I don't throw De Jong's tackle precisely because there were other tackles prior to De Jong's that also should have or could have seen a red card. So opening up VAR to SFP solely to get De Jong's tackle also means you're reviewing a bunch of other tackles in that match. The De Jong challenge has reached mythical status because of its nature and the boot to the chest. But I feel like the severity of some other tackles in that match have been forgotten. De Jong wasn't the only player who should have been sent off that day. And neither was Heitinga. As for Suarez, in my system that would review unseen violent conduct, it would have been caught. I guess I just don't think of it as one of those "grave injustices," though because it was a group stage match and even if you claim the biting indirectly affected the result, you have to get from a 1-0 Uruguay scoreline to a 1-0 Italy scoreline, which means arguing the Uruguay goal wouldn't have been scored and the man advantage would have definitely led to Italy scoring in the final 10 minutes. Possible, sure. But not one of those clear "oh my word, the wrong team won because of that!" situations.
Even with VAR I doubt anything would have changed in that match. It was the culture and instruction to the officials, as much as Webb's acquiescence of it. The VAR referees would have been on the same wavelength as those on the pitch. But I agree Heitinga was far from the worst. PH
I think you have raised interesting points about the VAR here and elsewhere, and I appreciate your perspective. But my guess is that even with the chatter yesterday and today about its use and potential misuse in yesterday's games, FIFA will consider VAR a success this tournament--unless there's an absolute travesty in the knockout rounds (and I'm more hopeful than you are that this will not be the case). Even though Ronaldo missed the penalty and Iran was later rewarded a soft penalty, VAR allowed FIFA to avoid the type of missed call that gets played over and over and over again (and imagine if the penalty doesn't get called and Portugal gets eliminated). As to the off-the-ball "coming together" between Ronaldo and the other player, as a former player (albeit at a slightly lower level ), I simply cannot believe that Ronaldo didn't know what he was doing. But even there, my guess is that FIFA is happy that Caceres showed yellow and not red (especially if Argentina gets bounced later today).
Of course they will. And if VAR corrects an absolute travesty, they will be very vocal about it. None of that will prove that this experiment was ready for this World Cup, though.
This was the hardest thing for me. I know what Ronaldo's doing. I know that Ronaldo knows we know what he's doing. But at those levels, they ingrain in you: If you are between yellow and red, and you cannot 100% determine that it should be red, downgrade it to yellow. It's like a crime show where you KNOW everything points to the murderer, but there's no actual evidence. It doesn't look that much different from the "swim" move that players use to get past each other. So, without a shut case, yellow becomes the better option. This is one of the conundrums of VAR. If the referee gave a red here, there's definitely considerations for it! The VAR probably wouldn't overturn the red there, either.
This is probably the best piece of analysis I've seen when it comes to VAR and it's effect on the game. Well worth the watch. Apart from the nonsensical conspiracy theories portion, everything else is spot on. Especially about it being too soon and nothing ready. Hamann is spot on there.
I feel like all my posts for 2 years are wrapped up into 17 minutes. I might just quote this video next time someone asks how I feel about VAR. Even the nonsensical conspiracy theory is something I said would be coming once the VARs were put in once central booth. It was too soon. It was obvious this was too soon.
Totally wrong. First penalty given to Portugal was wrong, CR7 dove in the box. Yellow card to CR7 was wrong. Every pundit I saw were saying either a red or nothing and most agree that CR7 should have been sent off. The PK given to Iran was a handball but I am not sure if it was a PK or not after watching it from many different angles. There was another incident in this match when a Portuguese defender brought an Iranian forward down in Portuguese box and even walked over him after ward but the referee didn't see it or even the VAR crew called it. Russian TV director showed it and it was a PK in my opinion.
