Thought you might like to see these, they make interesting viewing of some terrible officiating. First up, Portugal vs Serbia. Serbia score to make it 1-1 in the 88th minute, but is it offside? There's also an interesting act of VC by Luis Felipe Scolari on a Serbian who was sent off. Markus Merk was the referee. Secondly, we have Turkey vs Hungary, refereed by Stuart Dougal. He sends off Zoltan Gera for a SBO for a 'dive'. And finally, there is Scotland vs Lithuania. Lithuania's Mikoliunas clearly dives to win a penalty, however, UEFA have now charged him for diving.
On the first incident, IMO, the touch from the Portugese player wasn't intentional, and so the Serbian player should have been offside. UEFA will very likely come down hard on LFS though, they're tough on violence, soft on racism. As for Stuart Dougal, it was an incredibly messy and poor decision. Firstly, I don't know what's going on with the original free kick. Some odd gestures in there, and he seems uncertain whether he's about to card or not. Then comes the 'dive', which is given from 40 yards away. I don't think he could be certain it was a dive, and in fact, given he gives a thumbs up to his AR, and seems to point to his headset when the Hungarian players surround him, I'd suggest that was the AR's decision. And finally, the Lithuanian incident is fascinating. The SFA suggested doing this, but were quickly told by FIFA they couldn't look at incidents the referee had seen. Then UEFA go and do just that, by punishing an incident the referee has seen (albeit wrongly). Now I'm all for this, and wish FIFA would stop being so stubborn, but given FIFA's reaction to the SFA's proposal, I'm very interested to see if FIFA will say anything about UEFA's decision.
Incident 1: The defenders seemed resigned to their fate, and it didn't look like they expected the call. That right there says a lot. However, I agree that there was no way that was an intentional play on the ball. Raise the flag, blow the whistle, boom we're going out. I hope Sr. Scolari gets his pants fined off him. The Serbian player too. I have to wonder why he was still there to create that situation after being sent off.... Incident 2: That all started because Dougal screwed his mechanics on the first foul. Everyone was like "so what's going on" and they took the kick and he paid for it. If you're going to card the guy, CARD THE GUY, don't fiddle around (I should know, it took me 45 seconds to send a goalkeeper off for DOGSO-F once). If you're not going to, then blow the foul and move on. Incident 3: I'm so glad UEFA is backing it's referees, especially those who are being groomed to take charge of major games in the future like Skomina. Is it just me or is UEFA doing more and more of it's own thing. First the directives and now this. I sense a schism in the works...
Taken in reverse order... Incident 3. This is not, as falcon.7 alludes to above, an issue of UEFA undercutting its referee (unless, of course Skomina was able to watch it on replay and decided to stand by his decision). If governing bodies are punishing players for diving, then what they are doing is saying "don't con our referees--you will get punished." In the long-term, it theoretically can help. I have two major concerns, though. The first one is obvious and has been reiterated time and time again: cameras don't always catch everything (WC98 Brazil/Norway the greatest example). So what happens when something clearly looks like a dive but the referee insists, even after replay, that it wasn't? Secondly, I have a huge issue from a competition standpoint. It's one thing for fans and players to "know" or think that they got screwed. Complaining and debating about incidents is one of the attractions of sport. But when UEFA (or anyone else) steps in and says, "no, that was wrongly decided" it starts a slipperly slope. Quite frankly, UEFA has tacitly admitted that Scotland's goal differential should be different--and they are in a huge fight with France and Italy for a spot in the EUROs. What if they lose out by a goal? UEFA is on record saying that the penalty should have never been given. Doesn't Scotland have grounds--both morally and possibly legally--to then claim that their rightful spot in EUROs is being denied? It may not happen this time and it may not even happen soon. But eventually, in a major competition, something like that is going to happen and a whole can of worms will be unopened. Incident 2 is just atrocious and unfortunate. I don't want to assign motive, but I just don't believe that the AR called this. I think the thumbs-up and the point appear to be, when analyzing the body language, an attempt to try to assure everyone that the officials are on the same page. Could the AR have seen the actual contact and overturned Dougal? Probably not--and even if he could, in Turkey, that would have probably been the end of the match. I also don't think the previous incident has too much of a role. Yes, there were odd gestures, but I don't think it was an issue of indecision. I think he was threatening the Turkish player with a booking for dissent. The quick free kick was smart and should be allowed--it unfortunately put Dougal in a bad position because it exposed the Turkish defence so quickly. Anyway, I still don't know, from his angle, how he comes up with a dive. Even if he didn't see it cleanly, context would indicate that the player wouldn't dive there (if he stayed on his feet, after cutting the ball back, there's an open net). It's an unfortunate situation, but really, the actual decision is indefensible. Incident 1, to start, I don't think it was a situation where the AR kept the flag down because he thought the Portuguese touch negated any offside (I agree that it didn't). I think the flag stayed down because it was impossible to tell whether or not the first touch off the free kick came from a Serb or not (from the AR's angle, he's looking through about 6 bodies and the touch is between waist and chest height). So, that being said, I believe the mistake is not calling the referee over. If I saw what I think the AR saw, I would have stood in position and called the referee over, asked him whether or not the first touch came from a Serb or a Portuguese player. Once he said Serb (because he could have seen it), we'd go with offside. So I don't think this is a case of a misinterpretation, but rather miscommunication (or lack thereof). As for the fracas, Scolari will get fined/banned severely, as I'm sure will Dragutinovic, a few other players (fines) and the Portuguese federation. That being said, what did Dragutinovic do to get sent off? And--this is almost rhetorical--when will Portugal learn to behave?
