The Rational RefPandora's Box to remain ajar without consistency
Recent ruling by FA's regulatory committee to overturn red card decision creates doubt and confusion both on and off the field
Unforeseen troubles for referees lie ahead because of the FA's decision to rescind Manchester City captain Vincent Kompany's red card for what match referee Mike Dean deemed to be serious foul play. In undermining his interpretation, the FA has opened Pandora's Box.
The laws of the game demand three key traits in their interpretation: consistency, consistency and consistency. The present regulatory system does not embrace this. It is hardly surprising that an independent FA regulatory commission - especially one comprising a three-person panel selected and chopped and changed from a pool of FA councillors, former players and the Professional Footballers' Association - may differ from referees in its analysis of serious foul play.
Match officials know the importance of consistency because it gives credibility and confidence to its practitioners. Referees strive for consistency knowing they are under huge stress, pressure from time limits in games and intense public scrutiny. Realistically, they acknowledge that errors of judgment sometimes occur and to offset this officials practice, prepare and then perform to the best of their abilities. Referees do not have the same luxury afforded to three-person panels that sit in comfort, take time to deliberate and reconsider and then make decisions behind closed doors.
These appeals panels comprise individuals who have little or no refereeing knowledge, which inherently lends itself to differences of opinion.
This is the real reason why there is potential for inconsistency in interpretation and why the whole regulatory appeals process needs to be revised. At the very least, because these panels review the laws as interpreted by referees, members should be made to complete an accredited referees' course and perhaps experience what it is like to officiate games. They need to seriously consider the referees' perspective when making their judgments.
The laws have a caveat that states: "The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play … are final."
This means that the interpretations of the laws by players, coaches, pundits or supporters are inferior compared with the interpretations made by match officials. This is in no way a slight on other stakeholders' passion and love for the game, but a referee's interpretation is what's relevant here.