Articles

With Yet Another Rule Subject To “Refereeing Interpretation” Our Game Continues To Flirt With Disaster.

|
Image for With Yet Another Rule Subject To “Refereeing Interpretation” Our Game Continues To Flirt With Disaster.

Do you ever get déjà vu?

Maybe it’s just me, but even this early in the season, I’m genuinely concerned by the explanation we’ve been offered for why the penalty at Tynecastle wasn’t given at the weekend.

When they promised us transparency, accountability, and consistency in decision-making, we all presumed—or at least some of us did—that they were promising a tightening of the regulations, making them more definitive and less prone to individual interpretation.

Let me put it another way.

In cases of handball in the penalty area, referees should have a clear set of guidelines on what constitutes a penalty kick, reflecting what’s written in the rule book. The problem plaguing Scottish officiating for the last few years has been the ambiguity. Instead of sticking to the rule book, officials seem have more and more been calling things as they see fit. This causes problems, controversy, and negative perceptions about how our game is run.

We were told VAR would make things simpler and clearer. It hasn’t, because as with what happens on the field too much is left up to the way the guys behind the cameras view certain incidents through their own prejudices and biases.

If this weekend is any indication, we’re heading in the opposite direction from that which we were assured we’d be going in.

We’re going to end up with a situation just as bad, if not worse, than what we had in the last campaign, where most of the clubs would have binned VAR if they’d had a chance to.

Instead of tightening the definition of what constitutes a penalty, and thus giving us not only clarity but some kind of consistency across the boards, what we’re hearing is that officials have been instructed to take a more lenient view on handballs in the box.

But if you’ve watched Scottish football in recent years, you know that a lenient reading benefits some clubs but not others. We all know who those clubs are.

Under the current system, there’s too much individual interpretation. We’re going to see teams penalized for almost identical incidents all the way through this campaign, because some refs will opt for that “leniency” and others will not, depending on the circumstances.

What we need are clear-cut definitions not subject to referees’ individual biases.

And by “bias,” I don’t mean only favouritism towards certain teams but rather differing interpretations of the rules.

Some referees think every handball in the penalty area is a penalty, while others see it as just one of those things. This creates too much grey area.

I don’t think the explanation for the decision on Saturday will provide any comfort.

Had regulations been tightened so that any such contact would be punished – as per the rule book – it would have been better outcome and one that you could guarantee would have given us the clarity going forward. The more individual interpretation is allowed, the crazier some of these decisions will be. Here we are again in a mess.

Remember, those who blame VAR are not criticizing the technology but the officials’ incompetence or worse. The only way to improve is to ensure officials follow the rule book.

Once again, those in charge of refereeing in Scotland, instead of taking accountability for wrong decisions, are passing the buck.

They’re blaming UEFA, claiming it’s another directive from them. If UEFA is responsible for these issues, that’s an even bigger problem.

The rule book exists so everyone knows the regulations, what’s permissible, and what isn’t. It ensures fairness. It creates a level playing field.

The minute you start giving refs the power to “use their own judgement” you are putting us all in a bad spot, to nobody’s obvious benefit.

Some of our officials simply cannot be trusted to make the right calls.

One weekend into a new campaign, and already we’re discussing this stuff and the same old excuses are being trotted out. “This is a new directive, a new change to the rules”—except the rules haven’t actually changed one bit, just the way referees are allowed to decide what them mean. Where does this end? When will people realize this is a recipe for disaster?

Scottish football, for all its faults, is one of the few in Europe yet to suffer a major refereeing corruption scandal.

That’s not because the ingredients aren’t present; they are.

It’s because we either haven’t uncovered it yet or we’re incredibly lucky. Sooner or later, some official, crime organization, or corrupt club will walk through those doors, and we’ll all be asking, “How did we get here?” This is how. And the risk isn’t being taken seriously enough.

