Raheem Sterling and the pain that was none: should he confess?

In retrospect, Raheem Sterling was sorry. "I do not know what happened, I do not feel any contact and I want to apologize to the referee," said the Manchester City striker after the match against Shakhtar Donetsk (6-0) in the Champions League.

The reason for Sterling's apology was as follows: after 24 minutes, the 23-year-old had entered the field without any negative effect by attempting to release the ball over the goalkeeper. Sterling is crushed. To the surprise of all the referees, Viktor Kbadai decided on penalty. Apparently, the experienced Hungarian referee had made a mistake on the fall of Sterling. Gabriel Jesus converted the penalty to 2-0 for City.

Should Sterling have gone to the referee?

A flagrant bad decision that would have been avoided if a video badistant had checked the scene. But there is one in the top category of the coming season, at least if UEFA does not change its plans.

Should Sterling have gone to the referee and told him that he was not fouled? Would the referee have asked the player? Can we and should we expect or even demand one or the other?

In any case, there is no answer in the rules of football. "The referee decides to the best of his knowledge and belief in accordance with the Laws of the Game and the" spirit of football. "He makes decisions based on his badessment and has the discretionary power to apply the appropriate measures in the rules of the game. " He may modify a decision of principle until the end of the match, "if he considers that this is not correct or that he has received a notification from another official of the match".

Sterling falls in the video:

However, there are also unwritten laws in football. One of them is the following: the interrogation of a player by the referee is in principle admissible, but the ultima ratio, so the exception absolute. This should only exist if the referee, for example, because of unusually violent protests in a gambling-related situation, such as a reparatory kick, has significant doubts as to the correctness of his decision and with the help of his badistants can not help it.

However, no referee likes to use this remedy. After all, there is always a risk of loss of authority and control – because of a weakness that could be exploited by players.

Players like to take the exception as an opportunity to rebadure the referee at the next available opportunity, but please invite your opponent to pray. In addition, the referee pushes an interrogator on the person under pressure, he imposes on him the responsibility for a decision that must be taken only by himself.

The referee book

At the same time, he indulges in the player's response. If he is lucky, the respondent is honest, if he is unlucky, he retires for not knowing it himself – or even telling the lie.

As Oliver Held of FC Schalke 04 during the Bundesliga match against 1. FC Köln at the end of April 1998. At the score of 0: 0, he had deliberately blocked the shot of Toni Polster on his own line goal, but referee Uwe Kemmling had escaped. Cologne was threatened with relegation, so Kemmling asked his hero – and the Schalke said he cleaned the ball with his head. The penalty kick did not exist, Schalke won, Cologne went up – and Held was suspended by the DFB because of his misrepresentation for two games.

Because of the players, equity is expected. This includes not lying when the referee questions him. In return, any personal penalty is waived. If Held had told the truth, it would have resulted in a penalty. But he would have avoided dismissal due to the prevention of an obvious chance of scoring. In the case of Sterling, this means that there was only one referee's ball.

"So we do not want to win a match"

As seldom as the interrogation of an umpire, players can voluntarily approach the referee and confess that they benefit from his mistake. Who acts voluntarily to their own disadvantage when the stakes are high? In the Bundesliga, a penalty was last canceled in March 2014 because the alleged foul would have told the referee not to have been at fault in breach of the rules.

Aaron Hunt, still in the service of Werder Bremen, fell in the 1. FC Nuremberg match after a duel with Javier Pinola in the penalty area. Referee Manuel Gräfe decided on a penalty kick, but Hunt told him that he had fallen voluntarily. "I wanted the penalty, but it was not the right decision," he said. "It soon became clear that I was telling the truth, so we do not want to win a match, even if it's a relegation battle."

At Raheem Sterling, remorse came only after the final whistle, when no one has any more.