Wednesday, August 02, 2006

UEFA's new regulations

In light of new regulations to tackle racism and diving, Daryl at the World Cup blog wonders what other regulations could be introduced to ensure football cleans up its act. It's an interesting question, and most certainly worth looking into.

First of all, I fully support these new regulations. Any attempt made by the game's governing bodies to eliminate racism is welcome. What is even more heartening is that none of these new regulations actually affect the way referees manage a game. All of them are post-match regulations, allowing the game's regulators the benefit of multiple replays in order to determine whether a player dived, or a yellow card was unjust, and so on.

On the subject of new rules (and I assume the author means rules that determine how referees run a game), I would rather get rid of some existing rules - more precisely, FIFA's 'recommendations' to referees - than include new ones. Referees are constrained enough as it is. They are denied technological backup to aid their decision-making, and must therefore make split-second decisions that they might be crucified for later (see Urs Meier in 2004, and Graham Poll in Germany). It is hardly the easiest of jobs, and has only been made worse by FIFA's almost schizophrenic rulings. Consider this - diving, or 'simulation' as FIFA now calls it - is expected to result in an automatic yellow card and a fine for the player involved (the footballing equivalent of being grounded for ten minutes by your over-indulgent parents...but no loud music). Fair enough, no one likes cheats, and diving is cheating. It's not so clear-cut when you also consider that a referee is expected to book players for 'lunges', tackles from behind, and practically any contact that was not made with the ball. Now, in a perfect world, these rules would be...perfect. There would be no more diving, and all tackles would be clean. Unfortunately, referees are more confused than ever about what constitutes a dive. What could be a dive to one referee could also be a late tackle (albeit with minimal contact) to another. Players continue to go down at the slightest of touches, in greater numbers than before if you believe the reports. Clearly the rules are not working, and it is immediately apparent why. As the tolerance level for tackling has been driven lower by the authorities, the line between a foul and a dive has blurred. If you have a higher tolerance for...ahem...spirited tackling, not only will it be relatively easier to figure out who the divers are, but those that do dive and get away with it will now be going down under far more substantial contact. Granted, some shocking decisions will be made - referees are only human - but on the whole, by relaxing the rules on tackling and allowing referees the freedom to run matches as they see fit, we might end up seeing the sort of football that we all crave, minus the divers. This does not mean that I want the game to return to the bad old days of studs smashing into ribs and so on, but such a scenario is never likely to happen if referees are just allowed to call the game as they see it. Micro-managing the game is the worst thing the administrators could possibly do, and unfortunately they did it right before the World Cup.

In short, any new regulations regarding analysis of past matches are welcome. It ensures justice in the long run for all teams, even though in the short term, individual sides may feel hard done by some refereeing decisions. Any attempt to increase the referee's workload during a match would be disastrous, unless FIFA agrees to use video or microchip technologies to aid the officials.

No comments: