In all fairness this was a poor performance, but he also had good game performances earlier in the tournament.
absolute send off, just as David Luiz getting hugged inside the box was an absolute penalty for Brazil. "Oh, but refs don´t call penalties for people being hugged inside the box". true. And refs don´t give red cards at 2 minutes in the match. Either we go literal in everything or we concede that being hugged at the box is usually not a penalty, just as refs will never give red cars two minutes inside the match. and besides, again I see people ONLY talking about Silva deserving a red card, and barely or not even mentioning the fact it was a freekick, not a penalty. posted earlier by UncleSox
and I see plenty of penalties for hugging someone on the brazilian league. So I also disagree refs dont call penalties for holding inside the box.
when I wrote "Even if Oscar embellished it, was still a clear plastic." I meant PENALTY, not PLASTIC. Damn cell phones and text correction. Anyway: -two penalties for Brazil not given (on David Luiz and on Oscar) -penalty for Holland was actually outside the box and was a freekick -second dutch goal was offside -Thiago Silva should had been sent off for it was a clear goal chance for Robben too many match altering events incorrectly called. Atrocious refereeing, therefore. a gif of Oscar´s penalty, there is simply no way Oscar could have avoided that leg that missed the foul and blocked his path http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/07/oscar-dive-yellow-card-brazil-netherlands
You haven't been reading very carefully, then. Practically everyone agrees that it was probably a free kick and not a penalty, but we reckoned that Brazil got off lucky with the call. Would you have preferred Silva get sent off instead?
Maybe it's just me, but when I read this text which was inserted into the Laws a few years ago, I don't just see point of emphasis, I see pleading by IFAB with " referees are reminded"... Is there anything else referees are reminded about in the Laws?
There is a wide world of refereeing between "Reading everything literally" and "Doing everything subjectively". That's the great thing about it! A lot of referees will both allow players to be more physical in the penalty area (subjective) while also correctly sanctioning DOGSO in the first two minutes of a match (literal). And if you are really concerned about the "Why isn't anyone talking about how it shouldn't have been a pk?" then you aren't reading anything anyone is saying. The FK issue has been brought up plenty. It's not an 100% attachment rate, but who cares? It's been mentioned NUMEROUS times. The reason it isn't getting quite as much airtime, though? The location of a FK is a black/white issue. It's either in the penalty area or not. There's no judgment on it (yeah yeah, referee has to "judge" which it is, you know what my point is). It was wrong. He must have seen it wrong. There's hardly anything interesting to talk about from a refereeing standpoint other than "Dont get the location of the foul wrong". There isn't much to discuss past "Yep, the foul was outside. Moving on." On the other hand, whether or not something meets DOGSO does have to be judged. It's pretty clear by most metrics we can come up with that this SHOULD have been sanctioned as DOGSO. Why wasn't it? That is actually an interesting referee conversation that can have things we can learn from. Did he just bottle the decision because it was so early and he was intimidated by the crowd? Possibly! Is it possible he thought the GK was going to collect the ball without the foul so therefore it wasn't "obvious"? Maybe! Let's go look at the tape. Was he just looking for an excuse to not give a red card? Could be. Was it <reasons>? There is a LOT more to talk about with that. Like the decision to award a PK, we're almost all in agreement that is should have been red. Trying to figure out what he saw that would have led him to incorrectly, in our opnion, decide on yellow gives us something to watch for in our own matches. We learn more from discussing subjective things because our whole job is the subjective things. So pardon us referees for trying to have a critical discussion and not bringing up things that are basically "Ref missed it, ref bad" that HAVE been brought up. This was a poor match, make no mistake about it. So lets try to learn from it.
I was shocked to see how poorly the crew did in this match. Thought he had a nice performance in the USA-Germany group game. Anyway, as an assessor I tell referees that people really only care if they get three things right during matches. If there aren't any serious injuries, these are the only events which people will remember: 1. Red cards, 2. Goals, 3. PKs. So let's go through them. 1. Silva definitely should have been shown red in the 2nd minute for DOGSO and Hernanes (#18 for Brazil) should have also been sent-off in the 58th minute (shortly after coming on) for his straight-leg, studs-up lunge at Robben. Robben is fortunate that the leading leg mostly missed and only glanced off his left shin and that his left leg didn't remain firmly planted as Hernanes crashed through him with his backside. It would have likely blown out his knee. So 0/2 here. 2. First goal was scored from a wrongly awarded PK. It is very close, but I've checked the slo-mo and the holding ceases (right hand first and then with the left hand) prior to the penalty area. Tough decision though at full speed and with the turning upper bodies of the players. The angle of view can easily be blocked for both the CR and AR. Still, not a fair goal. Second goal is a missed offside decision. Again it is close as only his lead leg is ahead, but objectively, this is wrong. The AR is actually a step ahead of the play and having to look back, so it appears to be on-side. Third goal is good. 1/3 here. 3. PKs: already stated that the awarded PK was incorrect. But no one has pointed out in this thread that Robben is in the arc and a Brazil player is inside the area (to the kicker's right) when RVP strikes the ball. Should have been retaken per the LOTG. The holding on David Luiz from FK is worthy, but frequently let go. I hope that this starts to get called more in the future. The play with Oscar is tough andopen for debate. Blind sticks his leg in and misses the ball. Does this qualify as an attempt to trip, even if Oscar jumps prior to any contact being made? There is certainly knee-to-knee contact after, which hurts Blind and he must be substituted. Robben is barged over from behind in the PA without a whistle, but he also handled just prior, yet no whistle there either! Finally, a couple of handling or not decisions in the area both involving Dutch defenders. The only one which is close is on the side of the area facing AR2. I don't see the contact as deliberate. Difficult to give a score here, but I'm going with 3/6. Overall, that gives 4/11. Very poor for a FIFA crew. Additionally, I didn't see anyone mention this play, which surprises me as there are some sharp people on this forum, but the offside flag at 58:06 was in error. While the Dutch player came from behind the Brazil defenders to play the ball, he was not in an offside position when the ball was last touched by his teammate and even had he been, the ball was clearly played in a controlled manner by a Brazilian defender. He simply intercepted a ball that was passed between two opponents. If anyone can post this clip, you can analyze it for yourselves.
