Zidane’s Last Red Card

Zidane’s last red card Introduction Business organizations and associations formulate regulations that govern their members’ conducts. Implementationof such rules depends on the organizations provisions subject to consistency with rule of law and natural justice. These organizations however sometimes chose to ignore their regulations, as FIFA ignored its regulations that would ensure harsh punishments against Zidane, Materazzi and their team following allegations of contempt and violence in a world cup final match. This paper seeks to explore implications of FIFA’s failure to implement its regulations. The paper also explores the advantages and disadvantages of an institution ignoring its regulations.
The sense in FIFA having offensive behavior regulations that it effectively ignores
It does not make sense for FIFA to have an offensive behavior regulation that they effectively ignore. This is because rules and regulations are sets of guidelines that regulate conducts in an organization or association. It is one of the sources of law, applicable under trade and customs, if the regulations are consistent with written law and natural justice. The rules therefore serve the same purpose as the law, at least within the organization’s jurisdiction. FIFA’s regulations are therefore aimed at achieving such objectives as maintaining order in football matches, molding behavior, and ensuring that its subjects are treated equally. A move to compromise these purposes of the regulations therefore renders them meaningless and their creation unnecessary (Jennings, 2010, p. 6, 7).
Advantages of an organization having a regulation that it ignores
One of the advantages of an organization having regulations that it can ignore is the ability to preserve its ‘self-interest’. The regulations, especially in cases of internal conflicts where the parties submit to resolutions, can solve a dispute without interference from legal systems. Such rules therefore facilitate reconciliatory processes for organization’s stability. The ability to ignore a regulation also helps an organization to protect its image before the public. This is because even though the regulation may have good intentions, the public may not understand its implementation. Another advantage of the avoidable regulations is that their compromise leads to solutions that cannot be achieved through strict implementation of rules. Such types of problems include disputes with political significance (Bercovitch, Dean and Jackson, 2009, p. 57).
Disadvantages of an organization having a regulation that it ignores
One of the disadvantages of having rules that can be ignored is that it can highly compromise justice. This is because it leads to partiality. Parties to the organization may also lose confidence in the organization’s commitment to regulate its members’ conducts, something that may lead to adverse lack of order. Perceived partiality in implementation of the regulations may also discourage members commitment leading to mobility to alternative organizations, if available (Bercovitch, Dean and Jackson, 2009, p. 57, 58).
While evidence based on the players’ testimonies identified contemptuous treatment and violence, offences that are governed by FIFA’s regulations, the rules were ignored and neither of the players nor their teams lost their rewards from the match. Even though it does not make sense to formulate a regulation and later ignore it, such a move has a number of advantages such as protecting an organization’s interest and preservings harmony and image. It, however also have identifiable disadvantages such as injustice.
Bercovitch, J., Dean, R. and Jackson, W. (2009). Conflict Resolution in the Twenty-first Century: Principles, Methods, and Approaches. Michigan, MI: University of Michigan Press
Jennings, M. (2010). Business: Its Legal, Ethical, and Global Environment. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning