Ref's decision is final my arse!

Xterminator

I am talking about the decision to punish Jamie Rednapp further than the referee deemed nessacary on match day, and worried about the precedent. Please dont discuss the tackle itself, as thats not what this thread is about.

I think its a very bad and dangerous precedent to make. The principle that if a ref sees an incident, and deals with it, (even by taking no action, or just having a few words etc.) that the FA can then say "Hang on a minute, we think this punishment is more appropiate."

I am worried that if a ref pulls a player up about a bad tackle or handbags at 10 paces etc,, and uses his judgement to just allow the player off with a warning, or just yellow card him, the next day some suit can (or the next week, month ?) reverse that decision. After all everyone is always saying refs should use their common sense, like when player get sent off for celebrating a goal for instance!

There is always controversy over whether the defender is the last man, or if goalies should be sent off, if they take down a player, or handle outside the box etc. Does this mean we will have a table of players who are going to be red carded after a vidoe commitie each week?

Even David Moyes, (Cahills manager) said there was no sense in giving Carragher a ban, because as Everton didnt gain the advantage of haviig an extra man during the match, and probably going on to win that match. Hence banning him after the event will have no benifit to Everton. It may actually hinder them, because if Spurs play Everton's rivals with a weakened team, arguably Everton wer punished too!!!

Surely the next step could be to say, hang on, that goal should have been allowed, we are awarding that match to X team, or there must be a replay etc? Thats a mad situation.

Surely we have to go back to saying, the refs decision is final!

X

KdjaCL

No totally disagree there , if a player escapes punishment during a match he deserves it after the match.
Will stop him doing it again , if a player is booked and video evidence deems it a red he should get the red.


kdjac

leeroybrown

I don't agree that the ref's decision should be made final again.

A referee is only one person (albeit with assistants) and is in a position where (s)he can easily make an error with individual decisions. Quite often a referee will have an obstructed view, will be too far away or (as in Rednapp's case) too close to clearly see the incident. There are also cases where referees just make the wrong decision.

While I don't think that having a panel of 'suits' performing retrospective decisions is perfect, if used correctly with suitable discression to the referees decision it's an improvement. Right now there are a specific, defined set of examples where the panel can review and change a punishment and the decisions always come under close public scrutiny.

Also, it I remember correctly, this panel is still the method by which referees can change their own decisions after a game if they need to.

Imposter

There's a lot of things to take into account here.
The ref is not always right. That's a given. If the referee has stated he has seen the incident and came to his decision then I don't think a player should get a harsher/more lenient punishment. Punish the ref by demoting him. If there is no mention of it in the ref's report then fair enough, go to video evidence.

Then you have things which don't exist at the moment which could be really good. Would giving out yellow cards after a match for diving based on video evidence be a good thing? I think it would.

Then the argument swings around to why not just have a video ref and do away with all the extra punishments by the FA (Then what if anything would have happened with Keane and his book).

Imo a complete review needs to be done and rules and procedures need to be put in place that alow everyone (FA, UEFA etc) all deal with things in a similar and consistant manner. It needs to define the powers the governing body has when it comes to suspending people, it needs to define what technologies are ok to be used and in what circumstances.

Boro

I think what Xterminator was saying though is "where does it stop?"

If an incident is missed by a referee, then it is only right and proper for the FA to step in. It sends the message that fouling or other dirty play, even behind the ref's back will not be tolerated. However, the fact of the matter is that the referee saw the event in question and reacted to it. He obviously believed it was only a yellow card offense. This decision should stand. Banning the player now sends out a contradictory message; ie, while it is bad to foul it also means that the referee's decision is not final any more.

When a player gets two yellow cards, he is not allowed to appeal because the referees decision is final in that matter. If a ball crosses the line and a goal isnt given, the referees decision is final. If a player handballs in the lead up to a goal, the referees decision is final. It used to be the case, that if a referee saw something and booked a player, or even just made note of it in his match report, the referees decision was final.

Change one and you risk leaving everything open to question.

beer enigma

Yeah, Xterminator's point is not so much for incidents that the ref doesn't see, but more on those that he DOES see & deems to take the appropriate action.

I disagree totally with the bigwigs coming along & changing the punishment after the ref has dealt with an issue. Is there room for common sense here - ie..

a) if the ref sees it and deals with it as he sees appropriate, then the punishment stands.

b) if there's clearly an incident that no official has seen, but is picked up in a video, then the FA can take action.

&

c) if a ref sees an incident, but is unsure that he's caught the whole thing, then he takes whatever punishment he deems to be correct, but annotates his notes to ask the FA to look into it.

By giving the third option, it would make it a much fairer system. By the FA talking further action after the refs report, it completely undermines the ref & smacks of a big brother approach

Xterminator

Exactly my point Boro.

Also, If a ref makes poor decisions regularly, he is demoted to a lower league.

But who judges the judges? Where is the transparancy?
Whats if in the run up to a cup final a couple of key players are retrospectivly banned, from one side?

Also, the high frequency of 'controversial' decisions. Will there be a table of reversed decisions, causing bans to be given on the first tuesday of every month?

Where will it all stop? I am not opposed to video evidence, but i think perhaps the ref should be able to stop a match, and review an incident, like a foul, possible dive, did the ball cross the line etc, and then decide. But i am opposed to the after the event.

X

Xcom2

How many times have you seen the ball cross or not cross the line and a goal is or is not given?

The ref has the final say on which team get's the point's in a game so why should his decision on a yellow/red card be questioned unless he admits he made a mistake!

If the FA want to look at tackle's like this then they should also start looking at everything else equally. Say a player takes a blatant dive and get's a free kick,his team score's from the free kick.What happen's at the moment?,Nothing!
Should the player be given a booking for diving? Should the team have the goal wiped out?

The ref's decision should be final!

g