Confederation Cup 2017 Referees

Discussion in 'Referee' started by MassachusettsRef, Apr 27, 2017.

  1. greek ref

    greek ref Member

    Feb 27, 2013
    Club:
    Panathinaikos Athens
    Nat'l Team:
    Greece
    You can't restart play until the review process is completed. And the ball has to be out of play in order to review an incident or the referee has to stop the match himself.
     
  2. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    All of this is already happening and it's not a problem (at least for most people, it seems). For the type of incidents you're talking about the VAR is only initiating a review if he thinks the CR clearly got it wrong. And then, as we saw today, the refreee takes an on-field-review (OFR) and has a second look himself. So for a penalty to be awarded the referee has to agree he got it wrong.

    That prevents the VAR from refereeing the game (though of course he is the gate keeper to what merits a second look). I think it's a bit weird in the sense that it's telling the world that two FIFA refeeees disagree when the CR opts not to overturn his call, but that's a nuance that perhaps only referees will pick up on.
     
  3. TxSooner

    TxSooner Member

    Aug 12, 2011
    Club:
    FC Dallas
    No matter what the official process for the VAR says, in practice, based upon what we've seen in this tournament, there appears to be two standards at play for the "subjective" calls that warrant an OFR. One standard, something far less than "clear and obvious", is used to convince the CR that something appeared to be missed at first glance, and stopping play for a further review is warranted.

    And then there is the so called "clear and obvious" one to actually change a call.

    Otherwise, I'd expect near unanimous agreement among those people who have earned a FIFA badge that a call on the field was obviously wrong, meaning anytime an OFR is used, we should expect a call to be changed nearly 100% of the time.
     
  4. frankieboylampard

    Mar 7, 2016
    USA
    Club:
    Chelsea FC
    Nat'l Team:
    Spain
    I'm surprised no one spoke about the incident in the New Zealand v. Portugal match. The off the ball incident where the Portugal player attempted to strike the New Zealand player.
     
  5. Mark Edwards

    Mark Edwards New Member

    Jun 7, 2017
    Just a counter opinion about the Penalty shout, I don't think it is one. Not every contact is a foul, and in this case it looks like the Russian player knows he's surrounded, and decides to stop and get run over for the penalty. He stops and just gets a light tap at most.

    Take that for what it's worth, VAR isn't meant to look with a magnifying glass to determine the slightest bit of contact. It isn't a foul at full speed, or outside the area, shouldn't be a foul on replay or inside the area.

    Also I'm seeing a lot of positive opinions about this referees performance from fans.
     
  6. ifsteve

    ifsteve Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Jul 7, 2013
    MS and ID
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    As far as I am concerned the center missed two PKs in the Russia - Mex game and game an incorrect red card. Crappy job and to say the foul in the box that was reviewed was trifling is silly. Thats a foul anywhere on the field. Where does FIFA find these bozos?
     
  7. Mark Edwards

    Mark Edwards New Member

    Jun 7, 2017
    It was a bit of a devils advocate argument but it's how I felt. Do you want to flesh out your argument a bit more though?
     
  8. ifsteve

    ifsteve Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Jul 7, 2013
    MS and ID
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Mark, here is why that is a PK. Well in my book anyway since clearly that "ref" didn't think so.
    1. The attacking player has a direct path to the ball. The ball is not going out the endline.
    2. The defender is behind the attacking player and has no position to play the ball.
    3. The defender knees the attacking player in the back of the left leg causing the attacker to stumble. Was the contact hard? Nope it wasn't. Did it appear to be intentional. Nope it didn't. But that isn't the rule.

    So I call that a foul in the area and award the PK. Now on my side with that position -

    4. The review officials clearly thought it was a PK or they wouldn't have called to the center to look at the replay.
    5. The announcers in the booth and Fox' "expert" in Dr. Joe all thought it was a PK.

    Frankly, I don't see how anybody can conclude it wasn't a PK. If the ball was so far in front of the player that he clearly had no chance to get to it then perhaps I could see letting it go. Not in this case. That was a dangerous opportunity for Russia and should be called......

