Don't buy this at all. Zwayer is trying to get to the WC Final like everyone else and he's being assessed on how he performs. Not correcting what his training tells him is a clearly wrong error not only hurts him, but hurts Brych as well. Plus Zwayer and Brych have been working with VAR for 18 months or so--they've become very accustomed to it and there should be no ego issue at play. Look at MLS where plenty of younger referees have had no problem telling Stott or Toledo or Grajeda that they are wrong. EDIT to add that I say this as someone who used to buy an argument like this prior to the VAR experiment getting started. So I know where you're coming from. But I just don't think it applies at this level for the reasons I laid out.
If ever there were a time for a defender to take a red card for DOGSO oustide the PA, that was the time.
Given the strong German ties with Switzerland, and Serbia loss, you know that FIFA is going to have a lot of explaining to do after that non-PK call and subsequent silence from VAR.
Stop. FIFA assigned perhaps the best referee in the world to an all European match. Serbian complaints will go no where and FIFA will have nothing to explain.
No they won't. Whether it was right or wrong, there will be no explaining. There may be complaining, but you act as if this is the first team ever feel aggrieved by a non-call. It happens every WC and guess what, life goes on.
That was never going to being given via VAR. It is what it is. What VAR has done is highlight more of these situations than before. Before the incident would be a minor footnote in the game. Everyone would say "that's a penalty, but I can see why he's given the foul coming out." The whole story of the game and the analysis of the game is, why wasn't that given? The more interesting situation is the 2CT to Matic that he refused to give. He's given 2CT red cards in CL games for way less. I really don't think we're going to see a 2CT red card in this tournament. If Brych won't give one, I doubt anyone else will. It's pretty obvious that there is an instruction to avoid red cards at this tournament, especially 2CTs.
Wait, why wouldn't the VR intervene if it was a clear and obvious missed call? Because it was unlikely that Byrch missed it in the first instance?
Complaints about an referee interpretation/opinion are always final. Only a misapplication of the law can lead to a match replayed. It happened during an Asian playoff for the 2006 World Cup. Had Graham Polls 3 yellows changed the result of the match/group, that game probably would have been replayed.
The more I watch it, the more I can understand why the VAR didn't get involved. The really clear rugby tackle occurred after the forearm to the face, which Brych called. I can't find anything before that where the VAR can say that should be a PK based on the standard set at this World Cup. Like it or not, the high bar was set for holding fouls and it's been consistently applied.
Feel like the same answer works for both these statements/questions. Zwayer believing a penalty is the preferred call is not the standard to send it down. Zwayer even saying "well, I would have called a penalty on this" isn't even the standard. It has to meet a threshold of being clearly wrong and David Elleray (who runs the IFAB) once said that the definition of that standard is 95 out of 100 people in football would say the call had to be overturned. So while that's not the official instruction, obviously, it's been a guiding principle throughout the implementation of VR. Now, you can debate all day whether you think you can find 6 people who would say either "yeah, he got that right" or "meh, everyone was grabbing so it's not clearly wrong to say it wasn't a penalty." My guess is you could, but that's really beside the point. The point is that the threshold is extraordinarily high, as we've seen. Too high for people here, it is clear. The judgment on the success of VR will be rendered after this tournament, but it's hard to argue its application has been inconsistent on aerial challenges.
All I want to know, did anybody mimic a U 14 parent sideline when the breakaway for the final goal happened? He had to be 5 yards past the last offender when the ball got there, but he started his run in his own half to begin with!!
I'll admit, my first instinct was that they were going to VAR on it. On the replay though it was clear.
Higher level thinking should occur here. The center back MUST take Shaqiri down and take the red card. With such limited time remaining Serbia's chance to advance is much higher to take the red and give up a free kick and play down a man for a few minutes than to let Shaqiri waltz into the box.
I think you guys need to watch it one more time. He had to desperately lunge at the end of the play to try to stop the shot and he still wasn't close enough. Though I completely agree with your arguments, I also don't believe he was ever close enough to be sure that he could take the foul before entering the penalty aera.
Agree. It's not really until this point that he could probably make an American football style diving tackle, but it's really tough to be sure that it wouldn't carry into the penalty area.
Well we can disagree that he may or may not have been able to dive and reach out and tackle him. I have looked this over and still think it was by far his best chance. But the way he played it he gave him no chance since he wasn't going to get close enough to hinder a clean shot. Maybe he can't quite get there. But I still think trying was his best shot (ok pun intended...lol). And so what if it carries into the area? A foul outside the box is outside the box.