Poland : Tahiti - AL KAF (OMN) Senegal : Colombia - OLIVER (ENG) Mexico : Japan - SIEBERT (GER) Ecuador : Italy - MAKHADMEH (JOR) Honduras : Uruguay - GIL MANZANO (ESP) Norway : New Zealand - NGAMBO (COD) Qatar: Ukraine - MARTINEZ (HON) USA : Nigeria - BASTIEN (FRA) Kelly was VAR on the Mexico match. Guess he’s not really being treated as a CONCACAF referee. Fascinating non-PK call in 75’ of this Ecuador match. It was a fist full of shirt, on the player dribbling, and certainly negatively affected a scoring chance. It wasn’t much and maybe not clearly a penalty. Except earlier in the match a similar shirt pull—off-the-ball—was given via VAR. That one was more blatant but had much less of an affect on any scoring chance. And now we are going to have a VC red card via VAR...
Seems to me refereeing U20 WC is to Division II or Division III men as refereeing the actual WC is to Division I. The U20 players throw their bodies around with reckless abandon, go into nearly every challenge with too much force and too little control over their bodies, and they don’t have the skill they think they have. I haven’t actually taken a look but I imagine on average something like 10-15 more fouls are called in these matches than in the regular WC. And cards seem to have much less effect in terms of changing behavior. Referees probably feel likes they are constantly on the edge of losing complete control.
This is the incident from yesterday that had me in shock. Apparently players are allowed to do this at least once in a match now at the FIFA level. https://streamable.com/8qi0f One can only hope that FIFA deems the referee incorrect and the VAR correct. But without active communication of such a determination, a lesson is going to be drawn by many and it’s not a good one.
And here are the two penalty incidents I referenced. The first was given via VAR. The second did not prompt an OFR. https://streamable.com/n3vk0 https://streamable.com/5ddoy This doesn’t surprise me. But I think it shows we have our priorities wrong. The first is blatant, sure. But there was zero chance a goal could be scored. The second hold likely prevented at least a shot on target, if not an OGSO. But because the dribbler got a cross off that deflected on goal, we don’t think much of it. Now that we can use video to prove what happened, that seems backward.
This isn't a VAR issue though, it's a general football issue. If you had reversed these two decision you'd likely have more complaints and people disagreeing with the decisions.
I’m not sure if that’s true anymore. I think in the old days, you’re right. Player plays through it as best he can on a difficult to see infraction and no one is that upset. You’re right. But in the old days, the blatant shirt grabbing off-the-ball rarely got caught either. When it did, you’d get some people begrudgingly accepting it because the player took a risk while others would point to the arbitrary nature of the enforcement and disapprove. Now that the blatant off-the-ball stuff will (theoretically) always be punished, I think that’s going to raise the expectations for the holds that actually affect goal-scoring opportunities. In this case, both incidents would have favored the same team so there’s not a huge outcry. But imagine the scenario where that off-the-ball hold leads to a 1-0 score line and then the on-the-ball hold gets ignored for the other team. How have we achieved anything close to justice? This is where the clearly wrong threshold can run headfirst into the “what football wants” mantra. Are people really going to accept certain penalties because they are blatant (but inconsequential) when the less blatant (but consequential and clear fouls, nonetheless) get ignored in the name of tradition? Maybe. I’m skeptical, though. I get it as a referee based on current instructions and VAR protocols. As a fan, I really don’t like it.
This is the incident you’re talking about, right? https://streamable.com/e62jv No, not a penalty for me. You can make an argument for a foul but you can make an argument for a foul in about 80% of tackles like this. There’s no expectation for a penalty there. Look at the American player’s reaction. He knows the defender won the ball fairly. When you’re down 2-1 with minutes left, that’s not the reaction you get from a captain if he has any belief whatsoever he was fouled.
Panama : France - GONZALEZ CABRERA (URU) Saudi Arabia : Mali - VINCIC (SVN) Portugal : Argentina- ELFATH (USA) South Africa : Korea Republic - GUERRERO (MEX) Kelly VAR with Elfath and team. That’s a marquee assignment for Team North Atlantic. On paper, it’s the one everyone wants in the group stage (potential elimination matches on match day three notwithstanding).
52’ of Norway v New Zealand had a quick free kick with the yellow for the initial foul being shown at the next stoppage, per the new Laws. I’ll try to find a clip tomorrow but it was poorly (and, I believe, improperly) done by the referee. The referee had physically taken the card out and was about to issue it when the NZL attacker realized he had a quick kick opportunity. Referee allowed it. Shot saved. Next restart throw-in and card formally shown. But the appearance of the card in the first place has to make the restart ceremonial—players are looking at the referee at that point and he is acting to command attention. That’s not something you can undo just because there’s a new law change.
