Pass from Vasily Utkin

WHAT IS THE LITTLES THAT SAID?

Judges have recently tried to respond when they are attacked. This new trend has taken root in recent years, this property appeared under the current head of the CFA, Nikolai Levnikov. I remember the pleasure with reading his open letter at the beginning of the year, addressed, it seems, to all people of good will - the letter was designed in such a scanty Soviet style that it seemed that a real writer, a connoisseur of styles, worked on it.

The college of football referees does not take offense. And now on her website hangs a rebuke to the director general of Kuban Maxim Remchukov, whom the CFA accuses of “sweeping criticism” and recalls that Remchukov himself should be interested in improving the quality of arbitration.

What did Remchukov do? And let's think - what can we, outside observers, in principle do for the benefit of our refereeing? Here Remchukov merely said in an interview on the results of the first round that the quality of refereeing in the first division has declined. And he gave a very simple argument: at the moment, there are almost as many complaints about refereeing in the first division as in the entire last year ...

There is nothing to say - the general director of "Kuban" has unbelted. These words in the College of Football Referees are called sweeping criticism. Although, I did not know about this position of this significant organization, I would attribute them to criticism of a calm and reasonable. By the way, absolutely reasoned. By the way, complaints about refereeing are submitted for a reason, these club appeals are responsible, because for each such complaint the club must pay a special fee, which will be returned to the club only if the complaint is substantiated.

WHAT DID NOT RESPOND TO RESIDENTS?

And literally not even a few days pass, when the terrible CFA rebuff to indiscriminate criticism from Krasnodar hung on the site, how the match “Tom” - “Spartak” (M) takes place.

I can’t refrain from detailing the household: during my trip to the World Cup, my house was undergoing repairs, and when I returned, I adjusted my life for several days, so the TV turned on and tuned in for serious work right at the time this famous game began.

In general, I did not miss the most important thing. Because the most important of the football arts for us, of course, is refereeing. No, well, the words of Valery Zhilyaev, which he, as it turns out now, did not speak, - we will omit the words about the “hand of CSKA” that allegedly directed the actions of the young referee Kulalaev. In the end, is it not enough in our football, let’s take it more broadly, of our life, are there such words that everyone heard, but which nobody really spoke? This is a common phenomenon. Another thing is interesting, namely, the origin of the version that refereeing was biased. Not bad, but biased.

Do you know what is curious? If the judge was mistaken more often in one direction than in the other, then this is considered to be a sign of bias in our country. Although, if you look at it, the absolute status quo in errors would lead to strange thoughts. This could be considered such a black joke of a man in black - to bend neatly in half. Because in fact, a bad arbitration, when the judge does not cope with the game, is completely spontaneous. And there is nothing surprising if noticeably less errors accumulate on one side of the error field.

Let's look at the matter from the everyday side. After all, they go to the judges for various reasons. By the way, the question is to Nikolai Levnikov: he himself, interestingly, conducted research, who and why goes to the refereeing? This is not an idle or romantic question.

I recently spoke with one rather high-ranking football leader, who, due to the privacy of the conversation, will not be called here, and he told me that he somehow in his spare time asked about the past of football referees. And I found, for example, that in the length of service of a considerable part of them there are gaps in two, three, or even more years. It’s interesting what people did. What did they live on? Who they worked with. The judicial profession, it also implies transparency and clarity of biography.

I don’t want to say anything bad about the judge, for example, Kayumov, but it was just my interlocutor who cited an example of such an interest. Because for several years between the end of the career of a football player and the beginning of the career of a judge, Kayumov, judging by the documents, did not work anywhere.

WHAT DOES HE WANT TO HEAR LEVNIKOV?

Respecting the private life of each person, nevertheless, in the professional aspect, one cannot but be interested in this. But this is a rhetorical question. In the end, we journalists are not allowed to this kind of information, so we are judged by authoritative opinions.

Let's go back to Pavel Kulalaev. Nikolai Levnikov resolutely dismissed in his speech the very possibility of a judge’s bias. And it’s hard to disagree. Well, imagine: Kulalaev is just beginning to judge. In order to become a professional arbiter, you need to put more than one year of life on this. And so, having reached the destination, only getting into the taste of business, to which he has already given up part of his life - well, is it for sale right there? Well, my friends ... It's just not serious. Could not a man go to judge for some one-time (because if this is suddenly so, then there will be no other case) bribe? What was missing from him at Zhiguli, and he decided to get on this case, becoming a judge?

Here. And the refutation of the version of the bias of Levnikov was limited. That is, in fact, he fought with a windmill. Approximately as in the case of the general director of Kuban. The version of bias itself is not based on anything, it’s zilch - even Valery Zhilyaev took his words back. And even more than he took back, he struck out from life those seconds in which they had spoken themselves. But not to them. Just in his presence, the judges collectively heard this. Well well. Well, what’s the problem?

I read an interview with Pavel Kulalaev in Soviet Sport. You know, one cannot help but be imbued with human sympathy. The guy is tormented completely sincerely. Somehow, human life spontaneously arises before our eyes - a simple guy from the Volga tiny town, many dream of breaking out of which, to find another, interesting and eventful life ... The problem is that a good guy and, probably, a talented judge Pavel Kulalaev ready to work at such a high level. High level of responsibility. And you need to understand first of all how he got there, if a level lower in the first division, the young judge was weeded out according to the results of the first round. This is completely inexplicable.

Nikolai Levnikov and the CFA want substantive and not critical criticism. And they say that the quality of arbitration is in our common interests. But then you need to behave somewhat differently. From the outside, what can we do? We can ask questions. Reflect on the flaws. But the College should work, should not make hasty decisions, should be able to explain the logic of these very decisions.

Instead, she sulks, like a girl whom a cyclist sprinkled on a white bow. And he fights with ghostly rivals, refutes the fact that it is not a refutation - the air that shook is unworthy. If this is work to improve refereeing in Russia, then ...

Vasily UTKIN