Reporter Jin Cuo reports On the 27th, around the increasingly fierce referee dispute in the CSL, two things attracted our attention.
First, in the morning, the Chinese Football Association, through expert analysis at the internal meeting of the referee work of the Chinese Super League, determined that Ai Kun's decision on the final goal of Fellaini was "miscarriage of justice". This time, the Football Association "confessed" (that the referee was wrong).
Secondly, there has been a media report that "the Football Association will punish Luneng". This newspaper learned from the Chinese Football Association that before the qualifying match between Shandong Luneng and Hebei Huaxia, the Football Association had already imposed punishment on many Luneng staff, including teaching assistants and interpreters, who had impacted the VAR room on the night of the 22nd, and the maximum ban could be 7 months. It is very subtle that so far, the Chinese Football Association has not officially announced this punishment.
The Football Association released its comments on referees in a relatively short period of time. The general view is that this apparent misjudgment has put great pressure on the Football Association. Fellaini's goal was blown, which makes people feel that Luneng has been subjected to controversial decisions in a row. Many people even believe that this is the way that the referee circle has banded together to retaliate against Luneng fans' review of Shen Yinhao's paper, and blown out the scored ball, It has broken through most people's understanding of the bottom line of Chinese football.
Not only Luneng's media staff and fans were excited, but more neutral media and fans also joined in the denunciation. During the three matches, authoritative media, including Xinhua News Agency, People's Daily, People's Daily, and People's Daily, expressed their doubts about the referee and criticism of the Football Association in the referee management. Under pressure, the Football Association was also reasonable.
Although it is rare for the Chinese Football Association to publicly admit the misjudgment of the referee through the media, it is clear that if this is just a compromise attitude under pressure, rather than the beginning of the overall governance of the referee, this public "confession" may bring greater repercussions.
As we all know, according to the practice, Ai Kun will be stopped internally for a certain number of times after the Football Association determines that Ai Kun was wrongly judged. However, the impact of such measures on Luneng is unknown: the referee will certainly be restrained in the short term, and be more cautious in judging, but if Ai Kun is suspended, it may aggravate the hostile attitude of the referee circle towards Luneng.
What's more regrettable is that the Football Association, while "admitting mistakes", purposely denied the view that "the referee holds the team". If it was only a guess before, then who would doubt it after the anecdote that the loser had no objection, but the VAR room had brazenly led the change of the sentence, witnessed the farce that the judges lined up to send off the "heroes", and even saw the "miscarriage of justice" that even people with the least professional knowledge could not make, Is this just a small circle's humiliation to the whole industry? In terms of its "crime" characteristics of not avoiding suspicion, not making any cover up, and not setting any technical threshold, this is even more a blatant act of revenge and public demonstration.
In fact, the Football Association must fully realize that the problem of refereeing is already very serious, not just "there are some problems". The refereeing work has become one of the key factors that affect the image of Chinese football and even the development of Chinese football. The law enforcement environment is not harmonious, and the law enforcement standards cannot be unified all the time. The potential danger that referees may change the results of the game subjectively, Not only has it caused an almost irreversible negative impact on the league, but also has created a huge pressure on all investors.
According to the data released by PricewaterhouseCoopers in 2017, the total cost of CSL in 2016 is 11 billion, which means that the investment of CSL clubs is not less than 10 billion, and the 2016 season is just the beginning of the CSL bubble. In the craziest season of CSL bubble in 2018, the total investment of 16 CSL clubs is estimated to be about 20 billion.
At present, the investment of CSL tends to be rational, but under the downward trend of the economy, the huge pressure borne by investors has not been alleviated. Some investors have their own asset liability ratio of about 80% to 90%, some investors are facing certain policy risks, and many clubs are in arrears with wages, transfer fees and other dilemmas.
Under such heavy pressure, if a club that frequently invests hundreds of millions, billions or billions of dollars a year can be played by several referees at will, it is undoubtedly a great satire for the Chinese professional league, and it will naturally appear: the loser will laugh at it wantonly, and the loser will look confused. What's more, there is clear information that many clubs have shown their intention under heavy pressure, but considering the corporate image and other related influences, they are just trying to support it.
Luneng is a state-owned enterprise club, which makes it impossible for them to quit. But if other private enterprise clubs encounter the same situation, wouldn't investors just be able to quit on a downward slope? You should know that this "forced away" way will not affect the corporate image and will not cause public opinion response to the enterprise, but what about the image of Chinese football? What about the public opinion response of Chinese football?
This should be the reflection of the Chinese Football Association after this "confession". The important thing is not to "admit mistakes", but to improve: how to establish a more reasonable and open mechanism in the selection, management, selection and other mechanisms of judges. "Acknowledging mistakes" can only deter referees in the short term. Only a more sound system can ensure long-term stability, including the role and value of professional league in referee management.
A person from the Football Association disclosed to our reporter that the Football Association has also been paying attention to the issue of refereeing, and is also trying to explore the construction of a more perfect system: "The Football Association is actually very passive about refereeing, and many things actually affect the whole body. Reform is not so easy as the outside world imagined. In fact, after the new Football Association team took office, it has also been discussing how to promote the improvement of the referee system, and now I hope all parties can give the Football Association more patience. "
From the punishment of Luneng Club's relevant personnel to the fact that our newspaper was still secretive when it was published, we should realize the difficulty of the Chinese Football Association in referee management. On the night of the 22nd, Luneng people really attacked the VAR room, mainly Luneng staff, and the players did not participate. The Football Association's punishment was basically confirmed to be accurate, but the Football Association has not announced it. Luneng's absolute silence makes people feel that they have reached some kind of tacit understanding.
As for why the Football Association has not publicly punished or has not yet announced the punishment, it may be because the Football Association is afraid of further stimulating Luneng fans. This move is also regarded as a similar measure to "admit mistakes" to ease conflicts. The decision of Ai Kun was obviously unexpected by the Chinese Football Association, so this "confession" came into being.
OK, let's ask, then what?