Here's the relevant text Once the referee has decided to caution or send off a player, play must not be restarted until the sanction has been administered, unless the non-offending team takes a quick free kick, has a clear goal-scoring opportunity and the referee has not started the disciplinary sanction procedure. I can't imagine how physically pulling the card out of the pocket is anything but the start of the disciplinary sanction procedure.
It was bad. He was talking to a couple players telling them to stop with the card out, then he let it go. It was clear the instinct to stop play kicked in, then his brain realized “oh wait, this can happen now” but before he got to the third piece of the puzzle (card was already out) it was too late. Stuff like this is to be expected with a big new law change, but if you’re FIFA you have to hope it doesn’t happen in the first possible situation and at a FIFA World Cup event. Because to the extent this got seen, it sets the wrong expectations.
Two incidents from Elfath's match that I don't think went well. 56' he stops play for simulation and is about to card the Argentinian attacker for the dive. He goes to the pocket. Then he signals there is a VAR check for the potential penalty in 55' (Portuguese attacker had contact to his head from an opponent off a free kick). After the "check complete," Elfath restarts with a dropped ball to Portugal instead of an IFK. Never gives the yellow card. 84' minute Argentina scores off a crossed free kick, which was steered in from inside the goal area. Parker looks like he runs upfield to signal goal, but then Elfath has his hand in the air while he does the VAR check, so it looks like offside is the call on the field as I never actually see Elfath signal goal. But maybe he did signal goal and was just giving an easily misinterpreted signal for everyone to "wait?" Either way, regardless of what the on-field decision was, I thought the video evidence showed it was offside, so I was confused when the goal was awarded. The big question appeared to be whether or not an Argentina player headed the initial cross before it got to the goal-scorer, and the video I saw sure looks like it did. Perhaps it wasn't conclusive that the goal-scorer was in an OSP at that exact moment? I'm definitely confused. The review took a full 3 minutes, which is a huge amount of time since this is a factual review (VAR-only) and does not require an OFR.
Senegal : Poland - CLAUS (BRA) Colombia : Tahiti - SIEBERT (GER) Ecuador : Mexico - KRUZLIAK (SVK) Italy : Japan - GHORBAL (ALG) Also, from the Qatar-Ukraine match, I thought this tackle was eerily similar to the one Sibiga rescinded after an OFR in MLS. I think FIFA wanted his as red 10 years ago, but I doubt they want it today. That said, it's now two different standards for FIFA (what they want and what they want determined as "clearly wrong") so it's anyone's guess as to whether or not they are happy with the process and result here: https://streamable.com/4tvsy And from the same match, there is only one replay available here but I struggle to figure out how this isn't a penalty via VAR. https://streamable.com/8solx The standards for a VAR intervening feel like they are all over the map at this tournament. MLS has its issues, but a tournament like this demonstrates how important it is to have constant standardized training and weekly matches with VAR. Here you're seeing a bunch of VARs (with varying levels of experience AND different training domestically among the experienced ones) who go through a couple clinics and then have course correction throughout the tournament. It's not a recipe for a strong result. This is why FIFA was probably right to limit the VAR role at World Cup 2018 to about seven main officials. For tournaments, part of me is starting to think that should be the permanent course of action, rather than just a temporary fix during the experimentation phase.
Enjoying your insights MassachusettsRef. That being said, my guess is because it's studs-up on that it's a red? As for the 2nd incident, I agree.
I know why the referee gave it. It's a straight-leg lunge with studs exposed and they are elevated. And like I said, several years ago it was a no-questions-asked red at the FIFA level. But we've got away from that standard. The player avoided the challenge mostly. It was only one leg. The studs came down as the challenge continued. The result wasn't that bad. By the nature of the challenge and what we've been taught for a long time, yes, red is the correct decision. But we're straying away from that at the top level and have been for a few years. Yellow on a challenge like this is accepted at the moment and even preferred in most/many domestic professional competitions. Now that VAR is in place, I'm just not sure what FIFA wants. If red is not preferred here by FIFA, is red clearly wrong enough to warrant VAR intervention? It's a two-step question. And there is a third layer, which is that the VARs aren't as extensively trained as domestic level VARs, so there is more variance at these tournaments in how individual VARs assess "clearly wrong."
Norway : Honduras - BIN JAHARI (SIN) New Zealand : Uruguay - MAKHADMEH (JOR) USA : Qatar - ZITOUNI (TAH) Nigeria : Ukraine - RAPALLINI (ARG) Norway-Honduras is two teams on 0 points where third-placed teams can go through. In other words, both teams need a win to have any hope of advancing. That could be a war, particularly given the traditional behavior of Honduras sides.
ECU - MEX: If after two minutes we can't tell if it's offside, lets stick with the on field decision.
18:31 the ball went in the net. 22:06 the referee communicated that the VAR decided it was offside. 3 minutes and 37 seconds But awarding a goal was "clearly" the wrong decision.