2022-2023 UEFA Referee Discussion [R]

Yes, though I feel like Mateu's retirement will be the final nail in that coffin (and you can add Skomina's retirement, though quiet, as well). Not sure you can firmly put Rocchi or Orsato in with that group. From a timeline standpoint, you probably should. But Rocchi always had a different role or was assigned at a different level and Orsato came in late.

I think we have to ask ourselves if we'll ever remember a Taylor-Turpin-Siebert-Makkelie-Vincic, etc. era. With fewer big personalities and more VAR, we might have just witnessed a sort of permanent change rather than just a changing of the guards. I hope not.

 

Bastien had quite the match in Croatia. Three penalties and three sent off. Part of me likes Bastien--there's a bit of Rocchi in him in the sense that he has zero fear of making the unpopular decision. But I just don't think he has the personality to pull it off, nor, unfortunately, the same sort of accuracy rate on KMIs. Very suspicious of some of these decisions:

1. Second caution in the 17th minute. I'd call this accurate/supportable, but horribly executed. He gave the look of someone who was ready to let this go as a last warning and then something flipped and he opted for the send off. If he immediately sends him off, I think he has fewer problems here. But indecision in this moment--a very early red card that will effectively kill the tie--is crippling for credibility. And I wouldn't be surprised if UEFA said this was more careless than reckless, anyway... it's the lifted leg at the end that makes it look bad, but how much that leg relates to the actual severity of the foul seems dubious on replay. https://streamja.com/gwXmy

2. I don't see the foul here. Or, rather, I think I see it but believe it's trifling. I'm surprised the VAR supported this call, to be honest, but maybe I'm missing something obvious. Even if it's supportable via VAR, I don't think this call is advisable. https://streamja.com/N0V7e

3. This one seems unequivocally wrong to me. Like, not a punishable handball, not a penalty, and definitely not a clear penalty. If UEFA supports this decision, I have no idea what we are supposed to be looking for anymore. Shocked this was sent down and ratified. I really, really hate to say this, but it feels like a make-up call where the on-field pressure helped lead to this decision. If the benefitting team wasn't down a goal and a man... is this "obvious?" https://streamja.com/leXqz

4. This is the Rocchi in him. This is a reckless arm and Bastien doesn't care that it's a 2CT against a team that's already down a man. So, credit to them in that regard. On the other hand, this is the sort of 2CT that would make all of England and about 50% of the UEFA soccer world apoplectic regardless of the match situation, so there are pros and cons here. https://streamja.com/qL5A0

5. Perhaps the most Rocchi-esque call not made by Rocchi himself. Game is over and the defending team is down 2-0 already. But he upgrades a DOGSO yellow penalty to DOGSO red based on the evidence you see. I think, of course, he's technically right (and it's worth noting the VAR helped force him into this situation). The non-attempt to play the ball foul (hold/pull) occurs before the stab at the ball with the foot (and even that would barely count as trying to play the ball). But... man, talk about the sort of decision that no one on the field actually needs to happen. https://streamja.com/PV505

I don't think UEFA will like this performance. That said, it seems clear Bastien serves a purpose in UEFA and I think you'll see him on some contentious matches this season. I think it's worth watching his appointments closely.

 

I guess I just don't see the foul contact. I think the angle in the attached file (and the period right before and after) is instructive.

The attacker cuts back and plays the ball with his right foot, under his own body. The defender is, at this time, stabbing at the ball (on the right side of the attacker's body). Notice the defender's challenging foot and the attacker's left foot are both on the ground at this point. The right foot of the attacker is in the air, not contacting anything else, after he's played the ball himself.

There's no contact when the challenge is made. Contact between the defender and the attacker comes after the challenge was made. For me, that's the attacker's momentum just carrying himself into the defender. The defender has already made his action at the moment this still frame occurs. He doesn't do anything else. And if there's no foul here (there's unequivocally not at this point in time) then I have a hard time saying it's a foul because the attacker continued into the defender. The "he took a risk, he must pay the price" argument could work for me in the old days. But with VAR you can slow things down and see what actually happened here. And I don't think a foul actually happened. Go watch the period right before and right after this still frame. I think the attacker brings his right leg into the defender to create the contact. Bluntly, I think this is extraordinarily sophisticated simulation (though, it normally wouldn't be punished as such because contact occurred).

 

With credit to @Mikael_Referee , here's a clip from Sidiropolous' match in Glasgow. The player who gets his yellow card rescinded was already on a yellow, by the way. I am absolutely floored by this.

https://clip.dubz.co/v/04tn4r

 

But did he?

Look at the scissors motion on the tackle. On what planet is that clearly not a yellow card and clearly not a foul?

I get it. The defender got ball first. And the attacker bounced up and didn't stay down writhing in pain. So producing a red card there would have made his life a living hell for the rest of the match. But, once given, what's the argument here aside from that? This is quite simply "uh-oh, I regret my decision" and not "wow I really got that decision wrong."

Ultimately, I'm sure most observers--particularly those wearing blue--will be fine with this outcome and the AR might even earn praise from commentators. But this is absolute amateur hour stuff on multiple levels.

 

I think the attacker getting up immediately is everything on this play.

He stays down and this doesn't play out the way it did. There's just no way.

Talk about incentivizing bad behavior...

As it actually occurred, had it been a challenge that could have resulted in a penalty... I have no idea what PRO would want. Pretty sure it's a "no intervention" if not given. But I have no clue about the other direction. Of course, the likelihood of an attacker getting up right after that in a penalty situation is near nil, so it might be a hypothetical that is too far detached from reality.