[jambutty]

I have watched football since 1946 when I saw my first match at Peel Park and like most kids of my era played football in the street, on some spare ground or at school in inter form matches and even inter school matches. Followed by whilst in the navy and for the works team after being demobbed.

My first allegiance was to Accrington Stanley until one day I saw the Busby Babes in action and I switched immediately, although I have always had a soft spot for the Stanley.

That preview is to establish my football credentials so that I can lay some claim to knowing something about football gleaned from over 60 years association with the game. Although my viewing is limited to the TV these days with the odd foray to watch Accrington Stanley.

In recent years diving has taken a hold and a penalty awarded to a diver has altered the overall the outcome of a match. Conversely an obvious penalty not awarded has also altered the overall outcome of a match. Today a match won or lost that could have had a different outcome but for a penalty incident, could cost a club dear. From being relegated to not winning the league or attaining a lower place in the league. In other words it could cost a club several millions of pounds. The other side of the coin being - winning the league or not being relegated and attaining a higher place in the league thus gaining money under false pretences.

I accept that referees and their assistants can only judge what they see and an incident can look different from another angle. I also accept that, contrary to some opinions, referees and their assistants are human and under pressure humans make mistakes. Heck they even make mistakes when not under pressure.

But nonetheless the FA and FIFA should address the problem because football is rapidly deteriorating into a farce.

The solution is blindingly obvious. Use the TV replays and slow-mo to make a better judgement on alleged diving incidents in the penalty area. However football is a game that flows and is only disrupted by infringements so to interrupt a match whilst someone pours over a TV replay wouldn’t be practical or desirable. Yet the TV cameras capture the incident from several angles and should be used to decide – dive or no dive, penalty or no penalty.

I would suggest that three retired referees at a match view the replays for alleged diving and also for disputes about a penalty not being awarded when in fact a foul had been committed and make a decision.
If they decide that a player dived, a penalty was awarded and a goal was scored direct from the penalty or from an immediate ‘follow up’ – the goal would be scrubbed and the diver would be awarded a RED CARD and be charged with ‘bringing the game into disrepute’.
If no goal were scored direct from the penalty or from an immediate ‘follow up’ the diver would still be charged with ‘bringing the game into disrepute’.
If they decide that the challenge was fair yet a penalty was awarded, a goal was scored direct from the penalty or from an immediate ‘follow up’ – the goal would be scrubbed.
If they decide that a player was fouled in the ‘box’ but was not awarded a penalty, that penalty could be taken at the end of the half during which the incident took place.

The question is would the FA be able to find 3 retired referees for each match that is being televised and would the FA be prepared to go the expense? Unlikely!

In that case there could be a panel of 5 recently retired referees who could view penalty decisions from all televised matches during the following day/s. Much like there is a panel to decide the outcome of matches that have been postponed due to bad weather to aid the football pools.

If a manager of a team is of the opinion that the referee made the wrong decision about a penalty incident he could lodge an appeal with the fourth official.

The referee panel could view the incident and decide what the outcome should have been.
If a team were wrongly awarded a penalty from which a goal was scored direct from the penalty or from an immediate ‘follow up’ that goal would be scrubbed from the final score and if it were a diving incident the diver would be awarded a RED CARD and be charged with ‘bringing the game into disrepute’.
If a team was NOT AWARDED a penalty but the panel decides a penalty was due, then one goal should be awarded to that team.

Any panel decision that goes against what the referee awarded should not be seen as a criticism of that referee. After all he can only make a judgement on what he sees. He could have actually blinked at the crucial split second and everyone blinks all the time. His view could have been obscured by a player at the crucial moment.

No doubt someone will immediately think ‘what a crackpot idea’ but if they really thought things through my suggestion is A solution to the ‘it was a penalty – no it wasn’t’ problem. Not necessarily THE solution but one to be discussed.