Actually I thought F1 needed to learn from sailing in the Monaco Pit lane speeding fiasco (https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/articles/c6214mp9nv9o).

There was clearly an improper action by the RC equivalent in not measuring speed correctly. In sailing after one person protested the hearing would (or at least should) have included ever driver affected by the error, and redress would have been given to all.  I think it also demonstrates that our process of not altering points scored is superior.  Sailors who have been on the podium aren't demoted and positions aren't changed. One of the drivers affected by that mess up ended up scoring no points and would surely have been given average points as redress. 

What wouldn't a jury give to have the telemetry that F1 stewards have when sorting issues. 

Some thoughts about why sailing is different from [some] other sports.

Ben .. intriguing question.  

So top line question is the intrusion of a head-of-state (HOS) into the process.   In a strange way, USA's loss opens an opportunity for whatever process remains to be free of further influence. 

You are right .. the optics and reality of the entire thing has the potential to taint more than just this event. 

Now .. the President of FIFA is a politician .. certainly based upon past acts ... so the President of FIFA and the HOS of a participating nation are going to talk.  A HOS might even try to pressure the President of FIFA into actions. IMO, FIFA should have stated that it would be inappropriate for that pressure to be conveyed beyond their conversation in any way.  

I've been thinking about the red card and how that maps into sailing.   It's sort'a like both a black-flag penalty plus a RRS 69 penalty rolled into one.   The black-flag DSQ'ing the boat for that race and the 69 excluding them in future races.  

During the game in which the  incident occurred, the player was excluded and the team was forced to play with a man-down for the remainder.  That penalty was applied and there was no taking it back.  That's the black-flag DSQ in the incident-event. 

The 69-equivalent penalty is the one in question.  During the game, there was no 69-type hearing ... but the ref did review the footage available before rendering their decision (it was not an instantaneous decision in real-time .. but rather a considered one after careful review of the avail video evidence.)

That decision was over turned .. with a basis still unknown.  I think our best equivalent in sailing would map to a Request for Redress or a Request to Reopen .. both with the claim that there was a serious error made in the application of the rules. 

If we think the reversal-hearing was more like a R4R, in the USA, all competitors would have been given the opp to be made parties to that hearing.  Given that chance, certainly BEL and the most/all teams would have elected to do so. 

Next, BEL "appeals" that reversal decision and is denied based upon not being a party.  BEL's standing as a party would have been established with the process above for R4R (in the USA).  

Now.. if we think the reversal decision is closer to a request to reopen ... then BEL and other teams can't be made a party to that hearing.  

All that said, I started by suggesting the future-game suspension is more like a 69 result (suspension from 1 or more future events or for a period of time).   I don't see a way to make BEL a party to the 69 hearing.  Therefore .. BEL would not have standing to appeal the 69 decision if it was in sailing.  

That's what I came up with. Please correct me here as I was just thinking through it for the first time and I am eager to learn.  

If redress is suggested for soccer (football) calls it should be performed by professional (expert) judges and scholars of the game, not by non-pros, especially those politically connected with the head of the parent organization. In sailing we fight for ratings, courses, class splits and in most cases leave the final rules minutiae to those best equipped to render decisions. In one experience as PRO, I had to attend a hearing in which I made a bad call and had to present my side of the argument, be sequestered, listen to the other side and sit there in a conference room with egg all over my face. There was another PRO in attendance, a club BOD officer and two judges. The point I make is there was no 'higher-up' to bail me out; no amount of money would have influenced the judges' decision. 'Fallout' from this action was temporary. We all lived to sail and judge and PRO another day. In soccer (football), F1 and most other mega-sized international sports an unfortunate byproduct is that 'he who has the gold makes the rules.' When a head of state with no expertise can't abide by a decision by an official and intervenes it brings up credibility issues of international consequence. 

John rightly points out some uniqueness of sailing vs other sports.  While his observations may account for some of the differences, I don't think they are all.

Certainly, the scale of money (and therefore pressure) relating to one single point is way out of proportion.  In no other sport does one single play have that potential.  And yes, the nature of sailing means that our disputes are better sorted out after the game.  Andy's point on 'gold' rings true.

I am not sure that the 'contact' nature is necessarily relevant.  Rugby has a robust dispute resolution system and is arguably as contact as you can get.  Rugby dispute handling both on and off the team is based around respect and openness.

So, I do think that football needs to look carefully inwards.

As for the red card issue, I must be honest, I don't really understand the mechanism by which the decision was reversed.   I have read the disciplinary code and still don't really understand.  My only thought is how can there be even a pathway to such poor optics in a world sport like this.

Hmm.. 

John,

I appreciate your point.  Rugby has a number of differnt penalty types which the referee can choose from.  Perhaps its easier to find one which fits the crime.

There isn't really any specific issue. 

Aside from just a bit of 'something different in this forum', I suppose my post is as much a highlight of the strength of the sailing system  as  it is a comment on football (and other sports) clear shortcomings.  A thankful comparrison with other sports. i.e. Let's be grateful for what we have got with the RRS and sport of sailing in general.  It could be worse.  Let's not let it be worse.

Football is a remarkable sport.... which I hate.  I played football at school and enjoy watching a good game.   Then found rugby, and never looked back.

It's not the game I hate.  Its the people and the ethos.  It's the attitude which goes with it.  I have just spent 2 hours watching the Columbia v Swiss match.  2 hours of players diving to the floor then rolling around until they get a penalty or not, then getting up and playing on.  Players and coaches in the face of the referee if the decision doesn't go their way. The recent red card reversal incident shows that the problem is top-down. Systemic.

As a teacher of youth sports , football is one of the hardest problems to deal with.  Is football a good game? Yes.  Is it a good sport?  It's terrible. How to nurture the next generation of sports people with the current generation of footballers managers, coaches and fans as their mentors?

So, my issue is generic and whole and multifasceted.  My love for sports tested and strained here, but strenghtened there.

At the same time, I'm intrigued at the technical designs of sports.  If billions of dollars can be decided on one point and if one point can be decided by one play or theatrical act or referee's whistle is it inevitable that we will get all the baggage with the sport?  Then perhaps the sport has a problem - or is that the attaction?

I have often imagined what changes to football might be enough to chnage the game for the better.  More ways to score? Varied points for goals scored from different distances - one pt for in the box, 2 for in the area and 3 pts for shots outside the area?  Greater penalty for dissent? 10 meter advance for every arugment the referee needs to have after a decision.  Football was slow to adopt any sideline video refereeing and seems to have totally not learnt from the sports which had similar before them, because the VAR in football is probably the most contrversial video ref of any sport.

As I said while keeping politics out of the fray, I posted this without a single specific point.  Anyone weloome to comment on anything which loosly fits.

The winner of the America's Cup gets to write the rules for the next event!
Thankfully World Sailing has not gone down that slippery path.
The AC is probably as close as we get to F1 and other professional sports.
"Vive la différence"

My 2cents:  

EU Football (soccer over here) has had altercations that crippled players for life. The Red Card didn't get invented by someone who was just fooling around thinking that the sport needed another rule. The game, as played, needs that penalty to be sever and effective. A  detailed review of various photo and video sources shows that the call was well justified. My opinion: the call was exactly correct and it was against my country's team.

Sadly, this sport (and others) would be far better served if it explicitly stated that there was no way to overturn the official on the field except for proven bias or corruption on the part of that official. For obvious reasons, many of us in the USA are appalled that there was any way that a sports executive with a horrific reputation would overrule the official because of a phone call from another executive with a horrific reputation.

Sadly, the level of corruption in sport and other fields seems to go up as the square of the dollars involved.