I have always wanted to be a sports journalist, with this, remaining neutral and impartial when reporting on a sport is essential. If ever my journalistic qualities of remaining neutral in a report would have been tested, it was last Sunday (2/11/08), as my beloved football team, Derby County, took on historic and much hated rivals Nottingham Forrest. To make matters worse the last two minutes of the contest were highly controversial as Derby were ‘robbed’ by two of the most bizarre and ‘worst refereeing decisions ever seen’ ( http://www.football.virginmedia.com/page/Football/Championship/VideoIndex/0,,12555,00.html?mvnAssetId=3175833 - not the commentery on Sky Sports iv referred to). Now the two parts highlighted in that previous sentence seem as if they would’ve been written by myself, but they were actually broadcasted by ‘neutral’ television pundits. However if I was reading a report on this match and used that sort of language describing the events I would no doubt have been criticised by friends and family for being extremely bias. Thankfully I wasn’t reporting, and despite my mood being ruined due to referee’s Stuart Atwell’s decisions to deny my team the win, Lewis Hamilton duly stepped up in the late afternoon with the goods to at least make my Sunday evening fun.
- Referee Stuart Atwell, making errors again……but why pick my team this time!
My blog in this occasion would be a slight rant about how referee’s should hold a press conference after each game to explain their decisions. This I feel would stop the media criticising them on a regular basis. It would give the referee the chance to put their view of what happened across – therefore humanising their decision and making it easier to understand, and therefore tougher to criticise. But since it is only optional whether a referee speaks to the media, they will constantly be questioned, and picked on for their decisions. In this scenario, Mr Atwell did not explain his decision to either both managers or the press then it becomes very difficult to reason with him or report favourably on him. In my opinion saying nothing is worse than saying something (I obviously would say that as a ‘trainee journalist’). One reason he may not have explained his decisions is that he is the youngest referee in the football league, and may not have had the confidence to explain his ‘mistake’, however he will have been media trained. Having said this I was pleased to see Swedish Ref Martin Hansson admit to getting the late penalty decision against Liverpool in the Champions League wrong (The Sun, 6/11/08), explaining from his position it had looked like Steven Gerrard had been fouled. Whilst this would’ve angered the Atletico Madrid fans, it at least allows the Atletico fans to say they were unlucky not to win, and brings much needed closure to the debate. In my honest opinion I would happily let referee Hansson ref a match which involved a team that were close to me on the basis that he is obviously an honest man who at least tries his hardest to get decisions right. Mr Atwell on the other hand would worry me as he has not been able to explain his actions and therefore makes me wonder whether he has an alterior motive prior to events on the football pitch occuring.
My next blogs will be on more sporting events, with my honest and frank opinions on any ‘controversial’ media reporting, or sporting situations/reactions. They will also be far more in depth without a great introduction at the beginning.
