In the elite series match between Mjøndalen and Ready on 25 January, bandy referee Tarald Moe Bjølseth was driven at the request of a player. The collision had no consequences during the match, but after seeing a video of the incident, the referee reported the relationship to the Bandyforbundet. Bjølseth was not supported by the Sanctions and Protest Committee in the union. He appealed the decision, but this selection did not choose to punish the player either. Christian Førde, leader of the Bandy referees’ association, reacts strongly to that. – We cannot risk life and health on this. We are amateurs who travel around and do this because we think it’s fun, says Førde about the incident. – Convinced that this was done on purpose, Bjølseth says that he did not have a full overview of the situation in the match. But that he was convinced that it had been done deliberately after he saw the video footage of the incident. – With the previous situations in the match, I feel that it was done with premeditation and therefore I am reporting the case, says Bjølseth. REFEREE: Tarald Moe Bjølseth Photo: Camilla Alexandra Lie / news The situations Bjølseth refers to are two expulsions of Mjøndalen’s players earlier in the match. The judge therefore wanted to register the case, so that another party would assess the incident. Førde also believes that the player drove into Bjølseth on purpose. – I am convinced that this was done on purpose. I think the vast majority of people who have played and/or refereed bandy understand that this is not just an accident, says the leader of the Bandy Judges Association. Bjølseth says he respects the result, but that he thinks the selection committee has not made the right assessment: – I question the assessment they have made. It is a physical attack on a referee who is supposed to be a neutral party in the game, and it does not belong in a sports arena. So in that sense, I think they go beyond what is expected of what will happen in a sports arena. Judge Tarald Moe Bjølseth works as a technician at news, but is not editorially connected to news Sport. Fears for safety The incident has led to the referees questioning their own safety on the track. – One becomes more afraid of one’s own safety out there. I do that. I’m not sure what kind of protection a judge has in those situations when things like that happen, says Bjølseth. – We must discuss whether there is a need for some rule changes or clarifications. If what we see in that video is correct – when players get pissed off because some decisions go against them, then I’m scared. Then there is not much protection we can expect, says Førde. JUDGES: National Championship final trio a few years ago. From left: Gjermund Strømnes, Christian Førde, Fredrik Bjørseth. He explains that a similar situation between two players, where one tackles the other from behind or from the “blind side”, would result in a direct red card and a two- to three-game suspension. He thinks it is sad that this is not the case when it comes to judges. Drammens Tidende and Budstikka have previously written about matches that have been canceled and postponed because referees did not want to referee the matches to Mjøndalen after the collision with referee Bjølseth. – We naturally follow the decision from the appeal committee, it is final. Whether someone chooses not to judge certain teams or players is up to the individual. There are probably already properties anyway, says Førde. Expert: Acted in violation of NIF’s law news has shown the decision and the video of the incident to Eirik Monsen, an expert on sports law. He reacts to what he sees and reads: – Based on what I have received, I would say that I am surprised by both decisions. Monsen points out that he does not wish to take sides in the case in question, but gives a more general assessment from his point of view related to the decisions in question. The decision is based on regulations from the Norwegian Sports Confederation (NIF). According to Chapter 11 of NIF’s law, according to Monsen, the incident must have been done with intent or carelessness. Utvala could not ignore the fact that it was an accident, which the player believes it was. Therefore, they did not want to give the player sanctions. Monsen understands little of that rationale. LAWYER: Eirik Monsen. Photo: Bjørnar Ovrebø The lawyer explains that carelessness means that one has acted contrary to the requirement for responsible behaviour, that one should have acted differently or that the action can be blamed. – I can therefore see no basis for one having to prove that the action was done on purpose, as stated in the decision. As I interpret it, someone here has raised the demand for the issue of debt, contrary to NIF’s law, says the expert. He claims that the appeal committee believes that the action must have been done on purpose without authorizing the claim. Neither the section and protest committee nor the appeals committee in the Bandyforbundet have wished to answer questions from news or the criticism from the lawyer. They refer to Stein Pedersen in the Section Board. – These committees work completely independently of the Section Board. We have not been part of the proceedings and therefore cannot say anything about why they have landed as they have, apart from the fact that they have considered all sides of the case and the evidence/explanations that have been presented to them, says Pedersen. He adds that the Section Board has full confidence that the selection committee does its job as well as it can in all cases, but that some cases can be difficult to assess. – In any case, they should have been asked if it went well. Both Mjøndalen and their player believe the incident was an accident. – They have to be responsible for that, we have different perceptions of what is happening. In the situation, I just get scolded by the player and I react to the fact that there has been no question afterwards about how it went, Bjølseth says. – I have been in many tight situations and you get a lot of punching during matches. But I have never experienced and felt myself threatened, physically. It was not a good feeling to go out on the track and judge the second half here. The feeling afterwards was very unpleasant, says the judge. He says he had pain in his ribs for ten days after the incident. – In any case, they should have asked if it went well. It is normal when collisions occur, that you don’t throw shit, but rather ask if everything is going well. And I’m a little surprised by that, says the judge. Neither Mjøndalen nor the player wishes to comment on the incident to news. Because the case is closed.
ttn-69
– We cannot risk life and health – news Sport – Sports news, results and broadcasting schedule