    All IMHO of course......:D
     
  9. socal lurker

    socal lurker Member+

    May 30, 2009
    The attacker seems to exaggerate the contact. If that's what the referee saw in live action, I can see how he could review the play and see the same thing he saw initially -- trifling contact followed by a five not quite bad enough to caution. Or at least think it was not clear and obvious that initial reaction was wrong. Confirmation bias can have a strong effect (just read the papers these days ....).
     
  10. Bluegoose951

    Bluegoose951 Member

    Jan 10, 2017
    Regardless of certain details that need to be corrected, the VAR is incontrovertible proof that we have given soccer referees a job that they are physically unable to perform at acceptable standards. There is no other major sport that has given refereeing less resources in a game where a single decision can have the biggest impact.

    The fact that there are still people that do not want replay in the game is ridiculous.
     
    JasonMa and ifsteve repped this.
  11. mfw13

    mfw13 Member+

    Jul 19, 2003
    Seattle
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    Exactly.

    The problem is twofold....first, who has the ultimate authority over the match, the on-field referee or the VAR? If the referee disagrees with the VAR, whose judgement stands?

    Second, soccer rules are filled with gray areas....very few things are black-and-white enough to make a definitive judgment. For example:

    Is a foul deserving of a yellow card or a red card? You saw issues relating to this today in both the AUS-CHI match and the GER-CMR match.

    Is contact in the box severe enough to be called a foul and therefore a PK? Again, a gray area in which two perfectly competent officials may disagree. If the on-field official and the VAR disgaree, whose judgment stands?

    Or how about a handball incident leading to a PK, in which there is disagreement over whether or not it was ball-to-hand or hand-to-ball. Or whether or not the defender's arm/hand was/was not within the frame of his body? Or whether or not the defender had enough time to get his hand/arm out of the way when the ball is played into him at close range with little reaction time.

    All these situations are gray areas in which the on-field official and VAR may disagree. Right now it seems as if the judgment of the VAR always supersedes that of the on-field official, and I'm not sure that should be the case.
     
  12. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Agreed 100%. Today might have been the day the mask came off and we really saw some of the huge potential problems. VAR doesn't change a yellow to a red in the Australia match, but it does in the Cameroon one. Both SFP. Both probably classroom reds, but both have some level of subjectivity. In fact the Cahill challenge might have been worse. The result? Inconsistent. And now we have more debate and more controversy than we would have without VAR.

    Moreover, the red for Cameroon was horribly managed. Explain how our sport is better with this:



    The U20s showed some promise. This tournament has been awful. VAR is not ready and the World Cup is going to be negatively affected unless the experiment is altered.


    But here I completely disagree. In fact, you're just factually wrong. The referee's judgment is always winning out precisely because that's how the system is designed. The VAR is the gatekeeper on what gets reviewed and that is important but once the OFRs are initiated, it's the referee making the decision. Not sure why you're believing otherwise. Can you point to a situation (outside offside situations or Gassama's disaster, where he simply ignored two cards initially) where the VAR has made a decision that changes the on-field call? Even in the horrendous situation above, Roldan went back to the monitor to confirm he had mistakenly sent off the wrong player and didn't just take the VAR's word for it.
     
    greek ref, JasonMa, RedStar91 and 3 others repped this.
  13. Mark Edwards

    Mark Edwards New Member

    Jun 7, 2017
    Today is Tim Cahills One Hundredth appearance for Australia.
     
  14. RedStar91

    RedStar91 Member+

    Sep 7, 2011
    Club:
    FK Crvena Zvezda Beograd
    Agreed, this has been my first full on exposure to the VAR and I think it's been a total disaster. I really don't think it has added anything positive at all. It has ruined my enjoyment of the game and slowed the game down. I'm okay with that as long as they are getting the calls right. But half the time, they are not.

    The whole point of the VAR is so the referees do not become the story of the game, but it has had the exact opposite effect. That's all anyone is talking about. The VAR.

    Even the decisions that they ended up changing and getting "right" were marginal offside calls. They disallowed a couple of goals that were off a by less than a yard. Some were even half a yard. I don't think anybody would have really complained prior to VAR. The public has finally come to accept that ARs will sometimes miss those goals because of trying to promote attacking play.