I do think there is pressure on referees to give players like Ronaldo a pass in red card situations. If they feel there's anything there to avoid giving the red, they'll use that excuse avoid it. The referee understands the need to "protect" big name players. Also the referee would face backlash if an important player is forced out, something that could have cost Portugal the tournament. In my view it was red, but it would have been harsh one. I think the referee had enough of an excuse there to think Ronaldo wasn't particularly vicious in his elbow and Ronaldo did it sneakily enough to make it look like he was possibly trying to get past the defender to the ball. But anyone who has seen it knows it was an elbow and there was nothing nice about it. I think on the penalty the referee was being lenient. He awarded one to Portugal, so he was awarding one to Iran when the question of one came up. At this point in the game, it didn't matter if Portugal drew. They more or less had progression in the bag and I think the referee also understood that he wasn't giving the game to Iran by awarding the penalty. It was almost like a consolation goal to Iran. Was it penalty? I lean towards it not being a penalty, but players are tricky. Some are tricky enough to know that if they keep their arms spread like this defender did, the ball could be struck by their arm and taken out of the intended path. They know referees would be reluctant to award that as a penalty because it looks rather accidental being that his arm was already out and not moved into the path of the ball. Players are always looking for a little bit of an edge and some are smart enough to do this type of thing. This really comes down to the referee and how he chooses to interpret it. Some might argue it's deliberate simply because he should have had his arms tucked in a bit more.
This was a game that was also officiated poorly. On that, most I think agree. Portugal fans like to focus on the handball penalty, which was on balance not warranted by that play. But they quickly try to pretend Ronaldo didn't deserve a red and, what's worse, fail to address how the penalty on Azmoun was any less a penalty than the one on Ronaldo? Both would have been soft penalties. But they involved the same degree of obstruction, contact, and diving. Iran had already been denied another penalty claim, saw Portugal awarded a soft penalty, saw Ronaldo not shown a red card for his elbow, saw Iran not even get VAR on the incident where Azmoun was pulled down. All of this after a game against Spain when an Iranian goal was ruled offside, which in retrospect doesn't seem to have been the correct call at all (initially I thought it must have been since offside is normally black or white and can be established through VAR). At that point, and considering the stakes, the game was no longer in the referees control. I believe he tried to make it all up by awarding a late penalty to Iran, thinking it would not be enough to change the outcome. But the truth is that moments later, with seconds left in the clock, Portugal were close to being eliminated with Iran missing a great chance. If we had scored that goal, these poor calls would have looked even worse. In fact, we would have a huge mess in our hands! p.s. That he tried to give Iran a make up call to me is proof perfect that even the referee knew he had been lenient towards Portugal. I am particularly sure that he knew that a red card to Ronaldo would have been, strictly speaking, the right call according to the LOTG.
Pretend? It was the correct call not to give him a red card. The Iranian defender obstructed his run and he tried to go around him. It was not an intentional elbow. Like someone already said here if there was no VAR we wouldn't be talking about this. As for Azmoun, I don't know if it was a penalty or not because I have yet to see a replay of it. But I am sure it didn't help that some of the Iranian players were falling a bit to easy through out the game. Also, if Ronaldo should have had a red card than Iran should have been red carded for chest bumping the ref when they were arguing the PK. It is supposed to be an automatic RC if you touch the ref in that manner. Another thing is during the Ronaldo PK the goal keeper was off his line before the ball was kicked and they should have been a retake.
1) I agree that, technically speaking, the referee could have called (Ronaldo's missed) penalty to be retaken but that is usually not done. 2) Azmoun incident was not a clear penalty unless you think the Ronaldo penalty was clear. In both incidents, if that had happened outside the box, it was a minor foul that would ordinarily be called. Inside the box, these contacts and these kind of obstructions are too harsh for a penalty IMO. 3) We disagree on the red card for Ronaldo. I have seen the replay enough to now Ronaldo intended to throw that elbow. 4) The chest bumping of the referee could result in red cards but a yellow card under the circumstances would have been the right call. On the handball penalty, I just reviewed it again. The only thing about it that looks a bit suspicious is the fact that the Portuguese player had his hand above his own head and in Azmoun's face. I don't think the handball itself made an impact on the play, but the hands were being used to kind of obstruct Azmoun. It was not 50/50 still but there was a slight justification for it because of the way the hands were being used.
