Can you sue a referee?

halibut2209

Caveat: Not a serious question.

But was just wondering. I had an accumulator bet on today which I lost. No big deal as it was only a couple of pounds. But in the one game I missed (ended as a draw), a late penalty was denied for the team I wanted to win. Replays showed it should have been a penalty, which led me to wondering.

Is there a betting situation where you could take action against an official for making a wrong decision in a match?

What if you bet on no red cards being given, and one was - only for it to be later overturned.

What if you bet on a goal in the first half, only to have a legitimate goal ruled incorrectly offside.

I grant that no action can be taken against the bookies, but what about action against the officials that made an error?

Again, this is not a "serious" request (in that I have no intention of doing anything), but I thought it might be interesting to discuss.

marliepanda

Doubt it as you have no contract with the referee. Could you sue the player who missed a sitter? The player who caused a penalty?

Could clubs use them, if they denied them a trophy and the revenue that would bring? Nope.

Referee discretion will simply be an accepted part of the game.

I wonder if anyone who bet on Lance Armstrong winning the Tour de France got calls from the bookies demanding their money back

halibut2209

I see what you are saying, but what I'm asking about is non-contractual. I'm talking about action against an individual who made a mistake leading to a loss.

Your first paragraph is erroneous and not a like-for-like comparison. I am not asking about suing to alter a result (which is final). I'm asking about suing an official for a loss due to an provable error from said person (A striker missing a shot is not an error. Sending someone off which is then shown to be incorrect IS an error)

Your second paragraph - clubs have indeed sued the FA for such things (I think it was Sheff Utd who got relegated and sued because the other team in the relegation battle - West Ham - had an illegible player)

Your third paragraph - Yes the ref's decision is final when it comes to the game and for the bookies' liability. I'm asking beyond that.

Forth paragraph. That's kind of what I'm saying. Bookies and the like are quite happy to take further action against Armstrong for their losses. Why shouldn't a pundit take action against some responsible for their loss?

marliepanda

There must be something stopping people doing it though, as otherwise no one would want to be a referee if they could be sued.

They would have to take action against the FA I would think, especially as goal line technology is being held back in favour of human judgement, which is of course at times incorrect.

halibut2209

I'd assume that the referee would be covered by FA insurance for an error committed in the course of their duties.

It's an odd one, as football is generally "outside the law". Players fined for whatever reason, 'assaults' only dealt with internally etc. But I'm talking about things outside that bubble. As I said, it's not about changing results or anything like that, but as a 3rd-party punter who has lost out because of an error by someone else.

By placing a bet, you are agreeing to the referee's decisions. So you cannot take action against the bookie. But what if the referee is wrong? What if you bet on 6 offsides being given and only 5 are, but you can prove that a 6th person WAS offside. The officials made an error leading to a financial loss.

pelirocco

Being awarded a penalty doesn't mean a goal would be scored

halibut2209

True, but read what I actually wrote

Crazy_Jamie

The answer is very simple. You have correctly identified that you have no contractual rights against anyone in the game itself because your contract is with the bookies. Your only recourse would therefore be in negligence. In other words, that the referee failed to perform his duties to the standard of a reasonably competent referee in getting that particular decision wrong.

The problem is that the first step in a negligence action is establishing that the Defendant actually owes the Claimant a duty of care. In most cases (such as road traffic accidents) this is a given, but there are some cases where no duty of care exists. This is one of them. The referee is doing his job, and has no input as to bets that are place between third parties. He does not simply owe a duty of care to anyone who may have a financial interest in the outcome of his decisions. So the action falls at the first hurdle because the referee does not owe you a duty of care.

k12479

I agree with Crazy Jamie.

halibut2209 wrote: »

Bookies and the like are quite happy to take further action against Armstrong for their losses.

Also, I'm not sure this is the case, is it? The only references I can find are bookies offering further bets on whether he was going to admit doping or not, nothing about them taking action against anyone.

BobQ

I think that you would have no claim as you are betting within a legal contract. Typically bets are accepted against tightly controlled rules such as

•Where the Specific Sports Rules do not specify how and on what basis a market will be settled, markets will be settled on the official result of the relevant governing body regardless of any subsequent disqualification or amendment to the result (except if an amendment is announced within 24 hours of the initial settlement of the relevant market in order to correct an error in reporting the result).

which means whatever happens during or after the event, the result is determined by the official result however flawed it may have been in your opinion.

halibut2209

Interesting responses, thank you

But there are precedents on seeking legal redress outside of said contracts and businesses. However, I completely agree that this is a non-contractual issue, and it seems as though Crazy Jamie has a very valid point.