According to the BBC, the SFA is to review the way it handles red card appeals. Unlike the English game, the Scottish League lets the referee review and decide alone whether or not to overturn dismissals. Hopefully, they will decide to move in favour of a review panel to handle any appeals.
But is this a fairer system? Is the referee not being undermined?
This whole issue has been pushed to breaking point by Heart of Midlothian defender Marius Zaliukas’ red card against Aberdeen last month. In what appeared to be a touch of the heads (with more aggression from the Dons player), referee Iain Brines saw things differently and was quick to give the Jambos man a straight red.
Incensed, Hearts appealed the decision, only for Brines to close the case shut and claim that his decision was correct and thus final. By viewing footage of the incident, anyone could see that it was Aberdeen striker Lee Miller who had initiated the contact. Now, I’m not expecting referees to be perfect; it is understandable that during the moment the referee saw what he saw and sent off Zaliukas. But even after reviewing the video himself, Brines must be questioned.
Why did he get it wrong a second time? Was he hoping to avoid embarrassment? Would reversing the decision undermine his authority as a referee? Or did he even watch the tape?
Whatever his reason, this situation would not have arisen in the first place if a review panel was installed. From a fairness point of view, this method promotes an unbiased and unprejudiced judgement on a red card appeal. With multiple reviewers and no interference from the referee, a more balanced verdict will surely arise.
But with no referee input, does this not weaken his authority and command?
It’s debatable. I believe that decisions made within the game should not come down to just one man but rather a refereeing system that is efficient and, most importantly, accurate.
Referees are as human as the rest of us and are under unbelievable pressure to make the right call with split-second decisions, so it is only natural that wrong calls are made during the course of a season. If every play was the subject of official review, we’d have a 90 minute game lasting 5 hours (NFL style).
But if a player is punished beyond the course of a match (much like Zaliukas who has been banned for 3 ties), then accuracy and justice must come first. One could argue that this approach undermines the man in black, but I would rather it was him than the entire refereeing system.
Do you agree? Are the SFA moving in the right direction? Or should football move back to the days where the referee’s decision on the pitch was final? Again, I’d love to hear your thoughts below.
