I haven’t gotten around to reading The Ashley Book of Knots yet, which is very lazy of me since it came out in 1944. But if you want to know more about knots, this book contains 3,857 of them. Clifford W Ashley certainly knew his trade, perhaps more than any knotter who ever lived. Although I do wonder whether he has seen the threat from the board of the International Football Association.
Those guys and gals within the legislative branch of the game love to tie the knot even more than he does. Crikey, they could make a serious attack on his turf. So how about a new book, an unauthorized, unsanctioned biography of their recent work: How Football Tied Itself In Knots And Choked Until It Was Blue.
It’s almost six years since these guardians of the game wrote VAR into football and just a few days ago we heard the rumblings of a blue card and sin bins. Once or twice in between they took out their crayons to tweak what a handball is, so they certainly made themselves known.
But let’s focus on those blue cards and their brainwave ten-minute sin bins for dissent and cynical offense, because that’s a real knot in a knot. That’s a sheep shank in a manger in a frying line. They have tied it so tight that they are now having trouble getting out.
What was initially set up as a sin-bin trial in the professional game has shifted to something less bullish after facing the wrath of many in the game. UEFA president Alexander Ceferin called it ‘the death of football’, which was a bit dramatic, but at least on the right side of the line.
What was initially set up as a sin-bin process in the professional game has evolved into something less bullish
UEFA president Alexander Ceferin called the introduction of blue cards ‘the death of football’, which was a bit dramatic, but it was on the right side of the line
Already this season there have been attempts to control dissent and the referees are standing firm
Your browser does not support iframes.
That’s why the International Football Association Board (IFAB) will talk about it some more. They have put their foot on the ball, if you will, and will instead express their thoughts at next month’s AGM.
Let’s hope it’s a short conversation and let’s also hope that this incessant tinkering and tweaking is seen as the exercise in sports madness that it is. Because what was that old phrase? Football is a simple game: 22 guys chase a ball and a bunch of administrators find a way to mess it all up.
That is what has happened in recent years and it is the line of setbacks that a blue card could continue. It is simply not necessary. It was not necessary in the 54 years we have had yellow and red cards and it is not necessary now. Even if the IFAB’s heart is in the right place and notes that dissent is a colossal part of football’s refereeing crisis, its head is in the clouds.
The timing is especially baffling. Already this season there have been attempts to stifle dissent and the referees are standing firm – the figures tell us they have handed out 153 yellow cards for this offense in the Premier League this season, compared to 87 for the entire season. Campaign 2022-2023. But within those figures there is a trend in a promising direction.
I spoke to the statisticians at Opta this week and they obviously have an overview of the figures. What started out month-on-month as an average of 0.83 dissent warnings per match in August has actually gone down – it now stands at 0.58 and none of the past three months have been higher than the previous four. It is far too early to decide whether the deterrent has been effective and the four yellow back-chat marks given to Andreas Pereira, Bruno Fernandes and Nicolas Jackson suggest some skulls are too dense for the message.
But it’s certainly too early to give up on the experiment for a change that would mar the sport as we know it. More 11-on-10 games, more teams sitting back and hanging on, more reasons to complain, more reasons to wonder ‘why did it have to be this way’?
Which of course is the result of so many of these raids. The introduction of VAR was little short of an act of vandalism; a terribly imperfect solution to a game that fooled itself into believing it was too important to make mistakes. So important that it has led itself into a huge blunder.
That silence we hear so regularly after a goal has been scored, as we wait to hear whether it will be allowed by some distant power, is perhaps the most depressing sound in all of sport. And yet it’s only marginally more nauseating than the chatter as we dissect the modern meaning of handball frame by frame. And rest assured, a blue card would build on those discussions.
Chelsea’s Nicolas Jackson is one of the key players booked for dissent this season
Manchester United captain Bruno Fernandes is also known to be a nightmare for referees on the pitch
Fulham midfielder Andreas Pereira was also shown a yellow card this season for addressing the referee several times
I’m not too concerned about how this applies to cynical offenses. But a game-changing minefield awaits around dissent, because that has always been a subjective situation and a matter of what a referee is willing to tolerate. It may not be consistent with the letter of the law, but it does reflect reality.
We can see the problem lurking around this corner. If you’re interested, Peter Bankes has overseen 21 Premier League games this season and has been booked 20 times for dissent. Anthony Taylor is second with 13 in 30 games and Chris Kavanagh just nine from 13, with not a single warning included when Virgil Van Dijk appeared to ask if he had been drinking during Liverpool’s win against Arsenal.
Typically, we want referees to apply their own judgment to these situations. We used to call that good game management. But if the punishment is as severe as shooting a man for ten minutes, with all the consequences that entails for competition, then this is arguably an area ripe for inconsistencies.
It begs a question: why are the same people who want perfection in all aspects of the game now trying to increase the circumstances in which imperfections exist?
What an excellent piece of tying that would be from IFAB. Clifford W Ashley would be proud. Better yet, he could rise from the grave and tie these jokers to the mast before they put such a mess to paper.
The special story of two Chelseas
I went to two Chelsea games last week, the second of which was a stunning defeat to Aston Villa on a pitch where Villa had beaten both Arsenal and Manchester City. The first, three days earlier, was a home loss to Wolves, in which they embarrassed themselves and led to a social media mutiny from Thiago Silva’s wife.
Chelsea’s impressive FA Cup performance at Aston Villa came just days after a dismal performance against Wolves
Questions remain for Mauricio Pochettino’s side after the dismal match at Stamford Bridge
Strange time for Mauricio Pochettino. He has generally been spared the harshest criticism at Chelsea because the bigger problems start in higher places. But it is equally true that he has not yet achieved anything close to his best at the club.
In a strange way, this image was only reinforced by the win over Villa: if these players are capable of this level, how are their lower extremes still possible? Part of that is the nature of a young team. But increasing the performance base and reducing variance are an important principle of coaching. So it falls on him.
We can assume that he will bring Chelsea back to a more stable level if given the time. But one win over Villa doesn’t answer the questions Wolves and too many other games like it raise.
