From the same Atlético Madrid vs Barcelona match, Nico González again, this time a second yellow gets upgraded to straight red via VAR.
And why do we do this at all? I keep ranting about this. Whether it is 2CT or straight red is completely irrelevant to the game being played. This should be handled by competition authorities after the game, there is no reason to delay the game that is being played to look at this.
I am struggling with this. I would love somebody's opinion, like @MassachusettsRef . What is the preferred outcome and what is the reasoning? I genuinely do not know, because I feel that both cards could be defended. My gut says yellow is preferred, because it is more of a freak incident than a bad challenge. But I may be wrong.
Never mind that later on in this match...an ankle breaker was downgraded via VAR from red to yellow and this benefited Barca.
At the monitor reviewing the play, referee Mateo Busquets (no relation) says, "Alright, the Barcelona player controls the ball, plays the ball, and then steps on him, normal dynamic." He then decides the cancel the red and issue a yellow. From the match report, it looks like an Atlético Madrid assistant coach was sent off for comments regarding this decision.
I've got nothing beyond what @El Rayo Californiano provides, really. I've read elsewhere that there's a prevailing UEFA instruction about "normal dynamic" sort of overriding the previous edict about buckled ankles. But I'm not directly privvy to this sort of thing. @Mikael_Referee could probably shed more light. I think competition authorities are trying to find the balance between severely punshing tackles or challenges that have really dangerous results/consequences and not having red cards for bad results that are truly just a byproduct of bad luck. So I do sympathize with all the decision-makers here. To your point, though, both cards could be defended, so this feels like that category of foul play where VAR makes things a lot worse because referees and VAR are trying to find the optimal outcome when really either decision could have been sold as correct in the Before Times. If only we had stuck with the "clearly wrong" standard; of course, in places where we do, like England, we then have officials hiding behind the standard to not intervene in some pretty clearly obvious situations. Who would have thought turning subjective decisions into objective ones would have been hard?
[QUOTE="MassachusettsRef, post: 43582570, member: 14366" prevailing UEFA instruction about "normal dynamic" sort of overriding the previous edict about buckled ankles. I think competition authorities are trying to find the balance between severely punshing tackles or challenges that have really dangerous results/consequences and not having red cards for bad results that are truly just a byproduct of bad luck. [/QUOTE] VAR mistake made in Barcelona Gerard Martín yellow - Spain officials - ESPN
𝐎𝐋𝐁𝐑𝐙𝐘𝐌𝐈𝐀 𝐊𝐎𝐍𝐓𝐑𝐎𝐖𝐄𝐑𝐒𝐉𝐀❗ 𝐂𝐳𝐲 𝐠𝐨𝐥 𝐑𝐚𝐤𝐨𝐰𝐚 𝐩𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐞𝐧 𝐛𝐲𝐜́ 𝐮𝐳𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐲❓📲 Oglądaj online ▶️ https://t.co/oR918HyREo pic.twitter.com/KitT4XHzFF— TVP SPORT (@sport_tvppl) April 9, 2026 Does this encroachment count as impactful? Should this penalty have been retaken?
Yes, the guy who encroached gained from getting the head start, was the first player who touched the ball and subsequently scored. It appears that the goal was correctly waived-off.
It was not waived off. There was a VAR check and the goal was confirmed. Which has caused huge controversy as it is the semifinal of the Polish Cup. The pitch side reporter said the VAR said the players foot was in the air so there wasn't clear encroachment... This goal made it 3-2 but the team aggrieved equalised in the last minute of stoppage time so it will not have decided the game.. but it came super close to doing so.
Ohhhh. If I understand this right, this situation comes down to a nuanced interpretation of when exactly encroachment occurs. Law 14 requires players to be outside the penalty area and penalty arc before the referee signals for the PK to be taken. Then encroachment is penalized as an offense in Law 14, but "encroachment" is not specifically defined. Then in the IFAB Glossary, under "Restart Position" the laws say, "a player's position at a restart is determined by the position of their feet or any part of their body which is touching the ground, except as outline in Law 11 - Offside." So with this clip, I can't tell one way or another whether the player potentially encroaching's foot is clearly and obviously touching the ground at the time the ball is kicked and moves. Unless we've got frame-by-frame analysis of the potentially encroaching player's foot simultaneously next to a frame-by-frame view of the kick point...then it's really hard to tell.
There is no encroachment by the scoring player here. Neither of his feet are on the ground inside the penalty area before the taking of the kick. The goal is legal.
Will the IAFB agree with this Argie move??? The National Directorate of Refereeing (DNA), under the leadership of Federico Beligoy, has issued a firm directive: starting this weekend, any player who stands with both feet on the ball will be penalized. Sanctions for unsportsmanlike conduct This move is considered a “lack of respect for the game” and unsportsmanlike conduct that creates disruptions and injury risks. Referees in all divisions have been instructed to punish the offender with a yellow card and restart play with an indirect free kick in favor of the opposing team.
Anyone know the backstory that led to this? There has to be a reason for this. (Aside: when my daughter was young she was at a soccer camp and kids were trying to do this. She tried and ended up in the hospital with a sprained neck.)
yeah, apparently there were prior incidents: The End of the "Pisadita": Why Argentina is Booking Players for Standing on the Ball Following a high-profile incident involving Memphis Depay in the Campeonato Paulista—triggered a massive brawl and The tipping point occurred during the Matchday 14 Apertura clash between Estudiantes and Union Santa Fe. Union’s Julián Palacios stopped his dribble and stood on top of the ball right in front of Estudiantes defender Eros Mancuso.
yep, and as the article mentions...you will eventually see some player who decides to sit on the ball during play. Should not the IAFB address this?
I am very sorry for her pain, but hopefully she learned that for every risk taken in life there can be a "reward".
If the ball is in play when they do this, to shield or whatever their reasoning, is it not "playing in a dangerous manner" akin to attempting to head a ball on the turf where you put yourself at risk for injury? Two feet on the ball is asking to slip off or have it kicked out from under you.
I would like to correct your statement to reflect...a CR should decide that this is very clearly unsporting behavior and taunting the opponent. Again, I do wonder if the IFAB will weigh in before or after a player sits on the ball. I did send it over to my buddy over in the UK who was involved with MLS at one time.
“After consulting with NFHS in the United States we have decided to make taunting a cautionable offense”