    I don't know how they didn't award a PK in the Russia vs. Mexico game. It's a foul and a penalty kick. If he did give it initially, it's not getting overturned by VAR. I understand "clear and obvious" is a factor, but, you need to get the decision right if you're going to review and waste everyone's time. At the end of the day it is a foul. If you're going to waste everyone's time, get the decision right.

    As for the Cameroon red card, I guess they got it right, but there have multiple or similar challenges like that all tournament and none were upgraded to a red.



    You had this and not even a yellow card given.

    In Geiger's match yesterday, a Portuguese player got raked in the face by a New Zealand player after the whistle blew and no card was even issued. No VAR used.

    In that same match, you had a player take multiple swings at another player off the ball and no card given and no review given. The MLS AR that posts on here occasionally went on social media and labeled it a "world class" performance, but that's another topic for another day.

    It's going to be a debacle in MLS. The camera angles aren't as good and the players are so much more ill-disciplined than what we see in Russia.
     
  15. mfw13

    mfw13 Member+

    Jul 19, 2003
    Seattle
    Club:
    Newcastle United FC
    I guess my point is that since outside observers not privy to the discussions between the on-field referee and the VAR, we don't actually know whose judgment actually prevails.

    What we see on the broadcast is "this is what was decided after consulting with the VAR", which is different from "this is the decision of the referee" or "this is the decision of the VAR". We're only told the final decision, not how it was arrived at.
     
  16. ifsteve

    ifsteve Member+

    Manchester United
    United States
    Jul 7, 2013
    MS and ID
    Club:
    Real Salt Lake
    Nat'l Team:
    United States

    The implementation has clearly left something to be desired. And in every sport (although this amazes me) they still seem to have too many times when they review something and still don't get it right. But that doesn't mean you throw out the replay. It will get better. It will get faster. And it WILL lead to getting more critical calls right.

    As to your comment on the offsides. Total disagree here. What the hell is "a half yard" nobody is going to complain. Bull crap. I will complain all day. As a retired keeper. I wan't the defense to play it correctly. A half yard IS offside. Period. If there is daylight between the players torso then they are offside. End of story.
     
  17. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #142 MassachusettsRef, Jun 26, 2017
    Last edited: Jun 26, 2017
    You're kidding, right? If anything, it could have been straight red instead of a 2CT:



    You're new here. In this forum we have a higher standard of debate and discussion than elsewhere. You're welcome to express your opinion if you support it in the Laws and with evidence. Blanket assertions and ad hominem attacks are not welcome, though. Thanks in advance for complying.
     
  18. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I always said this was going to be an issue. We've taken subjective decisions, called them "objective," allowed a second referee to review them to the point that they can suggest they were decided wrongly, and then give the referee a second chance at the call. I don't see how that stops controversy and we're seeing exactly how it creates more. And it leads to things like 3-4 minute delays (at a time when FIFA is simultaneously saying stoppage time needs to be calculated better--look how laughable that assertion ended up being at this tournament!) and completely disrupts the flow and enjoyment of the game, as you've pointed out.

    I understand completely the need to get things right such as atrociously wrong offside decisions, clear dives that result in penalties and horrible missed red card challenges (like De Jong). But I just don't see how you address the latter two types of play without opening up a huge can of worms with marginal penalty decisions and the proverbial "orange card" also being re-refereed. People--even FIFA qualified referees--have different opinions on borderline penalties and borderline red cards. FIFA has implicitly acknowledged this by trying to instill a "clear and obvious" standard but even that is in the eye of the beholder (see no Australia red card vs. Cameroon red card). It's not that replay has failed so far, because it has saved a couple of objectively wrong calls in the last two FIFA tournaments. There is a use and, I would say, a need. But the experiment itself is not working overall. And since it is an experiment, it should be altered before too many domestic leagues institute it in the fall and it should be shelved before the World Cup. But we know that neither one of those things is going to happen.

    I know we're in the minority, but I agree here. The "clear and obvious" standard should also apply to offside. We're putting a little too much faith here in technology. It's not like tennis where there are actual lines drawn out and we are just seeing if the ball was in our out. In soccer, we have to trust the Hawkeye lines are correctly drawn perpendicular to the touch line (and trust the field is actually a perfect rectangle) and trust the freeze frame was stopped at the exact last moment the relevant player touched the ball. That's a lot of variables and I have no idea what the margin of error is in centimeters, but I know there is one. Is it 0.05 centimeters? 0.07? 0.01?

