2019-2020 UEFA Referee Discussion [Rs]

Was this the only time ever that we saw a red card for kicking the ball after a whistle in the CL knockout stages?

 

https://streamja.com/55WZ

Question: The offside player in blue near the top drags the other white players with him from an offside position. Would he not be affecting the play?

 

Sure he's affecting the play. But that's not the question. The question is if he "interfered with an opponent" within the meaning of Law 11. And that requires one of four very specific things--which does not include causing opponents to come cover him. The reality is that in the modern game there are tactics that include an OSP player who does not violate Law 11.

 

i thought Cakir was very good in the Spurs- RB match today. He seemed to be within 5 yards of every decision! His physicality was evident and it relayed his calls to the audience in a perfect manner. Just a great job.

 

Knowing all this, why do we say that UEFA referees are getting it wrong when they decide yellow card vs red card on something borderline? They know what their bosses want, they’re not in any position to go against it and nobody is going to back them up, so I say they’re right whenever they end a game with 22 players on the pitch.

 

In actual fact, there is a 0.1 deduction mandated for the "incorrect award of a free-kick which results in a goal being scored" and likewise a mandatory 0.1 deduction for the "incorrect award of a corner-kick which results in a goal being scored", but there is no similar reference for wrong award of a throw-in which leads to a goal.

 

I got told it was -0,2 in that scenario?

And I was under the impression wrong throw-in leading to a goal was -0,1 but in this case as there was another phase of play (the corner, correctly awarded) the throw-in decision would not affect the overall mark.

 

I didn't think it would, as I think IFAB had more in mind than what I could see from the snip. (Snip is gone now, so I couldn't go back to it.) But my post was more about the standard than the particular play. I think too often discussions start with things like "affecting play," which doesn't do anything to answer the actual question of whether there was an offense. (And I didn't have time when I posted to continue on to parse and apply the four criteria. I do agree the only potential candidate would be obvious action.)

 

I look at this differently. IMO, it shouldn't matter what happens after the TI. There should either be a deduction for getting a TI (or CK) wrong or there shouldn't. Whether a goal scores later is separate from the nature of the mistake that is made, and Rs/ARs (IMO) should not be off the hook because a player misses a shot or on the hook because a player makes an amazing play. And it can give perverse incentives. Under this model, the ref has less risk from giving a GK in error than a CK in error if he gets docked if they score on a CK. And if the R thinks he may have botched a call and awarded a CK, then calling an attacking push (which we can almost always find on a CK), takes that risk off the table--but not really an act we want to encourage.

 

Klopp noticed (in Spanish).

 

https://streamja.com/Pve9


So... Benfica scores, VAR rules that Cervi (#11), who assisted the goal, was offside. However, he was also taken out by a defender. They cancel the goal but give Benfica a penalty. But he was offside before he got fouled - he got the ball while in an offside position, played it back to a player who scored and in the meantime, got fouled. How are we able to give a penalty on a player who was offside if we just ruled out a goal for that very same offside?

 

If the OS offense was on the player making the assist, then it was an error? Could it have been by the scorer? (Can't tell from the clip posted.)

Aside: I don't recall seeing a professional PK with so little encroachment.

 

Another video: the play starts at 1:22.

https://yfl.tostreamit.com/embed00/HqFU2QFUbAPg4

 

There still isn't a great angle, but I think the goal scorer was determined to be OS, which would wipe the goal and make the PK the right call. (I also don't think it is likely that the R and VAR made the horrific mistake of awarding a PK for a foul that occurred after the OS.)

 

Hm, now that I think about it, it seems right.

So, in this case, is it possible that #11 was not called offside or was determined to not be offside? Or does it matter? If he was, can that penalty still be given?

 

It's all a matter of what came first. And that's true with or without VAR.

If there was no OS, the goal should stand.

If the player making the assist was OS, it should be an IFK coming out, as any foul happened after the OS.

If the goal scorer was OS, the PK is given because the foul came before the OS.

 

I found it! I was totally wrong. Number 11 was not offside. So this is a very correct sequence of events. Offside came after the foul. Sorry for the alert and confusion everyone!

 

It also appears that the keeper deliberately played the ball before it got to 11. That would negate an offside offense. It has to be the goal scorer was responsible for the offside offense.