2021-2022 UEFA Referee Discussion [R]

VAR nailing those clear SFP fouls in Belgium.

🟥 | Vadis Odjidja est exclu suite à une intervention du VAR ! 🧐 #STAGNT pic.twitter.com/r8dXpWndwp

— Eleven Belgium (FR) (@ElevenBeFR) February 27, 2022

 

Bayern : Salzburg - TURPIN (FRA)
Liverpool : Inter - MATEU LAHOZ (ESP)

Real Madrid : PSG - MAKKELIE (NED)
Manchester City : Sporting Lisbon - MELER (TUR)

Makkelie not kept away from a big match with two top teams, which is interesting if you believe he is a favorite for the Final.

 

So Turkey just tossed three of its seven male FIFA referees out of its top league for the final 10 weeks? That's, uh, weird. Seems like its more than just about Cakir; Turkey doesn't exactly lack for intrigue in footballing matters.

I wouldn't draw the conclusion that Cakir's international career is over based on this. There are other leagues that would and could use Cakir between now and Qatar and we now have two examples (Faghani and Conger) of referees not working in their domestic first divisions at all and are nonethless candidates for the World Cup.

That said, everything that has gone on with Cakir and UEFA in the last few years has been odd and maybe this gives UEFA an excuse to push against him for the World Cup if that's what the powers that be want. But it all seems very strange given Cakir was quite clearly back in the mix for Qatar.

 

One can argue anything. But that's a horrendous argument to make.

Look, I'll debate whether or not this is a caution--more on that below. But this sort of thinking (and not sure if you believe it or just throwing it out there as a debating point) has to be refuted forcefully. Because it's unquestionably untrue.

Start from this question: why does Sanchez launch himself with a tackle that exposes his studs? The answer is because he is challenging an opponent--Fabhino--for the ball and he thinks there's a risk he won't get there first.. A player doesn't make a move like that if he thinks he's going to possess the ball easily. Or if there is no opponent to consider. He is trying to win the ball first and prevent Fabinho from getting it. That means he knows Fabinho is there. I can't say this clearly enough: Fabinho's presence is exactly the reason Sanchez challenges in the way he does. To then say, with the benefit of a slo-mo replay and the knowledge-after-the-fact that Sanchez gets there first, that Fabinho might have "moved into the path of the slide" is incredible. Again, not saying you belief it personally so don't want to be too harsh. But--save for some very, very rare cases--we shouldn't even entertain the idea when presented with facts like this. It's very simple. Sanchez committed to a challenge to prevent Fabinho from possessing the ball. Then, based on the result and the facts regarding the nature of the challenge, you start to ask yourself if he did so in a careless, reckless or worse fashion. But to excuse the action because Fabinho moved into the path of the challenge? No. It can't work that way. It's a repeat of the terrible argument about the Danielson red card at EURO.

I've used this argument before regarding VAR comparisons (APP foul to penalty, for example). But I don't think it's fair to use it here. First, this is an on-field decision. So you have to ask it the other way... if Lahoz gives this as a penalty, is the VAR sending it down as a mistake? Of course not. Second, I'd argue that players don't often make challenges like this in the penalty area precisely because they know the risk. You make studs-to-ankle/foot contact in the penalty area, you are risking giving up a goal for no reason. The rush of blood can occur more at midfield with situations like this than it can in the penalty area. Note also it's an attacking player, not a defender, who does it. None of this is to say a play like this can't happen in the penalty area, of course. But I just think the argument that "it's not a penalty" doesn't really work because it's rare we do get a situation like this in the defensive penalty are to judge.

Well, given how early he got to the ball, maybe he could have just won it without going airborne? I can't really process an argument that this was the only way to challenge when he quite literally won the ball before Fabinho even arrived initially. There were other ways. But Sanchez chose this way. And he's responsible for the outcome.

There's another component to all this that is being lost. Go back and look at Sanchez's first caution. It was a borderline send off. I mean, it was REALLY close to red and if Mateu had given red on-field, there's no way it would have been reversed. So that's in play when we suggest things like "go manage this." He already had managed Sanchez and he managed him to a yellow. Now this happens. And everyone--including Sanchez--knows what happened earlier. I honestly think it's why he didn't personally protest at all; he knew what the result would be once contact was made.

Picture the alternate universe where Mateu rounds-down on a borderline SFP challenge, ignores/chooses to manage a subsequent 2CT per UEFA instructions, and then Sanchez plays a role in this tie becoming 2-2 and Inter progressing on penalties. Anyone want to guess what Klopp's press conference looks like?

Which, with the mode of contact, is a yellow card per UEFA instructions. If we really want to narrow it down to that point, Mateu is just calling what he's supposed to call there.

I don't think you'll get much agreement from those that are instructing professional referees right now.

 

I think Donnaruma was!

If given live as a foul, it's totally justified, of course.

Once not given... we've seen that the line for intervention on APP fouls is both high and nebulous. Here, Donnaruma had already dribbled himself into trouble and the contact itself may not have really led to the goal. So is there enough for a VAR to say it's clear and obvious? Narrowly, to the question of whether or not there was a careless foul, probably. But, bigger picture? I imagine Makkelie is totally fine not being called to the monitor there--there's no good outcome for the rest of this match if he has to go conduct an OFR for that.

 

The contact in question was with the leg. Watch Benzema's right leg and where it strikes Donnaruma. It's essentially thigh-on-thigh, with Donnaruma's standing leg being contacted as he goes to clear.

The more I watch it, the more I do think it's a clear foul. One of those weird situations where it's given anywhere else on the field but not in the most dangerous defensive position, where Donnaruma already put himself into trouble. So I'll stand by everything I wrote initially above. But, by the book, it's a pretty clear careless tripping foul. Looking at the upper body is missing the mark.