Received a reply from the FA....

....regarding my complaint about the officiating. Pretty much what others have had, although it does look at several points I made, apart from the one about Mason refereeing rivals of Bolton (who he supports).


Thank you for contacting The Football Association.

Whilst understanding your frustration as a football fan, every supporter will have an opinion on the game’s major talking points and we’re always interested to hear them. The Football Association receives frequent correspondence on individual refereeing decisions across all levels of football as well as on the performance of referees in general. It is important to understand that without a referee there is no game and as a result the long-term health of football relies on recruiting, retaining and developing referees. Whilst 100% consistency is impossible when human judgment is introduced into a situation, referees get the overwhelmingly majority of decisions right. In fact they are arguably the most consistent people in the game making split-second decisions that will be analysed repeatedly by slow motion cameras and panels of football experts.

There is a system in place for monitoring the performance of referees and referee's assistants. This involves referees assessors and reports from club managers. All assessors come from a footballing background and the majority are fully qualified referees themselves. The performances of referees over a season are then taken into consideration when the leagues appoint their referees for the following season.

Retrospective action in relation to the incident involving Mario Balotelli of Manchester City and Alex Song of Arsenal, which occurred in the 20th minute of Sunday’s game, will not be taken.

Where at least one of the officials has seen the coming together of players retrospective action is not taken, regardless of whether they have seen the full extent of the challenge.

Retrospective action can only be taken in scenarios where none of the Match Officials saw the players coming together. The normal scenarios in which retrospective action is taken are for ‘off the ball’ incidents.

Retrospective action was introduced for off the ball incidents where there was no contest for possession and could not be deemed to be re-refereeing an incident.

In agreement with FIFA, this is how ‘not seen’ incidents are dealt with retrospectively in England. It is a policy that is agreed with all football stakeholders.

In relation to the Commission’s decision regarding Shaun Derry, the ability to submit a claim of wrongful dismissal is an exceptional facility that allows Clubs to challenge the dismissal of a player when a serious and obvious error has taken place. Under guidelines from FIFA a Regulatory Commission must apply the test of whether a serious and obvious error has taken place. The Club has to submit clear and conclusive evidence that a wrongful dismissal has taken place. When such evidence is inconclusive the Regulatory Commission has no alternative but to dismiss the claim.

It is the responsibility of the commission to consider evidence subject only to the claim of wrongful dismissal and the contact between the players involved. It is not their responsibility to look at anything other than the incident which resulted in the dismissal including whether there was a possible offside or any suggestion of player simulation.

Under the guidelines for referees in the Laws of the Game, there are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour. One of these circumstances includes attempting to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled.

FIFA guidelines aimed at avoiding the “re-refereeing” of matches generally prevent The FA from taking disciplinary action on incidents which are seen and dealt with at the time by the match officials (this includes taking no action). As a general rule, if the match officials see an incident and have jurisdiction to take action, The FA cannot act retrospectively.

We are working hard to combat the problem of diving at the highest level of the game. The FA has led discussions with the PFA, LMA, referees and leagues on this issue, and we are talking to FIFA about changing their laws on retrospective disciplinary action to make punishment for diving easier.

In relation to your query about fielding weakened team you will need to direct it to The Premier League in this instance.

We do appreciate all of the feedback we receive from supporters. This feedback is collated and used to build a picture of public opinion and is subsequently fed back internally within the organisation. Please rest assured your comments will form part of this feedback process.

 

Looks like a standard response to me with a couple of exceptions.

 

With the bit at the end, didn't the PL scrap the rule about weakened teams this season after the fiasco around Wolves (and Blackpool?) doing it anyway last year.

 

I do hope that the FA and Fifa get something sorted re simulation and diving.

But I suspect hope will be as far as it gets.

 

"FIFA Guidlines" blah, blah, blah. The FA (and we all know what that stands for) pass on the responsibility to FIFA, yet every other football association under FIFA has the right to take retrospective action regardless of whether a match official has seen an incident or "coming together of players" or not. It is only our FA that has taken it upon themselves to impose these restrictions, FIFA can't understand why they do it???