I forgot to note that the offside flag in the 46th minute (1st of the 2nd half) against Brazil was also wrong. AR2 is positioned too far towards the goal and misses this call. The two Durch defenders nearest the AR keep the Brazil attacker on the far touchline onside.
I thought so too. After watching all of Germany's games however I realized they actually make it pretty easy on the referee. Other than Muller's constant dissent everyone is very disciplined and the matches rarely get out of hand. Obviously still tough games from a referee standpoint, but easier than most. I believe anything but the most obvious and egregious encroachment is trifling at this level. Interesting how you add up the pseudo-CMI's. What percentage would you estimate the average FIFA crew gets correct?
Destroying a whole Nation by giving A) one false penalty B) after you ve given the false penalty you also allow a "may-be-or-may-not" offside goal and C) you give a yellow card for pretending while a Brazilian is asking for the obvious is not just a POOR PERFORMANCE.Even the foul on Robben was a penalty but whatever.
You are correct. I watched both and must have mixed them up as they were only separated by a few days. Thanks for the correction. My post should have stated that Hamoudi had a good performance in the USA-Belgium match.
Obviously you havent understood the reason the Brazilians were crying after conceding 7 goals.Football means a lot more to them than proviously it does to you and me.
If it meant that much they wouldn't have put that team on the pitch. The Brasil FA has been a shambles for at least a cycle, now. If this doesn't lead to reform they are hopeless for the future.
Come again? I realize you're a partisan and we allow leeway here. But your approach to "discussion" is a little off, particularly when you accuse the forum of bias. The red card for DOGSO is clear and mandatory. There's no room for interpretation. The penalty/FK decision is brutally hard to make. You get one shot, with the ARs help. You don't have frame-by-frame ability. And you were comparing an offside decision (second goal) that was off by a player's foot, to a stonewall red card decision. As, you know, the sport of soccer has shown for decades, close offside decisions are incredibly difficult. ARs have been told to err on the side of the attack if they have doubt. Misses like this will happen. Look, I've only seen the first half so far as I was busy yesterday. But Haimoudi was terrible by all accounts. Likely both ways, from what I've heard and read. But from a refereeing perspective, completely ignoring a DOGSO red card for, well, no reason whatsoever, is going to be the biggest talking point here. It'd be the biggest talking point if it had helped the Dutch, too. If you don't get that, then you just don't understand the perspective that referees are going to take to analyzing match incidents.
mr RC- are you an assessor- what state? please check out http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/afdeveloping/refereeing/8. law 14_559.pdf
To be fair, I think the odds of a red happening that early in a World Cup game like in the clip above are getting slimmer and slimmer. Players aren't that dumb to go in like that anymore, but the referees are also hesitant as well. We have seen blatant yellow cards ignored 10 minutes into the game and we just saw it yesterday with the most obvious red card of the tournament not given. We see it time and time again with referees refusing to give reds for SFP early in a game and we saw it yesterday with the DOGSO. The only explanation that's plausible as to why Silva wasn't sent off is that it was too early to send him off or the referees have been instructed to follow Platini's rule of no DOGSO in the penalty area.
There were two potential DOGSO situations total in this World Cup. One, I think, the referee got right (Brazil v Colombia). The other, he did not. I think you're making a leap by applying reckless/excessive force decisions to the same standard as DOGSO. Also, how many "early" SFP cards were dodged in this World Cup, other than Brych's on Uruguay (which, I believe, was the end of the first half). I can't think of a potential/possible SFP card that occurred in the first 30 minutes of a match, but I admit I could be wrong. No, that's not the only plausible explanation. It's plausible Haimoudi just choked, for lack of a better term, in the moment. How many people have been faced with the opportunity to send off a Brazilian defender in the World Cup, in Brazil, in a 3/4 playoff after the nation is already devastated? The answer is nobody. Nobody knows what that feels like. Now, I'm not saying all referees would "choke" here. Or that it means Haimoudi isn't as strong as other refs. But, in that moment, maybe he just lost focus, reasoned he couldn't pull the trigger on this red card, and took the easy route. Or maybe he was specifically instructed to avoid reds in this match except in 110% cases of VC and SFP. Or maybe he genuinely felt Robben had played the ball too far. On replay, that's preposterous. Who knows how it looks to him and what he could have convinced himself in the heat of the moment--particularly with all the other factors around the atmosphere of the match. I mean, there are a lot of plausible explanations. None of them are good, but there are a lot.
For the "younger" referees here, it was extremely rare to see a red card back then for such a foul in ANY sort of competition. Hence all of the players with legitimate shocked looks on their faces. Although 7 years earlier in a non-World Cup match, a lot of tackles would be treated like the one below in a USA/France friendly, where I'm shocked Platini's career wasn't ended and on a play where this bone-crushing play only drew a foul and no caution (it starts at approx 0:42) and the usual theatrics with the ref pulling the player away and "talking" with him while the fouled player is in agony: