Bennett is not a candidate. And Diedhiou was the AVAR (Turpin was VAR). But I wouldn't put any of this on the VAR, based on what I know and what I saw.
Sorry, unrelated, but is their a list of candidates out there? Shame about Bennett though. Good referee.
This is the most updated public version: http://refereeingworld.blogspot.com/2017/04/updated-list-of-prospective-referees.html
They will probably send him home after the GS but I do fear that we will see him next year again in Russia.
IMO it's the other way round. A mediocre referee who is being pushed and considered CAF's NO1. I have seen him 4 times and he didn't even impress me once.
In any match the referee takes input from the ARs and 4th following a masscon. USSF has a protocol for this. All 3 other officials were on the pitch breaking up the fights. It is beyond belief that none of them saw anything that deserved a red card. It is very easy to issue at least a couple of red cards after a melee like this. Everyone understands this. Never mind input from VARs. Even Dr. Joe was wanting to see red cards! This was a disgrace at any level and a total failure by the entire crew. Very embarrassing for FIFA and the Referees' Committee after all the pre-tournament hype and especially the Van Basten/Busacca press conference. Just like the last game of a high school or college season, where the players won't be back again, New Zealand knew they were going home so had not much to lose and were frustrated by the Mexican tactics. Marquez is a known factor. All of this points to the referee needing to shut this match down for the last 10 minutes. No easy advantages, no tolerance of misconduct by either side. The man-management theories are thrown out. As a well-known instructor used to say "Just land the plane." This is refereeing 101, really sad that any referee at this level was unable to realize this. PH
If you can, try to catch the first 10 minutes of the match. Durante gave an elbow up high to a Mexican opponent, I think to the neck, around m. 2 or 3--free kick for Mexico, no card for New Zealand. Peralta challenged Durante about a minute later with a two-footed launching challenge, one cleat bottom exposed. Again, free kick no card. Then try to find the incident in the penalty area around m. 27 or 28 involving Wood and Salcedo, which resulted in an injury for the latter.
I think the question of how and when to use VAR is going to be the most difficult issue for FIFA to figure out. In every other sport that uses it (Major League Baseball, the NBA, the NHL, the NFL) this has proven to be the case. Baseball (MLB), Football (NFL), and Hockey (NHL) all utilize a challenge system, where the imperative is on the coach/manager to challenge a decision that he thinks is incorrect. The NFL and NHL also have very limited use of official- initiated challenges, as does the NBA (only used for determining 2 vs 3 pointers and flagrant fouls, but not out-of-bounds calls). The one clear line is that none of the other sports allow them to be used to determine or dispute fouls/penalties. Baseball only uses them for safe/out disputes, hockey to determine if a goal is legitimate, and football primarily on questions of possession or first downs/touchdowns. This would seem to indicate that the wisest course of action for FIFA might be to limit official-initiated challenges, and give managers one challenge per match (which they retain if their challenge is successful and lose if it is not), and which can only be used to dispute offside decisions on goal scoring plays and PK decisions. IMHO, allowing VAR for questions of discipline will lead to chaos.
If VAR isn't going to be used on this stage to correct this "clear and obvious error" It's not ever going to be used for this behavior.
With VAR I would have thought you'd get the referees to defuse the situation and leave the observing to the VAR. Different procedure but workable at that level. But then you need the VAR to actually deal with the incidents that takes place.
Of course, this leaves the question of who was managing the technical areas--particularly after there had already been an ugly incident (handled poorly) between the two coaches in the first half.
I think you're absolutely right here. Yes, and this is a point I made very early on, prior to the experiments going live. Other than the review of flagrant fouls in basketball, no major US sport reviews fouls (rugby obviously reviews fouls via the TMO). But other than offside, really the whole point of review in soccer will be to adjudicate fouls or misconduct. FIFA says it wants to deal with "objective" decisions but even those objective decisions are actually subjective (penalties, red cards) so it has to have this "clear and obvious" standard. There's a reason the NFL doesn't try to figure out what "clear and obvious" pass interference is. I think manager-initiated challenges are a recipe for disaster in soccer, though. Other sports that use them have natural stoppages with time for the coaches to review and get input from additional coaching staff. Soccer is far too heavy on dynamic play to make this work--the opportunity for abuse is glaring as is the likelihood that coaches might just not have enough time to make an informed decision. Moreover, the fact is sometimes there are 3+ penalty claims in one match for a team. The first game where a coach initiated challenge gets turned down for a penalty but then 2 or more penalties that don't get called later in the match can't be reviewed will be the collapse of such a system. I don't love the concept of replay (beyond a very limited scope) and the current VAR system has huge holes, but a coach-initiated process would be far, far worse in my opinion.
