Rulings on video examples of what constitutes a foul/penalty should be published to improve decision standardisation

[Carport]

Should referees be encouraged to become more consistent through making public a set of ‘caselaw’ or rulings that include video examples to set the benchmark for what constitutes a foul including a penalty?

The rules state:

A foul is an unfair act by a player, deemed by the referee to contravene the game's laws, that interferes with the active play of the game. Fouls are punished by the award of a direct free kick (possibly a penalty kick) to the opposing team. A list of specific offences that can be fouls are detailed in Law 12 of the Laws of the Game

Direct free kick
A direct free kick is awarded if a player commits any of the following offences against an opponent in a manner considered by the referee to be careless, reckless or using excessive force:
charges
jumps at
kicks or attempts to kick
pushes
strikes or attempts to strike (including head-butt)
tackles or challenges
trips or attempts to trip
If an offence involves contact it is penalised by a direct free kick or penalty kick.

Careless is when a player shows a lack of attention or consideration when making a challenge or acts without precaution. No disciplinary sanction is needed
Reckless is when a player acts with disregard to the danger to, or consequences for, an opponent and must be cautioned
Using excessive force is when a player exceeds the necessary use of force and endangers the safety of an opponent and must be sent off

————————————————————————————————————————

So yesterday:

Did NP challenge Silva?
Yes
Was there contact?
Yes
Was the challenge careless, reckless or use excessive force?
Clearly RE considered it to be one of these, presumably ‘careless’ ( as the others surely don’t apply) but did NP really show a lack of attention or consideration or act without precaution?

As long as we have phrases within the laws such as ‘deemed by’ and ‘considered by’ the referee and the referee remains a human, so we will have the ‘inconsistencies’ so many of us find so irritating.

Thoughts on publishing a set of rulings on video examples?

[piston broke]

I've said for years the laws of the game should be released with video examples.
In particular what is and is not holding from a corner or FK?
What is a studs up challenge?
What is a tackle from behind?
There are many other grey area examples that need clarity.

[Vegas Claret]

who cares about the rules, you must have the longest title to a thread in the history of UTC

[The_Referee]

The difficulty with this is what a lot of people deem as a lack of consistency is in reality just a difference in a persons opinion of what actually happened

An example might be in two games a striker appears to dive in the area to gain a penalty. Both referees do not give a penalty but one striker is booked for diving and one striker is not.

Fans, managers and the media would be critical of the inconsistency of this when the truth could be that both referees would book a striker for diving but in one game the referee thought the player dived and in the other game whilst the referee didnt think it was a foul he also didnt think it was a dive.

Just look at how much you as fans disagree on different incidents and then apply that thought to the fact referees can view an incident differently too