I have seen, read, and heard enough people that are unbiased have the same sentiments that I do. Either way, I think we can agree that the ref and VAR was terrible in this game.
The problem is your definition of "unbiased" isn't the same as mine You a posted an audio in support of your contention from someone whose objectivity you lauded, from a program where a guy who had clearly picked Portugal to easily beat Iran, trying to even deny the fact that Iran could have won that game at the last minute by saying that shot (even if on goal) would have been saved! This kind of gratuitous speculation appeared to me more from someone who probably had some argument about Iran's chances against Portugal and wanted to say he had been right than someone who was just reviewing the game that was played. The Portugal game saw at least 4 promising Iranian attacks snuffed by Portugal through physical contact with the Iranian player in Portugal's box. None of them were clear penalties. But none of them were innocent contacts either. In none of them, was the ball being played. In one case, we had Azmoun bumped clearly inside the box before he could get to the ball, falling on the ground. This is different from the scene where he was brought down subsequently. That could have been a penalty too, albeit a harsh one. Then you had Azmoun being leaned on and pushed to the floor in another scene. In the first half, you had a tough tackle that got Jahanbakhsh's legs and not so much the ball inside the box that wasn't called. Even on the handball, which I admit wasn't a penalty, you still had the same story. Ironically, the ball hitting the hand of the Portuguese defender and leading to the handball was quite innocent, but in that same scene, the other hand of the Portugal defender was over his head and complete in Azmoun's face/head. If the ball hat hit the other hand, it was 100% a penalty as the Portuguese defender was using his hands clearly to try to prevent Azmoun to win the header. As it turned out, however, the ball didn't hit the hand that was actually being misused but hit the other hand innocently and, for that reason, I agree that the penalty was the wrong call. You can watch the entire 2nd half, where most of the incidents I refer to are shown, at this site.
You can see several potential penalties on Azmoun in the Portugal match in this video which focuses on them. Compare those incidents to Portugal's penalty and two of the 3 penalty claims shown in this video here from the same match. Just watch these two videos and you will know that Iran deserved a penalty from that game (particularly if the Ronaldo penalty was called), even if it ended up getting the wrong one.
Of course we will disagree as we are both biased on opposite sides but the stuff I have posted before or read/heard is from people who are "neutral". What I am saying ,in short, is that I have seen more "neutrals" saying what I have posted way more than I have seen what you are posting. I still have the match recorded and when I have time I will check it again. Eitherway, I think we can agree that refs in this game were terrible for both sides.
Unfortunately the first video wont work for me but seeing the Ronaldo one in slow motion makes it look like a very clear penalty. The next one was a tough to see. But I can see an arguement for the one on William but I would want to see another angle as it still hard to tell.
See if this works better: https://hw17.cdn.asset.aparat.com/a...db031f585fdbb0c585ae411001391-360p__75849.apt If the Ronaldo penalty is clear, explain why any of these aren't penalties? In the first incident shown in particular, how is that different than what happened to Ronaldo? What about the rest?
The truth is that there were 4 incidents (including one from the first half which isn't shown in these videos) which could have been called penalties against Portugal but didn't even get VAR review. Any unbiased commentator would have had something to say about at a couple of them either way. Once the Ronaldo VAR penalty was given, the next 3 incidents (shown in the video above including on replay) became a lot more credible calls for a penalty as well. The reason I feel the referee did poorly in this match isn't because he didn't show Ronaldo a red card (which would have been the right call but being reluctant to do so is understandable as well). Rather, it is because he ignored repeated instances where contact was made against Iranian players in Portugal's box and then decided to make it all up by giving Iran a penalty frankly Iran's players didn't expect much either. It was a bizarre performance by that referee, to say the least.