In the last week, the games between Milan/Celtic, 'Boro/Man Utd and Chelsea/Spurs enjoyed a shared common thread apart from the entertainment. Three penalty decisions were made by the officials which altered the outcomes of each match - all three decisions were handballs which makes comparison easier.
The shortest ball-to-hand distance resulted in Boateng being penalised by Styles and United grabbed a replay from the penalty spot. Maldini's and Carvalho's handballs were at significantly greater ball-to-hand distance and yet neither were given as penalties. The power teams in each of these games got the benefit of any doubt and such benefits were absolute in that the level of validity for the decisions was irrelevant. Instead of 'Boro and Spurs being in the FA Cup Semi Finals, the agenda remains for a Chelsea versus Man Utd spectacular first final at the new Wembley. Do you really believe that the powers-that-be would prefer Middlesbrough against Blackburn for such a globally marketable event?
Additionally, Celtic have been denied significant income from a Champions League Quarter Final place due to the machinations of Galliani and the Milanese manipulators. They join a long long list who have reasons to diss Berlusconi...
Three tense and exciting games; three penalty decisions; three false results. Until football addresses the issue of omnipotent referee control, the most that the game can achieve is spectacular entertainment but not a competitive meritocratic sport.
Before anyone claims that the excitement and tension outweighs the justice of a fair outcome, check out a couple of other games this weekend. Barcelona and Real Madrid played out a thrilling and honest 3-3 draw with great goals and, moreover, great natural improvised spontaneous entertainment. Remove the word "great" and the same definition applies to AO Kerkyra's 4-3 victory in Kriti that massively improves the Corfiot's chances of staying in the Hellenic Super League. Each were meritocratic matches where the influence of betting patterns and/or hierarchical power concerns were conspicuous by their absence. Spain and non-Athenian Greece has not yet gone down the route that leads to pre-match team talks including issues about winning the game but being level at half time etc etc.
As a comparison with a different sport, look at the conclusion of the Italy versus Wales 6 Nations Rugby International. This was also mired in controversy as official Chris White provided erroneous information to the Wales team which directly resulted in their 23-20 loss. The reaction has been swift. Because the referee was on open mike, all the evidence is available. The referee has accepted his error and even released a press release apologising to the Welsh team. The only aspect that remains disturbingly unaffected is the impact on the betting markets. White's action prevented Wales drawing or even potentially winning the game. There was no redress for punters.
The best structure to cover all angles remains as follows (as outlined in earlier posts):
a) Two referees for all events.
b) A large pool of available officials for competitions.
c) Prevention of referees working with the same officials repeatedly.
d) Referees to officiate each team no more than once per season.
e) Open mike access to referees conversations on the pitch and to any fourth/fifth official on the sidelines.
f) Video evidence for all borderline key decisions (penalties, offsides, sendings off, ball crossing the line etc).
g) Making it illegal for football insiders to bet on the outcomes of games.
h) Referees having to publicly explain their errors.
i) Punishment and demotion for substandard officials.
j) No links between sports teams and bookmakers.
