Doesn’t Juventus have a long-standing burr in its saddle regarding Collina? I don’t think I would take much of what they say in this instance at face value.
This will help you understand the genesis of the hatred: https://www.nytimes.com/2000/05/15/...erugia-after-sudden-storm-and-long-delay.html Then there was the fact that Collina was one of the only referees who didn't get tainted by the 2006 scandal. From his wikipedia page, for simplicity's sake:
Hi all. Finally made an account after following this forum for quite some time. I primarily follow Serie A referees and Italian media coverage of refereeing. The whole Michael Oliver incident on Wednesday was interesting enough for me to jump into the conversation. For me, when Benatia reaches around the size of Vasquez, he gets the ball. The question becomes- was the initial extended arm enough for a penalty. For me, in the context of the game, I’m not sure it was enough.
Possible but unlikely and even if he did it would have been the slightest of touches.The clip above shows that the ball doesn't change its direction nor does its spin change.
Take a look at this clip. From the angled view (At 0:05) of the video, I don't think we can be sure either way. The ball DOES change direction after Benatia arrives. Note that this is the angle Martin Atkinson (AAR) would have had. To me the definitive clip is the angle that I didn't see on the American FOX broadcast. It was captured by Mediaset (Italian TV), and it comes from directly behind the goal. Based on the clip at 0:27, it is pretty clear that the ball changes direction. I am convinced that Benatia gets the ball, looking at this clip. The discussion for me lies in whether Benatia's outstretched arms constituted a foul before he reached around Vazquez for the ball. In this case, I think Oliver could have been a bit more "contextual" in his refereeing. In the 95' of the first leg, Juventus were denied a clear penalty in Turin. The context of the game conditions our decisions. The game should have been given the chance to go the extra time. Honest question -- I know errors of commission are worse than errors of omission. Would this contact have been so polemicized had it not been called? I honestly can't say. The Italian media are sensationalists, but in this case I find their claims founded. I look forward to taking part in the discussion here. It seems like a great place to learn and grow. I myself am a young referee.
You absolutely cannot ignore something you see as a foul just because one team had bad luck in the other game.
You're seeing what you want to see. It's clear at :17 that the defender's foot/leg wraps around the attacker from behind and makes significant contact with him. Even if he does end up making contact with the ball, which I'm not convinced of, it doesn't matter...it's a foul.
I think I am seeing what seems to be clear from that second angle. To me, Oliver, not Atkinson, makes this call. Given it's Oliver, he must be calling the extended arm of Benatia, because there is no way he can see what happens around Vazquez's body. What is in doubt (and what I can only hope the penalty was called for) , was the initial outstretched arms of Benatia into the back of Vazquez. I can understand interpreting that contact as a foul. I'm not saying I agree with the decision -- but I can at least see how he came to it. It is defensible interpretation. Personally, in the context of the situation, I'm not sure it is enough for a penalty -- but I don't think that's an argument I can sell you on. For academic purposes however, let's set aside the initial "arms to the back". If only the second part of the contact occurred, I really don't think we should have seen a penalty.
It's the only interpretation. It's mind boggling people are even making this a talking point just because it's in stoppage time of a huge game. It's a foul. Period.
As I’ve told others, this is called a foul 10 times of 10 at midfield and no one complains. Just because it occurred in the penalty area doesn’t suddenly change that.
fisch, i am going to go line by line with your posts, since you ask a lot of questions. you haven't been on the board enough, i guess, to know who the authoritative posters are (not me), but you'd be surprised by the empiricism that exists here. i DO NOT speak from lofty authority, so those that do please correct me as you have often done in the past as others have stated, a slight touch in this case does not make the kick not a foul. sure, can discuss events in isolation, for conjecture/discussion's sake. one oft-hashed topic is if the bar for trifling fouls is or should be raised in certain times (late in half or full time) or in certain areas (penalty area, in front of benches). in this case in particular, any test for trifling fails, even if the contact is modest, since benatia's push meant that the attacker could not make a play on a promising ball in. trifling can't have a significant impact on play. if you are saying that oliver should have thought about some sort of "injustice" that occurred in a previous game so that one team gets some sort of free card in the next, well, i would invite you to reconsider that viewpoint in the strongest terms. there's really no one who is going to be more aware of the context of this game than the ref crew- the entire context, not just a few talking points from a recent game. they will have studied previous videos, foul counts, if a player is prone to making a particular type of foul, etc. etc. ad nauseam, and not just pick and choose. why? that statement has no logical or practical basis. refs make a million decisions in a game of both types, and there are just as many key match incidents of one as the other. who cares? the important thing is that is was correct. a million biased opinions are not more legitimate than one unbiased one. the rhetoric put forth by buffon is shockingly stupid from a sporting perspective. i don't know if there has been anything more nuanced in the italian press, but to truly believe they were robbed by oliver is incredibly puerile. one wonders why there is no backlash on benatia. he, after all, is the one who lost the point, concentration, and discipline in the dying moments of a huge game. not oliver. this board will be a huge resource for you. i know it has been for me and countless others. welcome! and participate. i particularly enjoy getting my opinion in on situations presented early before many others have posted, as i don't want my first assessment to be biased by others'. the agreement/disagreement that follows is very enlightening.
