2022-2023 UEFA Referee Discussion [R]

Exactly!

Other than a couple of muted reactions by the blue player, everyone expected and was okay with a foul coming out.

This has always been a foul coming out. On replay, it does look like the keeper actually does carelessly kick out at the attacker, but no one was asking for this.

VAR is inventing goals and penalty kicks that were never part of the game (see the Man City vs. Man U offside goal due to a delayed offside flag as a result of VAR).

I watch a lot of college and NFL football and I have seen how replay has just started to suffocate the game and make it at times unwatchable. Everyone keeps asking for more and more involvement thinking it will be some panacea.

I was watching the Eagles vs. 49ers NFC Championship game and there was a long 4th down catch that Philadelphia made in the first quarter.

The receiver himself knew that he didn't make the catch, but he hurried his teammates up to snap the ball quickly before San Francisco can challenge. They ended up snapping the ball and they ended up getting a touchdown a couple of players later.

Only on like the 5th replay could you see that the ball actually hit the ground.

Immediately the reaction was "the NFL needs to adopt the college football model where every play is automatically reviewed (in the NFL all scoring plays and turnovers are automatically reviewed, everything else requires a coaches challenge)."

Or, "where was the NFL's new replay assist? how could they miss that?" Keep in mind the replay guys had like 10 seconds to go through all the available camera angles to find the right one as Philadelphia was rushing to the line of scrimmage.

After every "missed call" in an NFL play off game there is always some outcry to do more to prevent a mistake.

My main point is it is never enough and never good enough and that's what VAR is always going to be. It's never going to be good enough and it will always cause more problems than solutions.

This was exhibit 2983.

 

I’m gonna take the VAR’s side on this one. The goalkeeper clearly kicks out and carelessly/recklessly trips the attacker. It is also clear that the attacker involved in the collision doesn’t commit an offense against the goalkeeper. He’s running in almost exactly a straight line out of the penalty area, away from the goalkeeper, and doesn’t shape his body in any way so as to interfere with the release of the ball.

While you could make an argument that the other attacker does briefly commit an offense by interfering with the goalkeeper’s release of the ball by briefly jockeying in front of the goalkeeper while retreating from the penalty area, it seems like a slight stretch to me to say that this is an offense. Setting aside the very interesting APP question, because it seems to protocols as written don’t actually matter very much anyways to the people that matter, I feel like the only way you come to the conclusion that it’s an offense is if you really want to find/manufacture a free kick coming out. Also note that this is clearly not the offense that the referee is calling in the first place.

I can understand the argument that this is videos over-refereeing the game. But I think the fact that this would never get called without VAR is, instead, a complement of the system. On the field, 99/100 referees play it safe by calling the foul coming out. But that decision is clearly wrong! What we have is a case of a referee wrongfully punishing the attacker when in fact it was the goalkeeper committing an offense, the result of which should be a penalty kick. The VAR fixes this mistake by making a correct penalty kick call that 99% of referees aren’t courageous enough to make on their own. That fundamentally makes the game fairer. The correct offender is punished, the correct penalty kick is awarded, and the fact that most referees aren’t brave/crazy enough to call something so unorthodox no longer gets in the way of justice.

 

"Courage" was the wrong word to explain what I meant. To better explain, let me reference your comment in the England thread about errors "by omission" vs errors "by commission." Assume that, as I believe and you perhaps don't, a penalty kick is the theoretically correct outcome. Even in this case, and even if the referee had a good view, he'd have a very hard time convincing himself to make an affirmative penalty call here, because the risk of being wrong "by commission" on such an unorthodox play is far, far greater than the risk of making an error "by omission." That’s the only reason why it’s not given in real time, not because it’s somehow not intended to be an offense for the goalkeeper to gratuitously trip an attacker when not challenging for the ball. The VAR helps the referee get over that hump.

I think you see the decision as less theoretically clear than I do, in which case most of my comment wouldn't apply.

No longer talking about this play specifically, my answer to this part: the expectations of the players or of the game at large can be influenced by various biases, biases which should not influence a referee. A referee being blindly influenced by the expectations of the game or the players is indirectly biasing himself by whichever biases influence those expectations. At best, these biases reward dissent and embellishment; at worst, they might cause preferential treatment for certain teams or players.

You point out one of the most prominent of these biases: players and "the game" are more likely to expect a penalty when the attacker falls than when he doesn't, and more likely to expect a penalty when there are big protests than when there aren't. I think you can guess my view on such things: these reactions ideally shouldn't influence a referee's decision, because allowing this influence rewards players who embellish and complain and disincentivizes honest play. Corner kicks are a great example, by the way. A player could have his shirt nearly ripped off, but the game will never "expect" a penalty if he stays up and doesn't protest.

VAR, if used right, can promote fair play by helping us break away from these biases that incentivize unfair play. However, most of the time that's not how it's been working. I'm sure we've all seen quotes from players who feel that incidents only get seriously checked if they go down and protest. They are rightfully noticing that these have been, in practice, the criteria. Those criteria may be derived from "what the game expects", but we can see the negative consequences of that.

 

We're all seeing this clip for one reason. That reason is not because this is a good decision. Those don't go viral. Even on here.

Aside from that, a bit of analysis...

