“Le Replay” – An Examination of Potential Ramifications of a Dangerous Precedent

Helix

I don't normally do this, but I couldn't really get across what I wanted to say about this whole replay thing in the replay thread. Instead I've decided to start a new thread based purely on the ramifications of any replay being greenlighted. I'd like to point out to mods who might feel the need to merge it, that it's actually about the greater implications of the whole thing, not just the simple "Should we get a replay coz Henry cheated" spin in the other thread.

So I've written this short piece below, which I think outlines as well as I can, my fears about retrospective forcing of replays based on human error among referees. I think a discussion about it might be fruitful, if we can keep it away from the route of the Ireland v France thing...

Art. 12.4 (b) and 14.1 of the Regulations for the 2006 FIFA World Cup, all protests, including those against technical errors committed by referees, are to be decided by the Organising Committee for the 2006 FIFA World Cup Germany. A bureau of the Organising Committee may pass a decision in lieu of the plenary committee in urgent matters.

This is the rule enforced in the September 3rd 2005 game between Uzbekistan and Bahrain in a qualifier for the World Cup 2006. The incident in question came about when, upon encroachment by an Uzbek player into the penalty area while his side were taking a penalty, the referee wrongly gave an indirect free out for the offence.

Uzbekistan appealed after the game and FIFA found the grounds of the appeal to be sound. The referee had committed a technical error, and had wrongly enforced the clear rules of the game.

This is not under any circumstances a precedent for a replay in the France v Ireland game from the 18th of September 2009 in the World Cup 2010 Qualification Play-Off, for the simple reason that in this game, the referee and his assistants simply did not see the offence from French striker Thierry Henry. Yes he cheated. Yes he handled the ball. Yes he broke the rules. But the key difference between this and the Uzbek decision was that none of the officials saw the offence, therefore they did not make the wrong call or enforce the rules in an incorrect manner. This means that Art. 12.4 (b) and 14.1 of the Regulations for the 2006 FIFA World Cup have not been broken.

This is plain to see for all who care to look at the case objectively.

However there is still a growing push for a replay based on the fact that Henry, put plain and simply, cheated the Irish. This campaign raises more important fears for the future of the game than just the lack of sportsmanship in modern football. The crux of the matter revolves around a simple question: “If we replay this game, where do we draw the line?”

While it may seem like all too obvious a question, many fail to see the can of worms that such a ruling would open. To give a simple example of the cascading effect this could have on the game, we will focus on a single incident in Istanbul on the 25th of May 2005...

Widely regarded as one of the greatest showpiece finals of all time, Liverpool FC came back from a 3-0 half time deficit to force extra time, and ultimately defeat AC Milan on penalties. However, should “Le Replay” come about, wouldn’t the Italians be within their rights to claim that Steven Gerrard’s blatant dive in the second half to earn the Merseysiders a penalty changed the overall complexion of the match, and ultimately lead to Liverpool emerging as Champions League Winners in 2005?

If that were to happen, Liverpool wouldn’t have taken part in the 2006 competition, as Everton had beaten them to fourth place in the Premier League. The prize money earned by Liverpool in winning the 2005 competition, and from their run in the 2006 competition surely gave them an unfairly earned advantage over their city rivals in following seasons, so wouldn’t Everton have a right to claim they had been cheated too?

Wouldn’t Tottenham Hotspur who missed out on fourth place in the 2005/06 season also have reason to complain about the financial windfall bestowed upon Liverpool for their ill gotten winners’ medals? Wouldn’t Martin Jol, then Tottenham manager, have reason to complain about his ultimate dismissal from the job? For if Liverpool hadn’t earned all that money from the Champions League, there may have been a good chance that the Londoners would have usurped them in the top four?

Wouldn’t Portsmouth have reason to complain about the eventual appointment of Harry Redknapp, the man who had guided them to a 2008 FA Cup win, as role of Tottenham manager last season – and their current financial difficulties which no doubt weren’t helped by the club’s failings on the pitch?

And we haven’t even started into the effect that one incident had on AC Milan...

The fact of the matter is that you simply cannot retrospectively force a replay based on a referee missing, or being conned by, unsportsmanlike conduct. The Uzbekistan v Bahrain game cannot be used as a precedent in this matter, because it cites a clear FIFA regulation regarding technical error. What happened at Stade de France on Wednesday night was not a technical error, it was a human error – and the bottom line is that if we start replaying games because of human error on the part of the officials, we would be lucky to make it passed the first round of games in any competition around the world.

This isn’t to say that FIFA should not use Wednesday’s events as a catalyst to kick-start some serious research into the implementation of video refereeing. For the sake of the future of the game, it’s undoubtedly something that needs to be looked at very closely, but the demands of the Irish fans are simply unreasonable. You cannot alter the fabric of the game to the point of tearing because a nation is upset about something which happens week in week out in football pitches around the world.
Changes must be gradual and lessons must be learnt, but all a knee-jerk reaction to Henry’s handball could possibly do is destroy the very game everyone wants to protect. Passion is all well and good, but when it gets in the way of logic, then it must be disregarded as the meaningless hyperbole that it is.