For some unknown and inexplicable reason, FIFA is doing an excellent job on taking down any hi-def clips of the mass confrontation. I'll work to get one that will stay here. In the meantime, worth looking at a few earlier clips from the match, courtesy of "DutchRef" on vimeo... Gassama's intervention on the first free kick here is indicative of his presence and management of the match. He intervenes to make it ceremonial, gets ignored, almost gets hit with the ball, and just lets things go. New Zealand got possession, so no one could care or complain in this particular situation. But that's really not the point. Because the perception is that no one could care about what Gassama had to say on something very minor early on, which would lead to problems later. This is the incident that really raised the temperature of the match. Off-the-ball coming together and likely/possibly a foul on the New Zealand attacker. Leads to the Mexican defender dislocating his shoulder from the fall. New Zealand didn't put the ball out but, more importantly in my eyes, neither did Mexico when they had two opportunities to do so. Coaching staff from Mexico blows up and the fourth looks like a useless traffic cop. It's a difficult situation to manage, given how Mexico behaved here (both on and off the field) but the fact that there was no management at all was telling: This is the incident @RedStar91 flagged. A crew of Grade 6s in the US must be able to handle this better than the crew did here: Apparently, this is not a foul, nevermind a red card (or yellow if you want to be generous because of the lack of result). Good thing he had a word with the New Zealand player, though, right? This one is more of a question for the VAR (and an example for the public of what is not "clear and obvious). But the lack of any foul call, which could have been helped by the 4th, leads to the temperature rising in the match as things wound down:
Nevermind, the mass confrontation is up. Enjoy it all in its full glory here: https://vimeo.com/album/4648559/video/222604990
Three different red-cardable actions by Herrera (two-footed tackle, elbow, head butt), all seen by Gassama, and not even a yellow. That's not player management, that's abdication.
MEX-RUS: Al Mirdasi (KSA) NZL-POR: Geiger (USA) Marrufo is AVAR on the Saudi referee. Geiger has his usual team but Ricci as VAR1.
Hockey uses replay to judge goalie interference in the crease, which is just as subjective as many of the soccer calls, and just as important.
An eliminated team against one that might need a result, depending upon the other match. Good opportunity for Geiger and great that he got two matches in the first round (only 3 of 9 referees will). If Mexico can lose to Russia and he performs well, he has to be a candidate for the Final. Al-Mirdasi getting a huge match which could be very difficult. Not sure if that's due to confidence in him or just poor planning.
But that's closer to a difficult offside interpretation in soccer because the positioning issue is black/white (was he in the crease or not) and then there's the subjective component to interference with the opponent. You have a point about subjectivity, but it's still not a foul/penalty because it only results in the goal being waved off and not a 2-minute minor being assessed.
Sure, but if you're comparing reviews in different sports, I think that comparing the amount of subjective calls in general is far more telling than trying to categorize foul/no foul. And the positioning issue isn't black and white anymore in hockey...you can now be in the crease without interfering, or interfere outside of the crease. And yes, that caused all sorts of controversy and confusion in the NHL playoffs this year. Now, back to our regularly scheduled soccer discussion...
The review official in college football reviews every play and has the ability to alert the head ref that a replay is necessary. They also use the review for penalties (specifically to review targeting but I think they can review others as well).
In CFB they review targeting as a foul. And everyone hates because there is absolutely 0 consistency from play to play and game to game.
Today in the CAM-ATL match, Mazic didn't make a decision for what would become Australia's PK, but told the players he was going to wait for the VAR. That seems strange to me. Aren't referees supposed to make a decision, then VAR confirms it, or denies it, or produces no change? What happens if a referee waits for the VAR to signal the foul, but the VAR itself is inconclusive?