    I'm torn here. Part of me thinks it will be better implemented in MLS, part of me doesn't.

    In favor of better implementation is the fact that trials have been going on for a year in the United States, with a dedicated boss (Webb) on board in 2017. Note how it's gone better in the Netherlands, where there have been trials for awhile, versus at FIFA tournaments, where officials are getting a one-week crash course after a brief seminar in Italy. The officials who work MLS VAR are going to be better trained than the ones who work FIFA tournaments, which is a plus.

    On the other hand, of course, are the two points you raise about fewer camera angles and less disciplined players. There also is the issue of needing VARs for 10+ games a week and figuring out who works these matches once every game has VAR. Is a PRO-trained MLS veteran FIFA Referee going to have as much respect for a Grade 3 VAR who has never been on an MLS match as he will for a colleague?
     
  19. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    For assignments going forward, I imagine there are two paths. The first is that confederational neutrality is scrapped. In that case I think Skomina and Mazic gets semis, while Pitana gets the final.

    The alternative, where neutrality holds, probably means Pitana for GER-MEX and Faghani for POR-CHI. That would leave Skomina for a GER-POR or MEX-CHI (though Mazic could get that, too) final, Geiger for GER-CHI and I have no idea who would get a MEX-POR match. Gassama and Roldan essentially being toxic and UEFA referees + Geiger being eliminated would really put Busacca in a bind at that point. Al-Mirdasi would be the only option and he was not very good, so maybe Pitana gets repeated? It's one of the reasons I think neutrality is probably going to be scrapped.
     
    greek ref repped this.
  20. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Speaking of De Jong, isn't this pretty much the same play, except the Mexican attacker is able to turn to blunt the force of the foul? If we're turning yellows into SFP reds, I've got this near the top of the list:

     
  21. Alberto

    Alberto Member+

    Feb 28, 2000
    Northern, New Jersey
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Don't know if this was previously posted, but I found it to be an interesting document from the IFAB.

    http://www.knvb.nl/downloads/bestand/9844/var-handbook-summary

    While there have been hiccups and some decisions were initially wrong, but later corrected, the wrong Cameroon player was sent off, generally the flow of the game has been maintained. Stoppages have been relatively short. So as an experiment in it's first year I see it as promising. I am a big proponent in getting the calls right. If it leads to this end and match flow is not impacted negatively with unusually long stoppages I can live with it.
     
  22. Alberto

    Alberto Member+

    Feb 28, 2000
    Northern, New Jersey
    Club:
    New York Red Bulls
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The fact the Mexican player is able to turn and not take the cleat on his torso changes the decision for me. Zhirkov also does not go in with the force of Nigel De Jong. Clear yellow, bordering on orange. It depends on the temperature of the match.
     
    tomek75 and usaref repped this.
  23. greek ref

    greek ref Member

    Feb 27, 2013
    Club:
    Panathinaikos Athens
    Nat'l Team:
    Greece
    If they keep conf. neutrality, then Geiger will definitely get a SF. The other one could go to Pitana. An UEFA final could see Skomina with Al Mirdasi perhaps on the 3/4 place match.
     
  24. MassachusettsRef

    MassachusettsRef Moderator
    Staff Member

    Apr 30, 2001
    Washington, DC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    You think Geiger would see Portugal in back-to-back matches? Was he that much better than Faghani from your perspective?

    Regardless, seems noteworthy that assignments for the first semifinal didn't come out today. FIFA practice has been 48-hours recently.
     
  25. Cliveworshipper

    Cliveworshipper Member+

    Dec 3, 2006

    Can you explain how FIFA has been keeping Confederation neutrality?

    In the last WC, Argentina played four UEFA teams in the KO rounds (Switzerland, Belgium,Netherlands, Germany).

    The referees for those matches were Eriksson(Sweden), Rizzoli (Italy), Cakir(Turkey), and Rizzoli again.
     
    Reccossu repped this.

Share This Page