Mikeyt086

Shouldnt it be "Le Replay".

"Ze" is how the Germans pronounce "The". "Le" is French.

Helix

ahaha youre right it should

all them lovely big words and i mess up the smallest one

Mikeyt086

Helix wrote: »

ahaha youre right it should

all them lovely big words and i mess up the smallest one

lol yeah sorry for pointing it out, looks like you put the effort in.

flahavaj

Fantastic write-up Helix. I wouldn't have agreed with your point before i read this but now I do, which is the best possible compliment that can be paid.

Helix

flahavaj wrote: »

Fantastic write-up Helix. I wouldn't have agreed with your point before i read this but now I do, which is the best possible compliment that can be paid.

cheers, i was struggling to get it across in post by post basis in the other thread. tbh i think a replay would be an absolute disaster for football

retrospective law changes never do anyone any good. find if its decided that in future its a replay of the game, but you simply cant make a rule today and apply it to yesterday without serious fallout

CCCP^

Stop killing my hopeless stubborn dreams with your logic and sense.

super_furry

You know the funniest thing? We'd get bloody hammered in a replay. An angry and motivated French team with the world on their back would destroy us.

SlickRic

super_furry wrote: »

You know the funniest thing? We'd get bloody hammered in a replay. An angry and motivated French team with the world on their back would destroy us.

tbf, everyone said a French team in Paris would hammer us the first time.

good write-up Helix.

jebusmusic

How about this;

In the Uzbekistan match, an infringement took place, the referee awarded a free kick instead of re-taking the penalty. The wrong decision, according to the rules of football.

In the Ireland game, an infringement took place, the referee awarded an attacking goal instead of a free kick to the defending team. The wrong decision according to the rules of football. Seem pretty similiar to me.

Uzbekistan was reversed, surely the same could apply to the Ireland game?

If this was a league game etc, where the outcome was not so immediate and devastating to the wronged team then it would be more acceptable.

I think the FAI should contact the FA of every country taking part in the World Cup qualifiers and lobby for them to make a formal complaint to FIFA, in support if the FAI. If this had happened to any other country, such as England, Germany etc, they would be doing exactly the same as us. They should all stand together on it.

Then see how the French FA react. If they are happy and willing to allow their team to qualify for and take part in the World Cup in such an injust manner, and with such a cloud hanging over them, then they will have to live with their guilty conscience, and with the repercussions it will have on their team and fans, both in South Africa, and in the future.

A replay of the game, in paris, with France holding their 1-0 lead, would settle the issue fairly and with honour. The french should be ashamed to accept this blatant cheating, it is not in the spirit of how sports should be played.

Helix

jebusmusic wrote: »

In the Ireland game, an infringement took place, the referee awarded an attacking goal instead of a free kick to the defending team. The wrong decision according to the rules of football. Seem pretty similiar to me.

only applicable if the ref saw the handball and decided it was within the rules of play

he didnt

Mikeyt086

super_furry wrote: »

You know the funniest thing? We'd get bloody hammered in a replay. An angry and motivated French team with the world on their back would destroy us.

A Frech team that know they couldnt beat us without cheating.

And Irish team that KNOW they are the better team.

We would win. FIFA know it.

Agricola

It would probably be a very different game. The French would surely give us a much sterner test if we were to get a replay. But the point is we'd have another chance to get to the finals, which is the least we deserve.

Stercus Accidit

This "where would it end" argument doesn't hold water with me.

We are in a situation where the french have not continued on to play any of the upcoming world cup matches this win qualified them for, so multiple matches do not require a replay.

A replay combined with an introduction of video refereeing would be the "end" to the where would it end argument, anyone who wants to see a fair game would agree that this needs to be introduced.

Video replays are accurate and instant, there is no excuse to not use them, as is precedented in many sports.

Soccer seems to be the backward sport that is slowest to change, obsessed with rules implemented before we could actually know for sure if foul play had occurred.

Helix

Agricola wrote: »

It would probably be a very different game. The French would surely give us a much sterner test if we were to get a replay. But the point is we'd have another chance to get to the finals, which is the least we deserve.

so youd gladly run the risk of destroying the game with one quick retrospective ruling, as opposed to wanting to make sure it never happens again?

Helix

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

A replay combined with an introduction of video refereeing would be the "end" to the where would it end argument, anyone who wants to see a fair game would agree that this needs to be introduced.

Video replays are accurate and instant, there is no excuse to not use them, as is precedented in many sports.

nobody is argueing that though

the arguement is that if you create a law today and apply it to yesterday than things fall apart

Racing Flat

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

A Frech team that know they couldnt beat us without cheating.

And Irish team that KNOW they are the better team.

We would win. FIFA know it.

Did they cheat on Saturday to beat us?

Morzadec

Mikeyt086 wrote: »

Shouldnt it be "Le Replay".

"Ze" is how the Germans pronounce "The". "Le" is French.

I think 'ze' is correct. That's how French people pronounce 'the', they struggle with the 'th' sound, it dosn't exist in French.

I agree with your point Helix. Objectively-speaking a replay is just not feasible. But I would also say that Gerrard's 'dive' in Istanbul is a lot more contentious and debatable than Thierry's handball last night, so not sure if it's the best example.

