with it.

citytillidie

Adolf Hipster wrote: »

My point was that action was taken by the ref and then further action was taken bu the fa afterwards, they can break their own rules if they want to.

dunno what united or cantona has to do with it.

Yea only reason the FA took action is because of complaints to the police and after the club took their own action.

Brought in the other part because during that storm in Oct/Feb the Man utd fans were using that as an example on how Liverpool should have punished Suarez and try to defend the FA actions

Adolf Hipster

citytillidie wrote: »

Adolf Hipster wrote: »

My point was that action was taken by the ref and then further action was taken bu the fa afterwards, they can break their own rules if they want to.

dunno what united or cantona has to do with it.

Brought in the other part because during that storm in Oct/Feb the Man utd fans were using that as an example on how Liverpool should have punished Suarez and try to defend the FA actions

That's the kind of stuff that drags debate down.

thorbarry

28064212 wrote: »

How are you not getting this? The appeals process doesn't allow for Balotelli to be retrospectively punished, it did allow for Song to be punished. That is why Song was punished and Balotelli wasn't. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that Song's tackle was on an English player

Thats what I am giving out about. Why cant they be retrospectively punished?

Hamburger SV v Stuttgart 03/03/2012 – Striker Paolo Guerrero is sent off for this nasty challenge. The automatic three match ban becomes an 8 game ban after the video is reviewed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27DBI_re_r8&feature=player_embedded