Made in Wigan
Vital Champions League
I don't think the two acts are comparable. Firstly Powell didn't 'throw' anyone, he was entangled with Williams and his body movement, caused him to fall to the floor. That is commonplace in the game in one form or another. Foul? Potentially, but not definitively. Violent conduct? Not a chance. Compare that to lowering your head and body weight to then run at force into an opponent 5 yards away when the balls dead. Commonplace, not a chance. Violent conduct, absolutely. I'd be concerned as a ref if you can't differentiate between the two.
The problem about bringing pre conceived ideas into the decision making process is that subconsciously it leads to bias and effectively discriminates against players. I'm extremely surprised that referees are taught to assess any incident by who the participants are. If they do it's little wonder there is inconsistency in standards. Personally I think neymar dives all the time, should my perception if I was a ref influence the decision making process if he went down in the box? No, you should judge each incident on its merit and not let that unconscious bias affect the decision making. Taking it forward is it any wonder for example that big teams get more decisions? If the referee things he's a worlds class player, surely he wouldn't miss time a tackle so there's no way he's fouled that journey striker on the box, when the evidence is there he has. It's a sticky wicket I'm afraid.
As for common sense, I was playing devils advocate as I'm all for it. Common sense suggests hauling a player down in the six yard box with the ball fizzing across it is denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity when you can't definitely say a player wouldn't reach it. However you can't quote rules in that incident and not apply common sense, yet rely on it to justify not sending someone off in other incidents.
The problem about bringing pre conceived ideas into the decision making process is that subconsciously it leads to bias and effectively discriminates against players. I'm extremely surprised that referees are taught to assess any incident by who the participants are. If they do it's little wonder there is inconsistency in standards. Personally I think neymar dives all the time, should my perception if I was a ref influence the decision making process if he went down in the box? No, you should judge each incident on its merit and not let that unconscious bias affect the decision making. Taking it forward is it any wonder for example that big teams get more decisions? If the referee things he's a worlds class player, surely he wouldn't miss time a tackle so there's no way he's fouled that journey striker on the box, when the evidence is there he has. It's a sticky wicket I'm afraid.
As for common sense, I was playing devils advocate as I'm all for it. Common sense suggests hauling a player down in the six yard box with the ball fizzing across it is denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity when you can't definitely say a player wouldn't reach it. However you can't quote rules in that incident and not apply common sense, yet rely on it to justify not sending someone off in other incidents.