Allardyce's illogical logic on punishing Ronaldo

Big Sam has already won a major battle as Blackburn manager by keeping Roque Santa Cruz at Ewood Park during the January transfer window, and he is doing his best in the battle to keep the club in the Premiership following the unsuccessful tenure of Paul Ince, but one battle he will struggle to win is to convince Sport without Spin, or the FA for that matter, of the flaws in their referral system.

Allardyce and Ferguson watching two different games - Photo Abhijit Tembhekar

Santa Cruz's goal at the weekend was enough only to stop United continuing their frightening record of conceding nothing, and not to score Blackburn any points. Other incidents, Allardyce felt, might have gone Blackburn's way on another day – he referred in particular to a penalty appeal for a challenge on Morten Gamst Pedersen, and a moment of petulance from Cristiano Ronaldo which went unseen and unpunished, but might have led to his dismissal – before he scored the winning goal.

After expressing disappointment and anger in the immediate aftermath, Allardyce's reflection on whether Ronaldo should be punished two days on is bizarre. Here is his argument, as quoted in the Telegraph:

Allardyce said: "The referee should have spotted it, but is it any good to me if the FA take retrospective action? No it isn't. I'd sooner that they take no action against Cristiano Ronaldo than see him punished for it.

"If they take action against him, then it might ultimately be detrimental to me if he's suspended for games against our rivals. If the FA punish Ronaldo, I could be suffering twice for something that the referee didn't see.

"I don't think that is right, but in my opinion, the current system of retrospective punishment is totally and utterly flawed.

"If somebody has done something wrong against us, why should another club get the benefit?
"Maybe they should bring in the technology that allows us to make the decision there and then at the game. Get the right decision straightaway because it then affects both sides involved."

It makes sense, Sam, but only, and this is an enormous proviso, if you don't consider any other factors in the decision-making process.

Let us take as a starting point that Ronaldo would have been found to be in the wrong - something that doesn't appear to have happened, since the Daily Mail suggest the incident is not being reconsidered by the FA.

If Ronaldo is guilty and not punished, then there are no consequences to his breaking the rules of the game. It's hardly a deterrent from doing it again, is it?

If Manchester United do not have a punishment for a player's actions, there again is no incentive for them to tighten their discipline and nor a punishment as they try to secure the Premiership.

Similarly, United's title rivals might be more than a little irate that an important player fails to serve a suspension as they try to close the gap. That might see a repeat of the much-maligned Benitez rant in early January, which everyone could do without.

Allardyce approaches the issue of retrospective action as if he is sitting in a vacuum. Shaun Wright-Phillips is currently serving a three match ban for a similar off-the-ball incident. As it happens, Manchester City and Blackburn don't meet during this time, but if they did, would Allardyce want Wright-Phillips to play, working on the basis that Stoke, the opponents when Wright-Phillips committed the indiscretion, had been punished enough?

Players foul and do illegal things – if you don't catch them on the field (and no matter how good refereeing is or is not, they will never see everything), isn't it wonderful that you can look at a video and deal out some kind of punishment based on concrete evidence? Obviously not if you're Sam Allardyce – it's totally and utterly flawed. No matter that there are more problems with his logic than there are members of his backroom staff.

There's another intriguing angle implicit in Allardyce's assessment – that having Ronaldo on the team is likely to be the difference between Manchester United defeating a team battling relegation and not doing so. So, in order to mete out punishment in as fair a way to Blackburn as possible, Ronaldo should be suspended or not according to how likely he is to take points from Blackburn's rivals. What? How would you go about judging that? Opta Stats? Fantasy League points? If it's the latter, only then would I be inclined to let him go unpunished as well since he's the captain of my fantasy team.

These are the rules as they would be for Ronaldo, but what would Allardyce be proposing if it had been Titus Bramble who had committed the same infringement? Someone who might gift his opponents goals and opportunities – well, thank heavens for all those video replays which catch those nasty perpetrators of misdeeds...

To leave a comment on this article, please scroll down        BOOKMARK THIS -