Very unfortunate for Hungary, I don't understand why the referee was so confident in his decision, he should have consulted the linesman, I don't think that the Turkish goalkeeper would have been very shocked if a penalty had been awarded. Imo it's a much more obvious penalty than the one that was given here (please watch the first 25 seconds of the video, I am not absolutely convinced that the Bulgarian goalkeeper fouls the Belarussian attacker, it's a 50/50 situation). http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TdkVfKUcXE8 I am not sure whether the Serbian goal should have been allowed to stand. As for Dragutinovich, I don't understand whether he was ejected for an argument with Quaresma or for the scuffle with the Portuguese coach. Perhaps an unfair red card given the circumstances. Not that I condone diving, but why is the Lithuanian player Mikoliunas being singled out? Weren't there quite a few other players that were also guilty of diving? And two games is way too much, footballers guilty of violent conduct often receive 2-3 games suspensions. Also, perhaps Hunt's dismissal was slightly unnecessary? http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=w-aflAhXRxA (2:34)
So UEFA came down hard on Mikoliunas for the diving incident--much harder than even I had anticipated. He received a two match ban: http://www.uefa.com/uefa/keytopics/kind=512/newsid=591492.html As I stated, I believe this starts a slippery slope regarding results (if Scotland loses out on goal differential, what will UEFA say, since they have factually implied that Scotland's goal differential should be altered by one?). However, it now seems to start a double-standard as well. Lithuanian authorities are making a good argument: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=465151&cc=5901 So there was a card for diving in the same match. Why does that player receive no further penalty? Is the standard that the two match ban will only be applied when diving is successful? Why not when a yellow card is shown? And why not when referees just wave play on? According to Reuters: If so, shouldn't all diving be sanctioned with a two match ban?
Could this be UEFA's "round about" way to get more referees to deal with simulation within the game? Thought process: Referee; That looks like simulation. Do I caution? If I don't he could face a two match ban. If I deal with it, it is only a caution. OK, tweet, caution. Many referees on this forum have stated a reluctance to caution for simulation feeling they were harsh. With what UEFA has set up, I think referees may see dealing with simulation within the game as it should be seen. Nothing less, Nothing more that any other cautionable offense. I a "round about" way the referee is protecting the player from a "harsher" penalty.
The article is a little vague but isn't Lithuania complaining that the alleged Scottish diver did NOT receive any sanction. It seems like the card that is mentioned was given to the Lithuanian defender who ostensibly brought down the Scot, who may or may not have taken a dive.
The language is a bit confusing, but no, that's not the case. O'Connor was cautioned but Zvirgzdauskas wasn't: http://www.uefa.com/competitions/euro/fixturesresults/round=2241/match=83988/report=ev.html Lithuania is arguing that O'Connor should face a two match ban even though he was cautioned, because he committed the same act that Mikoliunas committed. And, quite frankly, it's a logical sound argument. I really don't think so. If anything, it takes some of the onus off the referee. Almost an "okay, if I just wave play on [not call either a PK or a dive], then UEFA will sort things out and I won't decide the game wrongly." That being said, I don't think this is the problem that it used to be a few years ago. I've seen quite a few referees recently giving second cautions (and reds) for dives. At the top flight in UEFA, that reluctance isn't there anymore. Do you really think that's the case? First, I don't think "many" referees on this forum have stated any reluctance to caution for diving. And, if any did, I don't think the cause of that reluctance is the stiff sanction--it's the theory that some diving is so tough to call, you don't want to be wrong about it.