Share this article

0 comments

  • David says:

    If it was a Hearts player would the decision be different ?? well take a few seconds to think. YES I do. Rangers would have been awarded a penalty either through Walsh or Var But either way it would have been a rangers penalty. (FACT)

    • Clachnacuddin and the Hoops says:

      It most certainly would have been a penalty David that much as you correctly say is very true indeed…

      However I’d personally say it’d have been a penalty to Sevco and not ‘Rangers’ as they are dead !

  • Seamus Campbell says:

    The reason there’s not been a refereeing scandal in Scotland is simply because our referees are happy to be corrupt free of charge.

  • JimBhoy says:

    Arm in an unnatural position and making themselves a bigger block I believe are what is normally trotted out. His arm made contact with the ball at shoulder/face height extended from his body… both those facts would have been considered in a pen call…are we going to see lines to measure how far away from the body the hand was. If so fine just tell us all what is acceptable.

    of course and to your point James it’s now back to an individual to make that call and we know where that is going to lead.

    I hope Hearts get answers and the sfa clarify. Doubt it.

  • Zeddy says:

    In this particular incident there was no room for error. It was hand to ball…..that’s it !!!

    The fact that these officials are not being held accountable is the problem !!!

  • Frank Connelly says:

    And you haven’t really started on the penalty that wasn’t. Joe hart got sent off for exactly what happened at our game against Livingston last year and not a problem with kyogo being clobbered.

    Its gonna get worse

  • Clachnacuddin and the Hoops says:

    Awesome article once again James !

    Scottish Football hasn’t as you say suffered a corruption scandal yet – But Hell its definitely out there for sure…

    And yes while as you rightly say, it hasn’t been uncovered yet, they’ve been incredibly lucky…

    Lucky that a Celtic board of yellow cowardice striped old men in grey suits haven’t – and NEVER WILL open their mouths about the scandals season after season…

    The Sevco board would put them to black Burning shame on this even though they are the constant beneficiaries of such scandalous decisions as like at Tynecastle on Saturday !

  • Big J says:

    James –

    In forming an opinion on this, it is instructive to read the rules as specified in FIFA’s Laws of the Game 2024-2025.

    Under ‘Handling the ball’ it makes the following statements.

    ‘Not every touch of a player’s hand/arm with the ball is an offence.’

    It is an offence if a player: ‘deliberately touches the ball with their hand/arm, for example moving the hand/arm towards the ball.’

    It goes on to attempt to clarify when the ‘hand/arm moves towards the ball the ball’ by saying ‘when it has made their body unnaturally bigger.’

    That last phrase is to a large extent open to to interpretation.

    Therefore it has to be the opinion of the referee or VAR or both which counts.

    There’s simply no way of avoiding the final decision being ‘in the opinion’ of the officials.

    Perhaps it would be worthy of a debate as to how the rule is worded, if that’s the problem.

    That is reviewed each year by the committee responsible. This took place in Tokyo in February this year.

  • Clachnacuddin and the Hoops says:

    Dipped in to Clyde Superscoreboard tonight for the first time since the Monday after The Scottish Cup Final hoping for some Schadenfreude but no Sevco fans on as yet…

    Not sure who the panelist’s are tonight but the two of them have said it was a STONEWALL penalty to Celtic…

    Nothing about the Stonewall one not given to Heart of Midlothian yet (surprise, surprise) !

  • Robert Downey says:

    Baby Dallas has caused a big problem with his personal affiliations.
    He should be reprimanded and if necessary sacked.
    These people cannot be allowed to sully our game with their bias and predejuce.
    Someone has to take a stand against these people for once and for all and put them in their place.

  • Frank says:

    James, what about the Kyogo goal being ruled out for being offside, yes his arm was in front of the defender but you cannot score a legitimate goal with your arm (unless you’re a Sevco player). the offside rule states you will be not offside if any part of the body that can score a goal is in line with the last defender, even if other parts of the attacker’s body are in front.

    If you look at the still var photo going by the laws of the game he was not offside.

  • Eldraco says:

    We just havent been caught yet mate.

Comments are closed.