Referee lied in match report - is this professional, ethical issue, or ...?

juneau-AK · Jul 4, 2017

Schlager said: ↑

Maybe I shouldn't wade into this but I am...Our local club puts the committee hearing results up online and I was obsessed with reading through those when I started off for some reason.

The only time they entertained overturning something that a referee wrote in a match report was when it was he erred in a basis of law. That is, he awarded an IDFK for a handball, or went straight red card and wrote dissent as the reason. In these cases, the remedy was rescinding the cards and/or replaying the game.
...
Click to expand...

Is this online-hearing available for all?

About your "referee erring in basis of law" situation, did the hearing committee rule this on their own? This means someone is reading the match report, right?

Also, dissent is yellow card. So this to me is wow, you have someone who is doing thing right. What local club is this? My hats off, I meant, my whistle's off to them! PM me please if you prefer.

psyc1Ops · Jul 5, 2017

vinDeezul said: ↑

One of my colleagues brought this discussion to my attention. It has so many parallels to what I experienced in the last couple of years, and yes, I could easily be that referee who had successfully appealed the decision that was transmitted to me by professional chair.

For anyone who would like to know, I was asked to appear for misconduct hearing. I never received any information about misconduct until I was at the hearing. During the hearing, I requested and was then shown a copy of email that a player had sent which was the basis of having the hearing. The player was not at the hearing, so I had no chance for any clarification. Neither was the referee of the match. I was assisting in the match. At the hearing, I saw four other referees, with whom I had worked in many matches. I did not know who had any grudge against me. During the question-answer sessions, I was asked to respond to many previous complaints. I thought I was in a kangaroo court. No one was under oath.

I was notified about expulsion for federation, a lifetime ban.

I appealed, and was successful. Something about not provided documentation in advance. A new hearing. Very much same situation written by Law5.

So now new hearing. In new hearing, same professional chair in hearing, another panel of referees.

The decision of the second hearing, which was also expulsion. This is where my situation diverges from Law5 description. I appealed this decision. The reasons were several, as the letter from the referee committee stated "some errors made in second hearing." They wanted to send case back for third hearing - the gall. They already had spent 7 months, and I was not permitted to register for this time. There was an olive branch provided, waive right for third hearing, permit to register for remainder of year.

I would encourage anyone who faces hearing process such as the ones I did to question each step of whatever process they conduct. After all, it will come down to he said this, the other said that. No one at hearing is believable, everyone is expected to have honesty and integrity, even when they do not. Reading the descriptions here, written word of one referee is accepted as such, not for others. Imagine when every other referee finds out what goes on, what confidence they have in the process of fairness and in the leadership. The referee committee already has enough data on what their professionalism chair did. If this is not old boys at work, I do not know what else is.
Click to expand...

From the description, it does not seem to be a fair process to begin with. No one in that hearing panel, including the accuser and defendant, are under oath. Well, all I can tell you is that is just a grim situation.

It is one referee's written word against another. That is a classic for finding who is supported more by whoever is looking into these accusations and allegations. I always find this is when any reasonable person will involve proper judicial measures. Apparently not in your area.