Kellys i – the media must remain impartial

As featured on Footy 24/7

Is the BBC, ITV, Sky Sports and Setanta overstepping their boundaries of what they are supposed to be providing by acting as judge and jury in sports incidents?
Arsenal midfielder Alexander Hleb has been charged with violent conduct following his altercation with Reading’s Graeme Murty.
Hleb allegedly slapped the Royals skipper during the second half of the Gunners’ 2-0 win at the Emirates on Saturday.

Referee Peter Walton has studied video footage of the incident and has informed the FA that he would have shown Hleb a straight red card for violent conduct had he spotted it at the time.
Hleb, who has until 6pm today to admit or deny the charge, faces a three-match ban which would rule him out of the rest of the season.
So, Alex Hleb yesterday was told that he was being investigated for an “attack on the Reading player for violent conduct because the referee missed it during the match, or to be precise, he misread the situation because he actually saw the incident, formed the wrong conclusion because he did not see all of the incident, he missed the incriminating evidence and formed the wrong conclusion

So actually, if the referee did see the incident but he misread the situation is the truth, like he misread a few penalty decisions for dives, like he misread a few fouls or offside decisions, or even misread throw-ins or misread, a corner for a goal kick or visa versa, surely that is part of the game.

Remember Hleb in Milan who was booked for taking a dive in the San Siro yet the referee admitted after the saw it on tv replay he actually got it wrong and should have given Arsenal a penalty, so where is the fairness in TV evidence? Were we awarded a penalty after the game, of course not, was Rooney booked for diving at Old Trafford after the game and the goal taken away after he won a penalty, no he wasn’t.

If the referee has the ability to change bookings after the match and review his misread situation, then what are the football governing bodies going to do about the other injustices during the game that are only highlighted by football programmes like Match of the Day.

MOTD etc analyse things in depth and seem to actually delight in trying to find things that the referee has missed so taking a superior position or higher perspective usually because they are ex footballers and like to ridicule the referee because he has never played the game, and they usually use this by mentioning the fact that if the referee had played the game then he would have known this or that fact.

The problem they have is that two pundits say like Shearer and Hanson can quite often look at incidents from different points of view, from a strikers and a defenders viewpoints, thus reading different things into the incident which they feel should be allowed for that player to do or not to do depending on that players position in the team, how often have we seen two pundits argue the toss about something because it is what would be deemed acceptable for a defender and a forward

So should the FA and Premier League take any notice of TV replays after the fact, if so at what point should it be used?

Do the British media send their video footage to Uefa of wrong incidences in the Champions League matches? No, or to Fifa no. So why do it for FA Cup matches and Premier League matches, are they really doing it for the good of the game or are they trying to influence the outcome, knowing that player will probably get a suspension and possibly influence the outcome of the entire season for that team, just imaging if Ronaldo had done something where he got a three match ban on the back of TV evidence, Manchester United may have possibly dropped 9 points in those three games because of Ronaldo’s incredible scoring record this season, would that have changed the outcome of the premiership, you bet it would have.

The problem I have is that every pundit has to be seen whiter than white and totally impartial to the teams who play when they inform their opinion, If I was of a cynical mind it could be misconstrued that say, Lee Dixon might favour Arsenal in his viewpoint, Mark Lawrenson and Hanson may favour say Liverpool in their viewpoint just as much as Bryan Robson, Lee Sharpe, Dennis Irwine, or any ex-player of a big club may favour the club they played for, or even worse, to hold a grievance against a club that was a rival.

Pundits working for TV companies where the tv companies have shares in specific football clubs like ITV used to have in Arsenal, or Sky do with Manchester United, Liverpool and Chelsea looking for ways to influence the outcome of the rest of the season by pointing out these things or are they just doing their job.

Now if anyone can tell me Richard Keys is impartial I will show you a liar, Sky have tried to recreate the best finish to a football season ever (actually on ITV) the 1989 season when Arsenal went to Anfield and win the title with the last kick of the game.

Sky change the football fixtures at the drop of a hat for TV and they would surely love to have the finale of a season, I sometimes wonder if before a ball was kicked in a season they must have looked at who they thought would be in the running for the title and made sure the games are going to near the end if not the end of the season.

Tags: footy 24/7, kellys i