NRL shows courage while FFA runs for cover

Roar Pro

By Jesse Fink, 18 Feb 2009 Jesse Fink is a Roar Pro

Tagged:: FFA Match Review Panel, Kevin Muscat

If I could one have one wish granted in ways to improve the A-League in “Version 5.0″ (come to think of it, is there a statute of limitations on “versions”?) it is do away with this ridiculous rule that on-field trangressions cannot be dealt with by the FFA Match Review Panel if the referee at the time of the incident saw fit to not place it on report.

Kevin Muscat, the dirtiest-cum-craftiest player in Australian football got away with a raking action foot stomp on Daniel Mullen this week, the FFA declaring “as the matter did not escape the attention of the referee, the MRP has no authority to intervene.”

Meanwhile disgruntled Brazilian Cassio is being hauled over hot coals for making a fist-pumping gesture to the crowd after copping his second yellow card.

“FFA has alleged that Cassio has breached the National Code of Conduct in relation to his conduct following the issue of the second yellow card.”

His punishment will be decided Wednesday.

There is something very wrong with the system if stomping on a prostrate, defenceless player goes unpunished while a heat-of-the-moment harmless rebuke of the crowd is deemed sanctionable.

Look at the video yourself and make up your own mind. In my opinion, there appears to be premeditation, his knee cocked inward, his left foot coming down on an unusual angle for someone supposedly attempting to recover a ball.

The ball itself is a good foot away from his boot.

There should certainly be enough doubt about Muscat’s intentions to at least place the incident on report to be dealt with after the match, in the manner high tackles are reported in rugby league.

Why is that so hard to do in football?

I can guarantee you that if such refereeing provisions were in place that the incidence of “dirty” behaviour in football would be dramatically reduced.

As it is stands presently, though, many players are quite happy to slip in a punch, an elbow, a sly kick, knowing chances are they will get away with it.

Make no mistake: Muscat is a formidable character on the pitch and it is a brave referee who comes up against him. But he is not a protected species, so why does it appear he is consistently treated as such?

A cynic would say that Muscat hasn’t been sanctioned for his rake of Mullen because the FFA wouldn’t dare suspend him for the grand final.

In all honesty I don’t think that is the case but, all the same, a grand final without Muscat would be disastrous for the code.

However the National Rugby League, it should be pointed out, didn’t allow Cameron Smith’s stature in the game to permit him to play for Melbourne Storm in last season’s NRL grand final following his “grapple tackle” on Brisbane forward Sam Thaiday in the finals.

Smith was slugged with a two-game ban on the basis of video evidence.

He wasn’t even placed on report. At the time, all his indiscretion warranted at the discretion of the match referee was a penalty.

But the NRL, in its commitment to eradicating the scourge of this dangerous tackle from the sport, showed some nerve and charged Smith anyway.

The FFA should have done the same with Muscat. And in letting it go, they’ve let us all down.

Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.

The Crowd Says (41) | Page 1 of Comments

Robert B said | February 18th 2009 @ 2:53am | Report comment

Absolutely spot on Jesse!

Reply
Luke Broadbent said | February 18th 2009 @ 3:12am | Report comment

You are absolutely right, Jesse. The system is a disgrace, however, my understanding is that this rule about not being able to take action if the referee reported it is a FIFA rule. A similar debacle occurred here in England recently when Bosingwa escaped any punishment for kicking a player in the back. So, I agree with the sentiment but it seems unfair to have a go at the FFA when I imagine that their hands are tied on this issue by FIFA.

Reply
Midfielder said | February 18th 2009 @ 7:14am | Report comment

Good Calll

Reply
Millster said | February 18th 2009 @ 7:31am | Report comment

Hear hear. And for once I thoroughly agree with using the NRL as a benchmark; they do pretty well at the tricky job of controlling on-field violence in that game and setting very clearly defined standards for tackles and other actions.

Reply
StiflersMom said | February 18th 2009 @ 7:58am | Report comment

OK I watched the video but I was more discusted by the commentary, they seemed to think it was funny?

Reply
Bill McIlroy said | February 18th 2009 @ 8:14am | Report comment

The NRL Panel that suspended Cameron Smith included an ex Manly player who had a vested interest in seeing the Storm weakend for the Grand Final,Let’s hope the other codes don’t use these tactics .

Reply
sledgeross said | February 18th 2009 @ 8:20am | Report comment

Hey Bill, read the rules of rugby league and you will see that Smiths suspension was warranted. Im not saying the judicary is consistent at all, but the suspension was spot on.

Reply
Bill McIlroy said | February 18th 2009 @ 8:35am | Report comment

I agree the judicary is not consistent , But I wonder if Cam Smith was made a scapegoat to satisfy the Sydney press who whipped up so much anti Storm hysteria during the final’s series

Reply
dasilva said | February 18th 2009 @ 8:37am | Report comment

I agree Jesse Fink but like what Luke say it’s a FIFA thing not an FFA issue.

I’ll say though that for FFA to hide behind that rule for the Joel Griffiths case years ago was a bit of disgrace. There have been precedents where the referee have dealt with incidence on the field and been punished if the offence was considered so severe. BEn Thatcher was suspended by the EFA for many weeks despite receiving a yellow card by the on field referee. FFA should have intervene with Joel Griffiths as it was a serious enough offence for them to intervene.

Reply
Vicentin said | February 18th 2009 @ 9:09am | Report comment

While these were not issues of violence, in Serie A this year Albert Gillardino was given a two (or three?) match ban when it was only discovered after the match that he’d deliberately deceived the referee by scoring with his hand. Adriano’s goal against Milan on the weekend is coming under scrutiny now (hand ball again) and he too may face some sanctions.

I absolutely all for people being sanctioned for violent acts – yeah there will be a grey area but there always is, let’s get back to the football.

Just an aside but isn’t Muscat about 35 years of age? How old is Mullen? About 18. Muscat is a psychopath – seems well spoken and intelligent (enough – hey he manages the team!) off the pitch and quite a good footballer too ….but he’s still a psycho.

Reply