No job for one woman and urges Scots to hire more staff
player if an incident, or an exceptional part of an incident, has been missed by the match official at the time and once three independent experts have all unanimously agreed it constituted a sending off offence.
However, Bean is vehemently opposed to “re-refereeing” games and believes only off-the-ball incidents that have been missed by the referee and his assistants should be looked at once the final whistle has blown.
“What you are essentially doing is re-refereeing the game and I don’t agree with that,” he said. “It isn’t in the spirit of the game, it doesn’t respect the authority of the referee. I am not a fan of retrospective action.
“If we are going to deal with incidents retrospectively and re-referee the game – and effectively a group of football administrators with no experience of playing the game at a professional level are re-refereeing a football game – there must be a high level of consistency about it. And the simple fact is that there isn’t.
“Given the referee’s expertise at professional level, you would expect then to get the decisions right. If he gets it wrong it is a big thing to for a referee to say: ‘I got that wrong, I need to rectify it’. I would suggest he is covering his own reputation.
“Even if you review it, it still comes down to people’s interpretation and opinion. The difference being they can look at it from different angles and in slow motion until they come to a decision.
“In terms of off-the-ball incidents that take place when a referee isn’t watching, like somebody punching another player, then of course there needs to be punishment for that.
“If the referee has failed to apply the laws of the game correctly then it should be him who is dealt with by the football authorities. He should face penalties, suspension from the game or whatever. It shouldn’t just be a player or a club who suffer because of a referee’s incompetence.
“I am firmly of the view, and always have been, that a challenge should be judged by the referee at that time. We shouldn’t be revisiting it. It is a minefield.”