No Luck For The Irish As They Say Sayonara to Tokyo

Anyone who is a fan of sport knows the highs and the lows you can experience following a team. As a player those highs and lows are more personal and can have a lasting affect.

Last weekend the FIH held their first set of games to finalise qualification for the Olympic Games in Tokyo next year. Obviously for all the athletes involved this is the pinnacle in the sport, it has been their goal since they started playing the game. Five-time world player of the year Jamie Dwyer famously stated that the reason he played hockey rather than cricket – which he was also exceptional at – was because it meant he could go to an Olympic Games.

To decide which teams could book their tickets to Tokyo the highest ranked teams were drawn at home, and played lower ranked teams in two games, with the winner being the team with the higher aggregate score when the scores from both games were added together. Understandably amongst the winners there were some very happy players, coaches and administrators,

On the flip-side there were others left devastated that their dreams had been shattered. Millions in Pakistan, despite their teams limited preparation, were proud of their side drawing 4-4 in the opening game against the Netherlands, but when they lost the second game they were left shattered. This former world power and three-time Olympic Champion would not be attending the Olympics for the second Games in a row.

Possibly the most devastated would be the Ireland Men’s team; a close second may be the Belgium women. Ireland played the first ever Hockey international in 1895, but apart from a silver medal in the sport’s first Olympic appearance in 1908, when Ireland, Scotland, England and Wales all played independently at the London Games, they had been in the Olympic wilderness until 2016.

Underpinned by a competitive league at home Ireland qualified for the Rio Olympics where they finished tenth. Their women’s team then claimed silver at the Women’s World Cup in 2018. Here was a hockey program developing players and a nation with teams on the rise.

It looked like Ireland were headed for Tokyo in their Olympic qualifier against Canada, in Canada. In the first match Ireland had won 3-5, so went into the second match with a two goal advantage. That lead over the two games was stretched to three goals when John McKee scored in the sixth minute. However as you would expect Canada fought back. Goals to Johnston and Scholfield made it 5-6.

In the last thirty seconds Ireland lost possession and Canada went on the attack. Wallace drove into the circle and with three seconds on the clock hit the turf, the ball harmlessly crossed the backline. The hooter sounded for the end of the match. The two on-field umpires signalled for a 16 yard hit out for Ireland and it looked as if they were headed to Tokyo. The Irish started celebrating. However Canada still had a referral; a chance to question an on-field decision with the video umpire. Canadian players immediately the player went to ground ran to the umpire signalling that they wanted a referral.

The two on field umpires were superb and did not panic, they met to discuss whether the ball had crossed the backline before the hooter sounded. New Zealander Gareth Greenfield was heard to say “for me time was up.” Both agreed that they felt that there was no infringement. Greenfield then went on to say that if they (Canada) want to challenge that there was an infringement that his colleague Ben Goentgen from Germany should let them. Goentgen was outstanding in his handling of the situation, calling over the Ireland captain and advising him that Canada “can challenge for whatever they want before the whistle went.”

Jonathan Bell the Captain of Ireland asked that the Video Umpire also to make sure that he can hear the whistle on the replay and whether that came before the hooter or not. Goentgen then explains that “the ball was inside the 23 before the whistle went so they can challenge.” After clarification from Canada who were looking for a “body tackle in the D” Goentgen referred the decision to the video umpire Diego Barbas from Argentina.

After viewing various angles that were not shown on television, or by all accounts at the venue Barbas announced that a Penalty stroke be awarded to Canada. Scott Tupper the veteran Captain of Canada faced David Fitzgerald of Ireland. Fitzgerald dived the right way, but Tupper squeezed the ball past him, and Canada had a lifeline. The game was going to a shoot-out.

As we wrote previously (The Price of Conceding Late) now the advantage was with Canada having scored so late. On Canada’s seventh one-on-one it was left to Adam Froese. The Malaysian-born, Australian-raised player whose father is Canadian did what he did four years ago, he scored the goal that takes Canada to the Olympic Games in a shoot out.

Since then there has been so much written, and so much said about the decision made by Diego Barbas. A great deal of it would appear to be grossly unfair and unnecessarily of a personal nature.

One thing that it has done is raise the issue of Video referral within the game. Hockey was for a time one of the sports that appeared to have the use of this technology right. It certainly had made a better fist of it than football. Now one wonders if it is time to shelve it completely.

First of all it is important to state that Hockey is a far more complex game that Cricket, Football or even Rugby Union. In Cricket when Video Umpiring is used it is usually to check whether a batsman did touch the ball with his bat or glove, whether a catch carried, and whether a batsman made his crease on a run out. All fairly clear cut decisions for a video umpire to make. The LBW decision is a little harder, but this is based on a computerised tracking of the ball and the umpire must base their decision on that. While many hate this technology, it is again not a hard decision for the video umpire to reach.

