Roll or stick

The validity of the decision to leave the roof open at the stadium in Warsaw hosting the Poland vs. England World Cup Qualifier is one for discussion elsewhere. What couldn't be disputed was the action taken by the referee to help him decide whether the surface was playable after heavy rain left water standing in a number of places around the field.

He used the same method used by referees across the world; he went out, in his boots and took a football with him. He tried to replicate the action of the ball during the game by rolling it along the ground, by throwing it in the air to see if it bounced. He threw it with forward spin, back spin and without spin. In the final inspection, he tried to kick the ball without much success.

In each case the ball did not roll as it would do normally during a game, even on a wet surface. That meant that if the game had taken place, players would not be able to pass the ball with any degree of accuracy, nor would the ball be where they expected it to be when they were trying to tackle an opponent nor would it bounce correctly. All of which would have resulted in mistimed tackles which increases the potential for injury and possibly the need for disciplinary action.

So despite what the TV pundits say, the referee followed a sensible course of action to help him decide that the field was not fit. He was bound by competition rules and I believe the pundits showed a lack of respect for the game by behaving in the manner they did. Final point, well done to the Head of the Referee's Committee in Poland for facing up to some aggressive (and unjustified) questioning by the interviewer without losing his cool!