"LONDON (Reuters) -- FIFA President Sepp Blatter said on Sunday he would have supported the England team if they had walked off the pitch when home fans hurled racial abuse during their friendly with Spain in Madrid last week." full text found at; http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2004/soccer/11/21/bc.sport.soccer.racism.blatter/index.html While the content of the article is definitely for another forum, one wonders if they'll come up with a mechanic for it. Once again Sepp speaks before he thinks and opens up an interesting can of worms.
The problem is that Blatter is saying that FIFA might agree with and support teams that walk off because of racial abuse. Then again, they might not. What if a team walks off towards the end of a World Cup qualifier that they are losing by 1 goal because of racial abuse, even though they endured it for 80+ minutes? What if FIFA agrees with one national team that walks off but then disagrees with another? As usual, Blatter is opening up a can of worms and FIFA could become far more involved in politics than it should be. For consistency's sake, decisions like this must be left up to the match referee and match commissioner, as they are the appointed, neutral arbiters.
So how would that work? Would the ref decide it was too bad to put up with and excuse the visiting team? Or would the team ask the ref for "permission" to leave the pitch without forfeiting? I'd hate to be in that spot as a ref, especially if it's a close game in a competitive situation (WCQ, etc).
I agree with the sentiment, but it does raise the issue of how the referee should handle the situation as it happens.
The referee doesn't have to do anything or have any part of the decision. What a team should do when faced with racial abuse is entirely up to the team and the league (and FIFA). Referees just go out and do what the Law provides, nothing more, nothing less.
Not sure I agree. You are there to provide a safe and fair playing arena for the players, which includes what comes from those attending the games. I think a referee has every right to suspend a game if he feels the fans are not behaving properly. This is no different then if you have a parents on the sidelines yelling abusive language at players on the field.
RF, you are correct but Statesman was not saying the ref should not attempt to control the abuse and terminate the game if it becomes excessive. He was saying that the offended team does not have to get referee permission to quit the game and the ref cannot absolve them of a forfeit if they do leave. You are both correct. We do not declare forfeits. We only report the situation. The one thing I would add is that if a team felt so offended that they had to leave the field and told me that was the reason. I would put it in the game report and not make them justifiy their actions afte the fact. The rest is up to the league.
The referee does have the power to suspend the game, of course. However, he is also there to serve the players. If the players are not bothered by the spectators and the game is not disrupted, there really is no reason to suspend or terminate. Of course, if the referee himself can no longer perform his duties as a result of the spectator behavior then the game should be terminated on those grounds instead. Fortunately for most games that have "sideline spectators," the league extends the referee's authority to dismiss them as well. I've actually had two games this year where all spectators had to be removed after drinking too much and starting to fight.
German referee Herbert Fandel, who is to referee PSV vs Arsenal tomorrow night (and the scene of terrible racist abuse aimed mainly at Thierry Henry the last time Arsenal visited the Phillips Stadion), has said that if he gets a repeated scene like that last time, or like in the Spain vs England game, he will abandoned the game: UEFA have supported this approach btw: Let's hope it doesn't come to that though.