In Rugby, invariably the video Umpire is used to check foul play, to check that the ball is grounded for a try to be awarded, and to ensure that there were no infringements in the build up to the try, such as a foot in touch or a forward pass. Again fairly straightforward.

Hockey Umpires have a far harder job. For a time they were given the best technology available in order to make these important decisions. Sadly due to the cost, this technology was taken away during the FIH Pro League and Umpires were expected to make important decisions with less camera angles and an inability to be able to zoom in on the alleged infringement. This was unfair on those expected to put their reputation on the line and make vital decisions. One umpire was visibly shaking after having to make one such decision. Upset that they were not given the tools to be able to make a decision that they could be 100% sure of.

In Hockey there are so many rules in relation to infringements, rules that are set in stone, and some that are left to the umpire’s interpretation. Which makes the job of the video umpire that much harder than their counterparts in other sports.

There has long been a suggestion that the video Umpire role in Hockey should be a specialised position. Some have suggested that it should be a role taken on by umpires facing retirement or forced to retire from officiating on the pitch, thereby tapping into years of knowledge. There are some umpires who are exceptional in this role, but understandably they first and foremost they want to officiate on the pitch with the players.

It has been said that this was the first time that Diego Barbas had been given a role as a video Umpire; this we have been unable to confirm. If that was the case should that appointment have been made for such a crucial match?

Unfortunately, and unfairly for Diego Barbas he has been accused of bias towards a team from his own Confederation. Not The Footy Show has been accused of being to blame for this due to the piece written before the Olympic Qualifiers calling for no such appointments. (Neutrality Can Also Help Development) We still stand by that article, that such appointments should not have happened in order to protect officials, such as Diego Barbas.

The big issue in all of this is that the footage that the Video Umpire saw in order to reach his decision was not aired on the live broadcast. It was hard to see if there was a big screen at the venue to keep the paying public informed when the referral was being viewed. Judging by the roar when Barbas announced his decision there was. Which is better than we had in Australia for the Hockeyroos Olympic Qualifier against Russia. When the video referral was used we sat in silence with no big screen and no on-field announcement advising us as to what was happening. (Despite online comments to the contrary, I was there as a spectator and not as the commentator!)

The footage that led to Diego Barbas making the decision he made has not even been put forward by the FIH after the game. Surely in light of all the abuse he has had to cop you would do that to protect one of your umpire’s reputation? These umpires only receive expenses to carry out their duties, they are essentially volunteers, surely they deserve to be backed up by the Governing body?

If the footage that the video umpire saw and on which he based his decision were to be aired, it could change the perceptions that currently exist, it may also help alleviate some of the pain being felt by the Irish players, fans and family members.

So why has it not been shown?

Reports have carried the following statement from the FIH, “Umpires’ decisions are final and, as a general principle, FIH does not comment publicly on individual umpiring decisions.” Is this acceptable at this point in time? Is this why the footage has not been shared?

As two-time FIH World Goalkeeper of the year Irishman David Harte, who missed the game through injury, tweeted “Hockey careers ended, Olympic dreams shattered & years (& years) of nothing but hard work & dedication from all players diminished… Honestly still can’t believe what happened @FIH_Hockey !!! A decision that will carry pain for a lifetime.”

There is the pain of the players, coaches, supporting families but also the pain the game will suffer. Sadly so many of the sport’s funding models around the world are based on Olympic qualification. So Ireland Hockey who have taken great strides in recent years will now have to try and source funding from other quarters to continue their drive to make the nation one of the top ten Hockey teams in the world.

There is a report that Ireland are looking at what appeal processes are open to them. Yet one feels that there will be none. The game is played, the outcome may be dissatisfactory but history will show that results are rarely if ever changed.

Can the sport learn from this situation? To many the big issue now for the sport is where to go with video referral?

If you are not prepared to invest in the best technology for every international tournament to enable those given the role of Video Umpire the ability to make the right decisions, then maybe you are best to shelve video referral. Alternatively you go out and sell sponsorship which covers the cost of that technology. In cricket the most valuable sponsorship slot is on the big screen and the television when a video decision is made, as all eyes are on that company’s logo.

If you are not going to have specialists taking on the role of Video Umpire then maybe it is best to shelve video referral.

If you cannot provide a big screen where the paying public can be a part of the review process, which in turn adds to the drama and excitement of being at a live game, then once again maybe you should shelve video referral.

If you are not going to show the footage on which a decision was made then you definitely should not have Video Referral. It is not meant to be a secret. It is supposed to give clarity, and show that the right decision has been made.

The reason all sports introduced the video referral process was to ensure that the important decisions in important games were correct. That there were no howlers that resulted in teams losing games that they shouldn’t have. The referral system has moved a long way from that.

Ireland will argue for many a day that the system failed them. They lost their referral earlier in the game, but even if they had still had it available that cannot refer a decision that has already been referred. Judging by the outcry Hockey fans it would seem also feel that the system has failed.