Juventus goalkeeper Gianluigi Buffon says he fully stands behind his inflammatory comments made toward referee Michael Oliver after Wednesday's dramatic Champions League defeat to Real Madrid. Buffon questioned the character of the English referee for awarding the late penalty that knocked his club out of the quarterfinals, saying the official had "a garbage bin in the place of a heart." And speaking on Italian television on Saturday, the legendary keeper doubled down on his remarks. "The content remains and I stand by all of it," Buffon said on Mediaset's Le Iene. "I'd say them all again -- maybe with a different type of language." He added: "I don't have to make up for anything, because I am a human being who puts passion, sentiment and anger into what I do. You find a way to speak, right or wrong, that at times can seem excessive -- but this is me, I am Gigi Buffon." ... The goalkeeper also admitted his emotions were still raw after the game when he issued his criticism of Oliver, but he said he didn't hold a grudge against the 33-year-old, instead blaming a lack of experience. "I'm sure Oliver will have a great career in future, but he's too young to officiate a match like that," Buffon added. "A referee with more experience would not have blown his whistle and decided not to become the protagonist of the match. "He would have left it running, turned around and let the two teams fight it out in extra time. Let the pitch do the talking." http://www.espn.com/soccer/juventus...michael-oliver-criticism-i-stand-by-all-of-it
In extra time players get to attach cockfighting spurs to their cleats. And don't you dare think to call a penalty in extra time.
Police are investigating threatening text messages sent to the wife of Premier League referee Michael Oliver. Oliver awarded a last-minute penalty as Real Madrid knocked Juventus out of the Champions League on Wednesday and was criticised by Italian keeper Gianluigi Buffon and some Italian media. BBC Sport understands Oliver's wife Lucy - a Women's Super League referee who also officiates men's non-league football - had her mobile number posted on social media after the game, which led to the abusive texts. Police are also looking into reports of people banging on the front door of the couple's home address and shouting abuse through their letterbox. The elite referee's body, the PGMOL, said it was supporting the Olivers and "condemned the abuse Lucy has received on social media". A spokesman for Twitter confirmed that several offensive tweets reported by Lucy Oliver have been removed for violating its abuse policy. Officers have now deactivated the phone number, although Lucy Oliver's social media account has also been targeted by some supporters. http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/43771452
And the reputation of a once-revered legend takes a further blow by his own doing. Gigi, it was a foul. Had it been Higuain six yards in front of Nevas with Ramos committing the foul, Buffon would be praising Michael Oliver's courage in making the call. Gigi, you used to be a favorite of mine. No more. The actions of these "fans" against the Olivers is sickening. I hope they find the people approaching their home and lock them up. What in the world did Lucy Oliver do to deserve this?
You've pretty much painted the picture perfectly about the quite shocking amount of psycho-analysis going into this whole thing. The emotion surrounding the event is completely overshadowing the very basic point: You need several angles, millisecond, super slo-mo technological benefits to paint the narrative you're looking for because of what the match meant. As another poster mentioned - you're seeing what you want to see. Simply put - this is 100% a foul and nobody should be talking about the context of this game because that is the ONLY thing taking away for exactly what this was.
We need only view again the great Kurosawa film 'Rashomon' to understand why everyone has seen this differently. There is also the great Wim Wenders movie, 'The Goalies Anxiety at the Penalty Kick' but at least Buffon didn't go out and commi9t a heinous crime.
I don't think this merits its own thread, and above MassachusettsRef indicates the occasional domestic match is allowed, so I'm going to put this here. A reminder to wait just a bit on infractions in the penalty area. In today's Copa del Rey final, Sevilla vs. Barcelona, Barcelona was ahead 0-4 when this happened in the 68th minute.
First time that a referee visits the same stadium in two consecutive UEFA club matches ("consecutive" both for the team and for the referee)? Nice prediction!