The APP has begun for the GK's team, but only if he immediately distributes it to a forward who makes an attack on goal. Otherwise, this play is between APPs. Remember what the "A" stands for. So, with what played out, there's not a clean APP. So let's not go down that rabbit hole as a group. This is probably the only scenario in which someone could potentially earn a PK, not have an APP associated with it, and also not ever have possession of the ball.

I make that point because your analysis of the foul/situation is what would fit for a trifling foul at midfield. This is not that. This is unique.

You say a foul coming out is "clearly wrong". No, it is not. When everyone expects something on a judgment call, it is not wrong.

Aside from that, and ignoring a whistle, is this a missed PK decision? That's the question here. Not "well, hell, the whistle blew so let's make sure we have it going the right direction." The question is whether a PK is missed - clearly missed - by the Referee on the field. The answer is simply no. Because of soccer.

This is a poor decision and is the result of over-thinking by the VAR and the Referee (because there is no reason he should have accepted this decision.)

 

Caught it on Twitter this morning, and it made my eyes twitch. Maximum interference for negative benefit.

 

It’s a completely different situation but this reminds me of the ARs who call the GK for handling outside the box because the held the ball a foot outside the box while releasing it on a punt that no one else notices. Gives zero real advantage to the keeper, but then you give the opponent a DFK from 18.5 yards out. Just turn the game into a farce why don’t you

 

Didn’t this happen in a women’s World Cup or Olympic game a few years ago? I seem to remember one involving the US.

 

You may be referring to the US game against Canada where a 6 second violation was called. If I recall, the Canadian keeper held it barely 6 seconds. US got a free kick and scored. They likely were eliminated if not for that late decision by the referee and a controversial handling PK a few minutes later. (Or there may be a different play you were thinking of)

 

2015 CONCACAF Gold Cup semifinal between the United States and Jamaica maybe? Big Soccer referee discussion from here.

 

Are you saying that shouldn’t be called? Really? That one isn’t even a subjective decision with any gray area. And it’s not some highly extreme scenario like the “subs on the field” incident at the World Cup final.

I’m not arguing for the complete abolition of common sense, but who are you, the referee, to say whether it’s too much of a “farce” to be called or not? I can bet that if the attacking players noticed it, they wouldn’t think it was a laughing matter. And the Laws of the Game would be on their side.

The play others are referencing was from the 2015 Gold Cup semifinal USA vs Jamaica. Jamaica scored from that free kick, which would go on to be the game-winning goal. And for whatever it’s worth to you, as far as I can recall the reaction of American pundits wasn’t to talk about how much of a “farce” the call was, the reaction was to blame Guzan for his mistake and praise the assistant referee for his good eye (although, really his positioning for this call leaves a lot to be desired, but I don’t expect pundits to know that )

 

I don't want to sidetrack this thread especially since I brought up a situation that didn't even happen in a UEFA match. I'm talking about having it just a tiny bit outside the box, especially if no attackers see it. I just feel like the minute "advantage" he gains from technically still having it in his hand outside the box when punting/throwing is nowhere near the immense advantage that an 18.5 yard DFK provides, that's all I'm saying. I know, rule is black and white, but in most cases like this some of us will just give a loud verbal warning to the keeper which tells him we might have seen him come out of the box, but we aren't admitting he did but are acknowledging that he was potentially very close, and even if attackers try to game you into calling it, it gives plausible deniability that he was very close but you can BS that "the edge of the ball was still on the 18" so technically it was still legal.

As for that 2015 situation, that actually seems to be quite far out of the box so I would probably call that, but regardless like you mentioned with the AR's positioning, even if he was correct, calling this while being 3-4 yards behind the 18 line and setting up a 18.5 yard DFK seems really bad.

 

1995 Women's World Cup.

 

Announcer at 3:17: "But those are the rules of football. They cannot be flouted."

 

The incident I vaguely recalled was the Guzman one linked above. The fact that I misremembered it as a possible women’s World Cup involving the US and this was purely coincidental.

 

interesting series in the Scottish FA Cup

Tough position for the referee but I kind of wish he had dealt with the manhandling of Tillman more strictly. I understand why thistle are angry but throwing a player down and hovering over him without sanction seems a bit off target (I only saw one yellow, given to rangers but may have missed)

nothing the referee can do but allow the goals but it’s interesting to see what happens when the unwritten conventions aren’t followed

INCREDIBLE SPORTSMANSHIP 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🙌 Malik Tillman 🇺🇸 scores a controversial goal off a drop ball. Partick Thistle angrily protest, after which Rangers manager Michael Beale instructs his team to allow PT to score. 🤯 Rangers ultimately got Scottish Cup win, 3-2.pic.twitter.com/YrFRrFAmbJ

— Men in Blazers (@MenInBlazers) February 12, 2023

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/foot...ortsmanship-scandals-involving-celtic-4024935

EDIT: I cannot see how this wasn’t a free kick to Rangers and at least a caution (and the more I watch it the more it looks like SFP) to Thistle after Tillman gets his ankle stomped but it seems that has been ignored.

 

The moral of the story is to just give the drop ball instead of relying on this outdated throw-in method. It’s nothing but trouble. We have uncontested dropped balls for a reason now. Use them!

 

Drop ball doesn’t even always work. Will still get players asking me about kicking it back to the opponent. I just tell them once it drops you can do anything you want including dribbling.