HACKETT’S VERDICT: Stamp out this inconsistency

HACKETT’S VERDICT: Stamp out this inconsistency

0

Television cameras at the Chelsea v Manchester United FA Cup game picked up the deliberate stamp by United’s Marcos Rojo on Eden Hazard.

Referee Michael Oliver, who was having a game to forget, took no action and we were left with the impression that he and his colleagues had failed to see this red card offence. This came fast upon the retrospective action taken against Bournemouth player Tyrone Mings for his deliberate stamp on Ibrahimovic of Manchester United.

Therefore, it seemed relatively safe to assume that Rojo would also find himself facing punishment on review by the Football Association.  So I was shocked to learn that Rojo had escaped action from the disciplinary department.

The explanation from the FA is that the regulations do not allow any form of retrospective action if the referee, when questioned, states that he has seen the offence.

So Michael Oliver, if you are saying that you witnessed the stamp then my question to you is this: Why did you allow such an act to go unpunished?

And this to the panel of three former referees: If you decided that no offence had taken place then you need to revise and update your knowledge on the Laws of the Game.It is evident that the procedure is flawed. Under current FIFA regulations the matter is closed if the referee indicates he has seen the incident. But it is bad for the image of the game when an act of violence is allowed to go unpunished in this way.