Really the main talking point from last night should be the absence of goal-line technology. It is just ridiculous at this stage we're in the 21st Century, how have they not implemented it? How can mistakes like last night still be allowed to happen? It's making a farce of the game to be honest.

GLaDOS

Agree with everything you say really, I'd love another chance but not to the detriment of the game.


Well written piece.

noodler

Pointless topic for me because it is blatantly obvious why we will not get a replay.

The FAI demnding a replay has nothing to do with any real attention of getting one, it is simply a moral plea that will place us on the moral highground.

If the FAI were doing nothing about this then I would be furious. If France (Henry) had gotten away with it without maximum media exposure then I would be furious.

I want a replay but know why I can't get one. However we also (I hope) don't want ceating to be associated with winning.

I can't see any middle ground, either theres a replay and soccer implodes or France and Henry go to the world cup after cheating without any punishment.

Racing Flat

noodler wrote: »

The FAI demnding a replay has nothing to do with any real attention of getting one, it is simply a moral plea that will place us on the moral highground.

I think it does the exact opposite of this tbh. We are 'stooping to thier level' almost. Saying nothing, letting the neutral observers decide would place us on the moral highground. This way we'll just be seen as moaners who can't let it go, like England were in 86.

noodler

Racing Flat wrote: »

I think it does the exact opposite of this tbh. We are 'stooping to thier level' almost. Saying nothing, letting the neutral observers decide would place us on the moral highground. This way we'll just be seen as moaners who can't let it go, like England were in 86.

Bull. Nothing happens if you don't. The seeding of the play-offs is/was wrong irregardless of whether or not we were invloved or if it was done for the last world cup. Fcuk all fuss was mde about it because only 4 smaller footballing nations were disenfranchised by it.

We are doing the right thing by kicking up a fuss, worst thing would be to let it blow over for me. Still looking forward to what Blatter and Platini have to say.

Football is starting to rot for me after the Eduardo, N'Gog and Henry incidents.

Agricola

Helix wrote: »

so youd gladly run the risk of destroying the game with one quick retrospective ruling, as opposed to wanting to make sure it never happens again?

Im not a FIFA administrator. Im a longtime Irish football fan. Tbh, I couldnt give a rats ass about the implications, real or imagined, of a replay between France and Ireland. Ireland were cheated out of, at the very least, a chance at a penalty shootout to decide if they went to the world cup.

Nothing will change unless the FAI kick up this fuss now, and I believe if anything good comes of this, it will be the replay. This will then force FIFA into thinking about the implications your writing about. But I think its clear from the statements theyve made today that their quite happy to sweep this under the carpet and move on. Which means the whole charade keeps on rolling.

If this all blows over, absolutely nothing will change. If, somehow, another game was sanctioned, then serious and real change would begin to happen. Sometimes it takes a major jolt like this to kickstart that change.

spiderdan

Fair play (no pun intended) for going to the effort to illustrate your point, while I'm in agreement with the majority of what you are talking about, the Uzbekistan inncident isn't the only time a match has been replayed- what about when Arsene Wenger agreed to replay a match due to the unsporting behaviour of one of his players? There weren't any ramifications after that.

~Rebel~

Helix wrote: »

nobody is argueing that though

the arguement is that if you create a law today and apply it to yesterday than things fall apart

Not to mention that if a replay were granted, every single game where the referee or linesman makes a mistake, a solid precedent would be there for the affected team to get a replay. Every missed handball, every time an offside goal is given, every dive in the box for a winning penalty. they could all appeal and they would all have to be granted a rematch because the governing body cannot grant it to one team and not another when the circumstances are the same, just because one match was more important then the other.

Nope, it just cant happen, Its not possible.

I believe the Arsenal match is not really a valid comparison either, as in this case Arsenal themselves took matters out of the governing bodies hands by offering a replay. Similar to how the Spanish FA put forward the CL winning, but low league position finishing Real Madrid as one of their Champions league entrants at the expense of another team years ago. They took the decision away from Uefa stopping them from having to make a precedent of "holder is auto qualified". This precedent was later made with Liverpool, but not before then.

If the French volunteered a replay, then it could possibly be done without Fifa having to set a precedent. But that's just not going to happen.

kida

Well written, another incident I quote often is Paul Scholes wrongly disallowed goal in the CL vs Porto. Had this been given Porto would be out, would Mourinho have gotten the Chelsea job and we all know what followed that?

Fr Tod Umptious

Racing Flat wrote: »

I think it does the exact opposite of this tbh. We are 'stooping to thier level' almost. Saying nothing, letting the neutral observers decide would place us on the moral highground. This way we'll just be seen as moaners who can't let it go, like England were in 86.

I think the FAI were right to kick up a stink about this if only to say 'Look FIFA, you talk about fair play but your on field officiating of the game is flawed, do something about it'

If this incident kick starts the introduction of enhanced officiating that will reduce the number of incorrect decision made in a game then the FAI can be proud of themselves for not letting the incident be brushed under the carpet.

When they write the history of football John Delaney will get a staring role.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.