Inconsistency is a word we are all too acquainted with in the world of football, especially when it comes to the men officiating the game. It is impossible nowadays to go a week without a referee’s ability to do his job scrutinised. But is it the referee’s fault or is this inconsistency due to vague and unclear laws regarding big decisions?
The decision that seems to be aggravating most these days is the sending off. The laws currently state that a red card can be issued if any of the following are conducted; serious foul play, violent conduct, spitting at an opponent or any other person, denying the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball, denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the players goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or penalty kick, using offensive, insulting or abusive language or gestures and receiving a second yellow card in the same game. [source: FIFA]
The thing that immediately springs to mind is the fact that there is nothing in the modern (2012/13) laws of football regarding ‘excessive force’. Is this a fantasy that has wormed it’s way into the referee’s mind?
There is also nothing to say that a player must be dismissed if he is showing his studs, comes in from the side or comes in over the ball.
Many argue that these ‘infringements’ fit into existing laws, but where? Not spitting, not handling the ball, ‘excessive force’ on the half way line does not qualify as denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity nor is offensive or insulting. This leaves serious foul play and violent conduct. There is often very little malice involved in these ‘over the ball’ challenges so it doesn’t fit in with violent conduct and a 50/50 tackle isn’t what I would deem to be serious foul play. And almost as soon as we began, our options have gone.
So we have established that in the majority of cases there is no law which instructs the referee to issue a red card, yet sending offs from 50/50 tackles on the halfway line are becoming more and more frequent. Two cases this season that immediately spring to mind are a) Jonjo Shelvey’s red card last weekend and b) Tom Huddlestone dismissal against Norwich. Let’s take Shelvey first, he was more likely to injure himself than an opponent and appears to maintain full control of his body. Is this serious foul play? I don’t think so, he led with two feet but just tackled with one and refrained from ‘scissoring’ Evans’ leg, and I definitely don’t believe that it was violent conduct. The second example of a red card for ‘excessive force’ is Tom Huddlestone, Huddlestone was issued a red card for what is believed to be ‘excessive force’. But when it was put in front of an FA panel the decision was rescinded, if this isn’t a phantom rule I don’t know what is?
Should the referee’s be blamed for this? In a way yes, after all they have failed to view the laws properly and have fallen into the trap of believing what pundits and managers are spreading, but mostly no. It is not Mark Halsey or any other referee’s fault that the laws of the game do not go into further detail towards the qualification for a red card. It should be recommended that a foul without denying a clear goalscoring opportunity, without endangering a fellow professional and without intent of harm is not a red card. This would set the record straight and would be a black and white reference for referees and go as far as eradicating most consistency when it comes to dishing out red.
Everything needs to be done to protect the players and protect the match. Too many matches are spoilt by players wrongly being sent off and to many arguments occur as a result of inconsistency. It’s time to put everyone right once and for all.
You can follow Joseph on Twitter here!
Be sure to join in the discussion below… Does the record need setting? Or Are the current laws and decisions made acceptable?