1- On the 15th of August Crystal Palace scored a goal against Bristol City, it went in, bounced back OFF THE BACK OF THE NET and was disallowed because none of the officials thought it had gone in.
2- On the 26th of August the BBC reported that Gary Roberts of Huddersfield Town had been given a retrospective red card for his part in a scuffle in the match at Bristol Rovers on the 22nd, "The 25-year-old will now face a three-match ban after the referee viewed footage of the incident after the game."
3- On the 28th of August Eduardo of Arsenal recieved a two match Champions League ban after UEFA reviewed footage of an incident in which he dived to successfully earn a penalty against Celtic on the 26th.
It would seem that video technology is finding its way into the game only when it suits Messers Platini and Watmore. If video technology can be used to hand a player a red card after the game, why can't it be used to award a goal that would have earned Crystal Palace a point? Because Bristol would have then moaned about the inconsitency in the use of video technology, that's why. And who is the judge of whether an offence during a match warrants a card? And what colour that card is? The referee, and to quote from Laws of the Game for the 2009/2010 season, Law 5 - The Referee, page 22:
"The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or, at his discretion, on the advice of an assisstant referee or the fourth official, provided that he has not restarted play or terminated the match."
The incident either wasn't seen by any officials or was deemed there and then by the referee to not warrant a red card, the match was then subsequently terminated. That should be it. But who should come along other than our little friend video technology, now it is stated that this little fellow can only be used when appealing against red cards. This now leads me onto point 3, don't get me wrong on this, I am firmly against players diving, but basically the same thing has happened here, except this time it was UEFA reviewing the situation and not the referee in question. However, they have basically handed down a two match ban for, to use the technical term, simulation, which comes under unsporting behaviour.
Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct, page 34:
"A player is cautioned and shown the yellow card if he commits any of the following seven offences:
- unsporting behaviour [number one, would you look at that!]
- dissent by word or action
- persistent infringment of the Laws of the Game
- delaying the restart of play
- failure to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a corner kick, free kick or throw-in
- entering or re-entering the field of play without the referee's permission
- deliberately leaving the field of play without the referee's permission"
Therefore the worst Eduardo should have recieved is a retrospective yellow card, which, in the Champions League, does NOT carry a two match ban. (Okay, here, I AM ignoring the point raised earlier about the referee's decision being final)
The sooner someone comes in and actually defines when video technology should and shouldn't be used, and someone upstairs at UEFA actually learns the Laws of the Game, the better, because until then our good friends Michel Platini and Ian Watmore are doomed to endure the farce that is the current system.
No comments:
Post a Comment